Is Hillary Clinton Physically Unfit to be POTUS?

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

1 hour ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

And Trump is unfit to be President based on his tax evasion, lack of mental capacity, illegal fund raising and his brazen lies to the American public. Both are terrible candidates. To claim that trustworthiness is a qualifying criteria for President would mean that Trump would be automatically disqualified.

Source Please.

[theyarecomingforyou]

1 hour ago, Gary7 said:

Source Please.

To Trump being untrustworthy? His Politifact scorecard is pretty damning, especially when compared to Clinton's scorecard.

[TPreston]

2 hours ago, Gary7 said:

She has not had a press conference in months.. What is she hiding??

Really ? This is all you have ?

Did you miss the DNC ?

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

1 minute ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

To Trump being untrustworthy? His Politifact scorecard is pretty damning, especially when compared to Clinton's scorecard.

Those are opinions and not facts I asked you for a specific source on this:

 

Quote

And Trump is unfit to be President based on his tax evasion, lack of mental capacity, illegal fund raising and his brazen lies to the American public. Both are terrible candidates. To claim that trustworthiness is a qualifying criteria for President would mean that Trump would be automatically disqualified.

 

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Just now, TPreston said:

Really ? This is all you have ?

Did you miss the DNC ?

That was not a press conference and yes I did not watch it.

[TPreston]

Just now, Gary7 said:

That was not a press conference and yes I did not watch it.

Ah right cause physically the two are totally different

Also there's a delicious sense irony when one of neowins biggest conspiracy theorists asking for reliable sources.

All he has to do is post some edited youtube clips to keep up with your arguments.

[Emn1ty]

2 hours ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

And Trump is unfit to be President based on his tax evasion, lack of mental capacity, illegal fund raising and his brazen lies to the American public. Both are terrible candidates. To claim that trustworthiness is a qualifying criteria for President would mean that Trump would be automatically disqualified.

 

Trump's doctor put out a patently false assessment of his health. Which is worse: an assessment that is over a year old, or an assessment that is demonstrably false? I mean, Trump's doctor claimed he has never drunk alcohol - not only is that demonstrably false—there are pictures of him drinking champagne on the internet—but it is not something that a medical assessment could determine.

 

At the end of the day the health and trustworthiness of a candidate is best determined at the election booth. If people are concerned about Clinton's health then they won't vote for her. But it's worth pointing out that some of the best leaders have had questionable health and serious character flaws.

This is a classic demonstration of cherry picking. Hillary doesn't have to put out a health evaluation, but Trump has to put out his tax records? No, neither of them are obligated to do either of these things. Also, it just goes to show how biased you are that you dismiss Trump's clean bill of health as "patently false" just because you don't like what you hear.

Guess what, my father has diabetes and was given a perfect score on the full body scan evaluation. Something his doctor had only ever seen on a 24 year old ex-marine (and my father is in his 50's). Sometimes people are just exceptionally healthy even if they don't look it. So get your foot out of your mouth.

 

Trump's tax records also have zip to do with his ability to govern the country. So let that one lay as well.

[theyarecomingforyou]

3 minutes ago, Gary7 said:

Those are opinions and not facts I asked you for a specific source on this

The clue is in the name: Politifact. Every claim is researched and sourced. The evidence is clear - Trump is a serial liar and categorically untrustworthy. If you're not willing to consider evidence then there is nothing further to discuss.

[Emn1ty]

8 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

To Trump being untrustworthy? His Politifact scorecard is pretty damning, especially when compared to Clinton's scorecard.

Politifact has Hillary more honest than Bernie. So much for a lack of bias there.

[DocM]

2 hours ago, jjkusaf said:

Wait ... when did Hillary have 3 heart attacks?

 

Some people are just reaching now.  Dislike and don't vote for Hillary for her agenda ... but dang ... no need to start spouting off non-truths. 

I only mentioned heart attacks wrt Trump as a counterexample. 

 

OTOH - what she has suffered is three thrombi; two in the legs which can cause a pulmonary embolism and one in the brain, and they also cause most heart attacks. The risk of more of the same is exceedingly high, even with modern treatments which she is not getting by her own papers.

 

Statistics are not on her side.

[wakjak]

3 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Politifact has Hillary more honest than Bernie. So much for a lack of bias there.

Facts are facts. Like it or not. 

[Emn1ty]

Just now, wakjak said:

Facts are facts. Like it or not. 

This just tells me you and others aren't willing to take things with a grain of salt when they fit your agenda.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Just now, Emn1ty said:

This is a classic demonstration of cherry picking. Hillary doesn't have to put out a health evaluation, but Trump has to put out his tax records? No, neither of them are obligated to do either of these things. Also, it just goes to show how biased you are that you dismiss Trump's clean bill of health as "patently false" just because you don't like what you hear.

Clinton has already put out her health records - she was the first candidate to do so. And I dismissed Trump's health record as false because it is demonstrably false - his doctor claimed he has never drunk alcohol, which is a) false, and b) not something a medical test could show. As for Trump's tax records, he has lied by claiming he can't release them whilst he's being audited, which only supports the claim that he is utterly untrustworthy. Presidential candidates have a long record of releasing their tax returns, yet Trump—who has repeatedly lied about his wealth—refuses to do so.

 

Just now, Emn1ty said:

Trump's tax records also have zip to do with his ability to govern the country. So let that one lay as well.

They speak to his trustworthiness and character. Given that he has repeatedly lied about his wealth and tax affairs it is a valid source of criticism.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

11 minutes ago, TPreston said:

Ah right cause physically the two are totally different

Also there's a delicious sense irony when one of neowins biggest conspiracy theorists asking for reliable sources.

All he has to do is post some edited youtube clips to keep up with your arguments.

Also there's a delicious sense irony when one of neowins biggest conspiracy theorists asking for reliable sources.

 

The YouTube Videos were of The FBI Director and one was a US Senator Tray Gowdy. If you watched them you can conclude, well a reasonable person can conclude that Clinton Lied to Congress many times. Each lie is worth 5  years in a Feferal Pen if charged and convicted. Now since You feel that I cannot ask for a source, I am done with you. It is like trying to debate a wall. Ta Ta

[TPreston]

23 minutes ago, Gary7 said:

Also there's a delicious sense irony when one of neowins biggest conspiracy theorists asking for reliable sources.

 

The YouTube Videos were of The FBI Director and one was a US Senator Tray Gowdy. If you watched them you can conclude, well a reasonable person can conclude that Clinton Lied to Congress many times. Each lie is worth 5  years in a Feferal Pen if charged and convicted. Now since You feel that I cannot ask for a source, I am done with you. It is like trying to debate a wall. Ta Ta

 That pathetic failure who wasted  millions trying to prove conspiracy theories of a stand down order that had already been debunked before. The same guy who wasted the pentagons time trying to call facebook posters as witness's  My sides! You are killing me!

 

 

 

Edited August 23, 2016 by TPreston

[DocM]

17 minutes ago, wakjak said:

Facts are facts. Like it or not. 

 

Politifact is published by the St. Petersburg, Florida Tampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a long time establishment liberal paper (as in, bank friendly etc.)  

 

Neither Trump or Sanders, both of which have moderate-to-liberal positions on many topics if anyone bothered to read them, are their cup of tea and therefore get 'The Treatment ' via selection bias etc. It's their MO.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

21 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

The clue is in the name: Politifact. Every claim is researched and sourced. The evidence is clear - Trump is a serial liar and categorically untrustworthy. If you're not willing to consider evidence then there is nothing further to discuss.

It is an opinion site. c-ya

[TPreston]

1 minute ago, DocM said:

 

Politifact is published by the St. Petersburg, Florida Tampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a long time establishment liberal paper (as in, bank friendly etc.)  

 

Neither Trump or Sanders, both of which have moderate-to-liberal positions on many topics if anyone bothered to read them, are their cup of tea and therefore get 'The Treatment ' via selection bias etc. It's their MO.

1) Organic Fallacy

2) They gave Obama Lie of the year

3) When you get past generic claims of bias and into specifics these claims invariably boil down to "fact checking has a liberal bias"

[Jim K Global Moderator]

29 minutes ago, DocM said:

I only mentioned heart attacks wrt Trump as a counterexample. 

 

OTOH - what she has suffered is three thrombi; two in the legs which can cause a pulmonary embolism and one in the brain, and they also cause most heart attacks. The risk of more of the same is exceedingly high, even with modern treatments which she is not getting by her own papers.

 

Statistics are not on her side.

Well ... no.  You are just making assumptions...and throwing out "three heart attacks" as a red herring.  People can live very long lives with her particular conditions.  Saying "statistics" isn't on her side ... even with proper treatment (per her physicians) ... where are these "statistics" you speak of?

 

Also, you keep throwing the thrombus out there.  Obviously the one in her head was caused by a transient factor (her hitting her head).  I do not pretend to know what caused her '98 and '09 DVT's  ... but they could have also been transient.  She tested negative for clotting disorders.  She is on Coumadin as a precaution.  You aren't her doctor ... and neither are the thousands of others trying to diagnose her.    

 

Now, if she had mets or pancreatic cancer ... or various other unrecoverable or untreatable conditions ... I would agree.  But having hypothyroidism and clots (though without a clotting disorder) ... doesn't mean "statistics are not on her side".

 

 

 

@theyarecomingforyou Regarding Trump's fund raising (saw you mention it earlier)...
 

Quote

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has his own e-mail scandal.

 

In a complaint filed  Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission, a pair of non-partisan campaign finance watchdogs alleged that the Trump campaign solicited campaign contributions from foreign government officials. Not only is it illegal for a candidate to accept money from foreign nationals, it's also a violation of the law to ask for it.

 

“Donald J. Trump's presidential campaign committee is violating black-letter federal law by sending campaign fundraising emails to foreign nationals,” Paul S. Ryan, deputy executive director of the Washington-based Campaign Legal Center, wrote in a statement announcing the complaint. “It is a no-brainer that it violates the law to send fundraising emails to members of a foreign government on their official foreign government email accounts, and yet, that's exactly what Trump has done repeatedly.”

 

Bloomberg citing the Campaign Legal Center

 

[Emn1ty]

12 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

Clinton has already put out her health records - she was the first candidate to do so. And I dismissed Trump's health record as false because it is demonstrably false - his doctor claimed he has never drunk alcohol, which is a) false, and b) not something a medical test could show. As for Trump's tax records, he has lied by claiming he can't release them whilst he's being audited, which only supports the claim that he is utterly untrustworthy. Presidential candidates have a long record of releasing their tax returns, yet Trump—who has repeatedly lied about his wealth—refuses to do so.

 

They speak to his trustworthiness and character. Given that he has repeatedly lied about his wealth and tax affairs it is a valid source of criticism.

First of all, he is under no obligation in the first place to release his tax records. It doesn't matter what his excuse is, he doesn't need to release them. As for the health record on Trump if his health looks like he's never drank alcohol then the doctor can very well say so. The exact quote is "has no history", which in regards to his doctor should obviously mean medical history. I don't think it is a true statement, but it's also unbelievably nitpicky (just as this thread is about Hillary). So because of one single statement you dismiss the entire statement? How convenient (and fallacious).

But again, I will reiterate, just because one candidate does something does not mean the other has to. Just because Trump released more recent health information doesn't mean Hillary has to just as Trump doesn't need to release his tax records just because Hillary has.

 

1 minute ago, jjkusaf said:

@theyarecomingforyou Regarding Trump's fund raising (saw you mention it earlier)...

I hope Hillary is given similar scrutiny with her foundation, considering she's openly admitted to accepting donations and decided to stop accepting them only after she is President (not while campaigning as the nominee).

[Jim K Global Moderator]

17 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

First of all, he is under no obligation in the first place to release his tax records. It doesn't matter what his excuse is, he doesn't need to release them. As for the health record on Trump if his health looks like he's never drank alcohol then the doctor can very well say so. The exact quote is "has no history", which in regards to his doctor should obviously mean medical history. I don't think it is a true statement, but it's also unbelievably nitpicky (just as this thread is about Hillary). So because of one single statement you dismiss the entire statement? How convenient (and fallacious).

It really wasn't a "health record" ... more or less a gushing letter....which started out with ...

 

"To Whom My Concern:"

 

"blood pressure, 110/65, and laboratory test results were astonishingly excellent"

"Physical strength and stamina are extraordinary"

"He has no history of ever using alcohol or tobacco products"

"I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency "

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/images/uploads/trump_health_record.pdf

 

Now, that blood pressure, if legit, for a 70 year old is really dang good...I admit.  But man ... those adjectives in a "health record" ... makes you go hmmm.  Especially the last line ... since I doubt Bornstein knows the medical history of every former President.

[DocM]

41 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

Well ... no.  You are just making assumptions...and throwing out "three heart attacks" as a red herring.  People can live very long lives with her particular conditions.  Saying "statistics" isn't on her side ... even with proper treatment (per her physicians) ... where are these "statistics" you speak of?

>

CVT

 

http://patient.info/doctor/intracranial-venous-thrombosis

 

>

Complications

 

It is important not to miss the diagnosis of intracranial venous thrombosis, as it can result in death and disability. Complications can arise from both the neurological consequences and also from the associated contributory diseases. Complications include seizures, hydrocephalus, intracranial hypertension and neurological deterioration.[10] 

 

Prognosis

 

Long-term follow-up suggests a generally good prognosis but there may be residual pyramidal symptoms, epilepsy, visual field defects and depression.[6] 

 

Recurrence rates of 2.8% and mortality rates of 10% have been reported, despite anticoagulation treatment.[11] 

 

Risk factors for a poorer prognosis and increased mortality include being female, infection, hydrocephalus, intracranial haemorrhage and motor deficits.[12] 

 

Earlier diagnosis using angiography and MRI followed by effective anticoagulation has greatly improved the prognosis.[2][6] 

>

 

DVT

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1495464/

 

>

Postphlebitic syndrome is a chronic condition characterized by leg swelling, pain, edema, venous ectasia, and skin induration. Studies have shown that it usually manifests itself within the first 2 years after an episode of DVT.2,3 Severe postphlebitic syndrome can lead to intractable venous leg ulcers, which are painful, decrease mobility, and require ongoing medical and nursing care. Even in less extreme cases, the functional status of affected patients may be impaired. Few studies have prospectively assessed the long-term outcome of patients with DVT. Although some investigators have documented the incidence of postphlebitic syndrome in DVT patients, information is lacking on risk factors for this syndrome and its impact on quality of life.

>

Only 1 published study measured quality of life as a long-term outcome after DVT. Beyth et al. interviewed 52 patients from a cohort of 124 patients with DVT who survived for 6 to 8 years.8 As measured by the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a generic quality-of-life measure, patients with symptoms of postphlebitic syndrome had poorer perceptions of their health, lower levels of physical functioning, and more severe role limitations due to physical health than asymptomatic patients. An earlier study of the long-term effects of iliofemoral DVT showed that among 21 patients followed for 10 or more years, 11 of 12 men were disabled and unable to maintain a steady job because of their leg symptoms, and 7 of 9 women were unable to perform household duties and required a homemaker.26 Although quality of life was not measured using a standardized instrument, the results indicate that this severe form of DVT had a profound effect on patient functioning.

>

 

Etc.

 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

59 minutes ago, DocM said:

/snip

So, you are reading just all the bad?  

Regarding CVT ...

Quote

CONCLUSIONS:

There is a clear trend in declining mortality among patients with CVT over time. Possible explanations are improvements in treatment, a shift in risk factors, and, most importantly, the identification of less severe cases by improved diagnostic methods.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24699058?dopt=Abstract

Regarding your DVT ...

Quote

Postphlebitic syndrome is a chronic condition characterized by leg swelling, pain, edema, venous ectasia, and skin induration. 

Only 1 published study measured quality of life as a long-term outcome after DVT.

Does she have "Postphlebitic syndrome?  No ...

"postphlebitic syndrome is established by 1 year after DVT in 17% to 50% of patients."

 

Remember ... there was over 10 years between her two DVTs.  Was it in the same location?

 

Doc, sorry ... but you've presented nothing as neither you or I know her full medical history.  What we do know is what her doctor wrote ...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-medical-records

...mind you ... it is a little less "gushing" than Trump's....but dare I say it is more ... professional?

[theyarecomingforyou]

8 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

First of all, he is under no obligation in the first place to release his tax records. It doesn't matter what his excuse is, he doesn't need to release them.

He has no legal obligation but he does have a moral one, as tax records have been traditionally released for the sake of transparency. Given Trump's shady financial dealings it is perhaps more important for him to produce them than most previous candidates.

 

8 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

As for the health record on Trump if his health looks like he's never drank alcohol then the doctor can very well say so. The exact quote is "has no history", which in regards to his doctor should obviously mean medical history. I don't think it is a true statement, but it's also unbelievably nitpicky (just as this thread is about Hillary). So because of one single statement you dismiss the entire statement? How convenient (and fallacious).

The entire statement by the doctor was preposterous. The idea that he would be the 'healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency' is laughable and no credible medical doctor would use the term 'astonishingly excellent' or describe his physical strength as 'extraordinary'. It's comical. Do you honest think that the statement from Trump's doctor about his health is at all credible? If so I despair, I really do.

[ViperAFK]

http://time.com/4462274/donald-trump-cancels-colorado-nevada-oregon-speeches/

 

I wonder if this is health related.

 

He's seemed really low energy since he said he had regrets, and if you slow the video down to half speed of his rally today, his words are really slurred and take a long time to come out.

 

Add that to his orange pale, and I wonder if he may be suffering from hemochromatosis which is 218.16% fatal within 2 years. So why is he running if he might be dead from his failing health?

 

We deserve answers. A lot of smart people are saying that debilitated don isn't healthy enough for the presidency