This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
If you read the rest of the comment you'll see that she not only acknowledges the Trump supporters with legitimate grievances, she was actually trying to reach out to them. She just made a mistake in word choice at the outset that will keep that message from getting out.
You just confirmed everything that I think about her. She does one thing, but tells the public something else. It's not a positive trait, Tim.timschochet said:
I've noticed, Politician Spock, that whenever you make any analysis of either Hillary Clinton or the people around her, your conclusion is always one that puts them in the worst possible light. You're not the only one that does this, of course, but it's always startling to read coming from you because, despite my various disagreements with you on a host of issues, I know that that you are both non-partisan (in terms of liberal vs. conservative) , and very intelligent.
Are the two options you provided (either devious lying or morons) possible? Of course. Does either one ring truthful? Not to me. What does ring truthful is close to what Axelrod was talking about- Hillary's excessive need for privacy, her (not unreasonable, but in this instance regrettable) fear that if her pneumonia was known, it would hurt her campaign. So what likely happened is that she was told on Friday that her cold was actually a bout of pneumonia, and she decided to "soldier on", hoping that it wouldn't get out to the public because of Trump's continual comments about her "stamina". That also means its very likely that few people in the Clinton campaign knew about the pneumonia, which accounts for the confusion immediately after the fainting spell. For me at least, the whole thing starts to make sense in a way which excludes both of your alternatives.
There's a scene in the last season of The West Wing in which Senator Vinick (Alan Alda) breaks his hand, and is desperate to cover it up, because he does not want any contrast with his more energetic opponent. Earlier he has a cold and tries to cover that up as well, despite a doctor telling him he needs to take it easy or it could become pneumonia. I think we're witnessing some of that playing out in real life before our eyes.
tommy, if Hillary Clinton was, in your eyes, a completely honest person and also completely healthy, would you vote for her?tommyboy said:
Transient Ischemic Attack (Mini-Stroke) ....probably passed a small clot....HellToupee said:
No it isn't. Is it a trait that will make her a poor President? I don't think so.
Well to be fair...If she became dehydrated and faint from giving a speech....timschochet said:
I decided to lighten the mood by revisiting what IMO, is still the best post of this entire election cycle.
You just confirmed what I've said the next four years will be like if she gets elected. Like you, I wish it weren't so either.... but unlike you I'm not going to be one who makes it happen.
Which is why I didn't ask you the question. I asked tommyboy, because I don't think he has credibility on this issue.
If she has pneumonia that is sufficiently advanced that it causes her to pass out, I can easily imagine 78 degrees being too much to bear. That's not "walking pneumonia." It's "losing consciousness from prolonged lack of oxygen" pneumonia.stlrams said:
Also, I can attest it was pretty hot yesterday in NY/NJ, which I enjoyed sitting on the beach. Sitting in the sun in a suit would have definitely been uncomfortable and not something I would advise anyone with pneumonia to do.
Wouldn't you agree that there are a certain percentage of Trump supporters who are uncomfortable with being associated with alt-right bigots?
I know most in this thread won't believe this, but yesterday's early morning was oppressively humid with dew points in the 70s (it did break 10am-ish, but this was before that) following a day that with a heat index of 100+.
Seemed to me she was careful not to call those people deplorable, in fact she reached out to them:
But as other people have said, I might be giving voters too much credit in expecting them to read the full quote.
She said that half of Trump's supporters are deplorable.
Not sure how you get to this. You like what she says the platform is at this moment or do you have some sort of secret decoder ring that allows you to weed through the
Do you really think the law abiding Mexicans think Trump is calling them rapist and killers?
Well, that's the problem. It would be great if it wasn't filled with BS.Not sure how you get to this. You like what she says the platform is at this moment or do you have some sort of secret decoder ring that allows you to weed through the
It depends on what it is they like about Trump. If you find yourself agreeing with him on the issues that everyone is always calling him racist, bigoted, and Islamophobic over, you probably will identify with the group that Clinton is calling racist, bigoted, and Islamophobic.
Not me personally. But "stronger unions / higher min wage / better social safety net / no more Mexicans taking our jobs" seems like a plausible basket of issues for an undecided voter in, say, Ohio or Pennsylvania.
I'm pretty sure the sun moves. But of course science never was the right's strong suit.
Well, I would not want to speak for all law-abiding Mexicans, but I would think that many of them were offended when Trump said "they're not sending their best". So yeah.
it was worse:
That's always been my favorite part. "There's probably some decent Mexicans. I haven't met one, mind you. But I assume they're out there somewhere."
Didn't she use terms like racists, sexists, misogynists, xenophobia?knowledge dropper said:
1) Pneumonia isn't a monolithic condition that is the same for everybody (kind of like not all Mexicans are rapists and drug dealers). There is a spectrum and continuum of possibilities. Maybe she had a mild case?soothsayer said:Here's the thing - the story of Hillary fainting/losing bodily function and the subsequent actions taken by her/her campaign make no sense. It doesn't add up. If we are to believe the narrative (in chronological order):
- Hillary is said to be suffering from seasonal allergies (which explains her persistent cough)
- On Friday she is diagnosed with pneumonia (which is kept private)
- On Sunday she loses bodily function/passes out/faints/stumbles
- As a nearly 70-year old with pneumonia, after passing out, she is taken to her daughter's apartment and not to a hospital.
- The "episode" is initially blamed on "overheating"
- The "episode" is later blamed on dehydration as a result of her previously diagnosed pneumonia
- Approximately 90 minutes after losing bodily function/passing out/fainting/stumbling, she is waving on the sidewalk and it is reported that she is (paraphrasing) "re-hydrated and feeling great".
My questions:
- In what universe would it make sense for a 68-year old with pneumonia to NOT go to the hospital on Sunday after that "episode"?
- If dehydration is so severe that it causes loss of bodily function, what would the standard treatment be? Drink a bottle of water and call it good? Fluids via IV? Other?
- Imagine your having a 68-year old parent, diagnosed with pneumonia just two days earlier, passing out (even if briefly). Can you envision any scenario in which you'd let him/her walk around outside with no assistance just 90-minutes later? Can you envision any scenario in which you'd let them not go to a hospital for treatment/observation?
- If such a patient does go to a hospital (pneumonia + fainting), what would the standard response be? Can any doctors/nurses here comment on how long such a person would be kept under observation? How long would an IV treatment take in that case? Would a person be discharged as soon as the IV bag was empty?
I don't have many answers, but I can tell you that this isn't adding up for me. And I don't know what the implication of that is, I just know this whole thing makes no sense. The response, the "overheated" story, the post-"treatment" spin, the walk on the sidewalk - the whole thing is just wonky. None of it passes the smell test, but I have no idea what that means.
Let's enjoy excerpts from Ed Klein's wikipedia page together, shall we?Interesting comment from April 2016:
Bill’s worst fear, according to my sources, is that Hillary will stumble or fall at a critical moment in the campaign and reveal that she’s not up to handling the job of commander in chief.
Definitely sounds like someone we should all take seriously. Outstanding work here, Sinn Fein. Really well done.
