Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

all hail HRCFollow

#227 Sep 13 2016 at 6:04 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
ElneClare wrote:
Seems there is sociological reason for all the hate directed against Hillary.

Fear of a Female President


I think this is more about attempting to paint any criticism of Clinton as an attack on her gender. I only need to read the first paragraph to see the problem here (or at least a huge disconnect):

The Atlantic wrote:
Except for her gender, Hillary Clinton is a highly conventional presidential candidate. She’s been in public life for decades. Her rhetoric is carefully calibrated. She tailors her views to reflect the mainstream within her party.


Really? Her gender is the only thing that differentiates her from other candidates? Not say... her long history of deceptive politics? Not her actions while serving as Secretary of State? Not her involvement in covering up (and outright hiding) information related to the Whitewater investigation? Not even her involvement with Whitewater itself? Not her poor decisions with regard to handling of classified materials? Not her constant lying to the public about those poor decisions?

People don't view Clinton as being untrustworthy because of her gender. They do so because she has a pattern where her first reaction to anything that happens is to lie about it and conceal it. Every. Single. Time. Even his latest health thing. I almost fell out of my chair laughing watching one of her spokespeople making a statement about how it was a mistake for them to conceal the facts about her illness, but assured everyone that there were no other things they were concealing. Um... But if she hadn't been seen stumbling and falling, we would not have been told about it, right? So the pattern here is that we only hear about these things when Clinton and Co are actually caught lying about them. Why should we believe that they're not lying *now*? What's the old saying about being fooled once versus multiple times? We're well past multiple time now.

And that's not even counting the one thing that is relevant to her role as a woman in politics. And that's her steadfast actions to defend and protect her husband against a list of women he's sexually assaulted (allegedly, of course). And not just that, but actively attacked them for daring to make accusations. Which is, you know, kinda the exact opposite of what a champion for women should have in her resume.


But it's all about fear of a woman president, right?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#228 Sep 13 2016 at 6:42 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
stumbling and falling
Trump stumbled and fell on a 13 year old girl, but that's OK with the GOP.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#229 Sep 13 2016 at 6:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Um... But if she hadn't been seen stumbling and falling, we would not have been told about it, right?

Probably not. Why do we deserve to know if she has pneumonia?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#230 Sep 13 2016 at 7:15 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm convinced that Hillary did sketchy things in her past, but Trump is, like, pristine and shit.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#231 Sep 13 2016 at 8:07 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Um... But if she hadn't been seen stumbling and falling, we would not have been told about it, right?

Probably not. Why do we deserve to know if she has pneumonia?


Because a candidate's health does have an effect on people's support for them. Because the job of President is massively stressful, but the slightest sign of illness can cause stock markets to tumble, especially if the cause is concealed rather than revealed (shades of of Soviet style coverups of their leader's health really). Because this is not the first question about her health that has come up, nor the first report of issues with her health that has been shuffled out of public view as quickly as possible, which makes this look like a pattern that maybe the voters should be concerned about if they want to elect someone who will be clear headed when making decisions. Heck. Even the excuse given for her dumb statement on Friday (blaming it on the pneumonia which she didn't tell anyone she had) is a bit of a concern. Imagine the scenario where she's sitting in the situation room making life or death decisions, and makes a similarly poor decision (but with much greater consequences) because her judgement is impaired by some illness that no on else in the room is aware of. Worse case is the commanders in that room start to question her judgement and decisions because they can't know if what she's telling them to do is the result of a medication induced poor decision.

That's a very real concern.

You can say it's unfair or unimportant, but if that were really the case, then she would have had no issue with just announcing she was sick and taking the weekend off (or at least reducing her schedule). She clearly thought that the perception of good health was so important that she choose to conceal the fact that she was sick. Fair or not, we expect our president to have good health and be able to perform their duties at peak capacity. That may be unreasonable, but there is it. The very reason why she chose to conceal that she had pneumonia is the reason why the public deserves to know about it. You can't have it both ways.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#232 Sep 13 2016 at 8:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Probably not. Why do we deserve to know if she has pneumonia?
Because a candidate's health does have an effect on people's support for them.

Having pneumonia isn't indicative of overall health. Healthy people get pneumonia.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#233 Sep 13 2016 at 8:30 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
stumbling and falling
Trump stumbled and fell on a 13 year old girl, but that's OK with the GOP.


Huh? No clue what you're talking about here, so kinda hard to be "OK" with it. Maybe tell me something that folks who are not in the liberal echo chamber have heard about?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#234 Sep 13 2016 at 8:46 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Healthy people get pneumonia.

But, if they have pneumonia then they aren't healthy... Smiley: dubious
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#235 Sep 13 2016 at 8:50 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Probably not. Why do we deserve to know if she has pneumonia?
Because a candidate's health does have an effect on people's support for them.

Having pneumonia isn't indicative of overall health. Healthy people get pneumonia.


Sure. So it's no big deal to say she's got pneumonia and will take a few days off to recover, right? Cause it's not a sign of bad health, right? Again, that logic goes both ways Joph.

Also, while it's certainly possible for a healthy person to get pneumonia, it's pretty rare. Usually, an existing cold or flu will evolve into pneumonia as a result of a compromised immune system, usually resulting from too much stress, not enough rest, not sufficiently treating the initial illness, etc. While you can certainly argue that she can't get sufficient rest while campaigning, so that caused her to develop pneumonia, the counter argument would be that the job of president is going to involve that level of stress and inability to take time off as well. The fact that she got that sick on the campaign trail could just be an unlucky coincidence. Or it could also be an indication of an underlying health issue. She may simply not be healthy enough to maintain a rigorous schedule and deal with things like colds and flu without them getting worse.

Fair or not, that's going to be a perception that some people will have. And that's precisely why she attempted to conceal it. And hey. If she'd managed to keep it together enough to not make it apparent that she was sick? That's a sign that she can handle this sort of thing going forward. The sad truth is that the perception of a leader is just as important as the reality. I'm sure lots of politicians get sick and just march on though it out of a need to appear strong. And given how rare things like politicians collapsing in public are, most of them are successful at it (or don't get so sick that they can't manage). Um... But she couldn't do it.

That is a concern. It may not influence your vote, but it may influence others people's. Kinda silly to insist that they shouldn't care about it, or to argue that it's unfair that they may care about something you don't. And again, if this was the first instance of this sort of thing, it might not be a big deal. But signs of Clinton not being in great health have been cropping up for a while now. So this is going to create a big question mark in many people's eyes.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#236 Sep 13 2016 at 9:02 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Hmm. I'm healthy. And I had pneumonia and/or bronchitis pretty much every year throughout elementary school. Then I got it twice in high school. Had to avoid football practice. From what I understood, pneumonia wasn't one specific disease, but a complication caused by a few different things, usually strep throat in my case. The infection would spread lower into my lungs and either infect my bronchial tubes or go deeper into my lungs and cause pneumonia.

Even as an adult I've had simple sore throats progress into a deep cough that can last for a week or two due to me saying **** it and not stopping to try to fix it. I'm sure if I had gone to the doctor they'd have diagnosed me with something along the lines of bronchitis (probably not pneumonia, as I've rarely felt the diminished lung capacity I did as a kid).
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#237 Sep 13 2016 at 9:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
stumbling and falling
Trump stumbled and fell on a 13 year old girl, but that's OK with the GOP.


Huh? No clue what you're talking about here, so kinda hard to be "OK" with it. Maybe tell me something that folks who are not in the liberal echo chamber have heard about?

You didn't know he's got an impending trial for raping a teenage girl?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#238 Sep 13 2016 at 10:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Having pneumonia isn't indicative of overall health. Healthy people get pneumonia.
Sure. So it's no big deal to say she's got pneumonia and will take a few days off to recover, right? Cause it's not a sign of bad health, right? Again, that logic goes both ways Joph.

No it doesn't. I asked why you deserve to know she had pneumonia. You don't deserve to know it on the basis of "it's not a big deal". That would actually be a reason why you don't deserve to know it -- since it's not a big deal (by your own admission), the only reason to be informed is for gossip.

We both agree that healthy people get pneumonia and so pneumonia is not indicative of any lack of health above and beyond the illness itself. So, again, why do you deserve to know she had it?

Edited, Sep 13th 2016 11:23pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#239 Sep 13 2016 at 10:53 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
stumbling and falling
Trump stumbled and fell on a 13 year old girl, but that's OK with the GOP.


Huh? No clue what you're talking about here, so kinda hard to be "OK" with it. Maybe tell me something that folks who are not in the liberal echo chamber have heard about?

You didn't know he's got an impending trial for raping a teenage girl?
No Republican has ever raped anyone ever, so...no.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#240 Sep 14 2016 at 4:58 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
stumbling and falling
Trump stumbled and fell on a 13 year old girl, but that's OK with the GOP.


Huh? No clue what you're talking about here, so kinda hard to be "OK" with it. Maybe tell me something that folks who are not in the liberal echo chamber have heard about?

You didn't know he's got an impending trial for raping a teenage girl?
No Republican has ever raped anyone ever, so...no.
To be fair, there's been very little media coverage of the lawsuit. But it's likely due to the complete lack of reliable information about the situation and Trump's counter against it which seems to be their way of shush anyone saying anything bad about them (sue who ever is saying something bad about you). I don't think it's a good sign when your first search hits on the subject are Heavy.com
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#241 Sep 14 2016 at 7:22 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
TirithRR wrote:
To be fair, there's been very little media coverage of the lawsuit.
Well, yeah. A democrat passing out is far more damaging to the country than a guy that has been taken to court multiple times for sexual assault.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#245 Sep 14 2016 at 8:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
shesreallydead wrote:
Hillary is on deaths door.

Long live President Kaine!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#246 Sep 14 2016 at 8:35 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Someone dying in office would be more concerning if the alternatives weren't all worse than a corpse anyway.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#247 Sep 14 2016 at 9:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
gbaji wrote:
Really? Her gender is the only thing that differentiates her from other candidates? Not say... her long history of deceptive politics? Not her actions while serving as Secretary of State? Not her involvement in covering up (and outright hiding) information related to the Whitewater investigation? Not even her involvement with Whitewater itself? Not her poor decisions with regard to handling of classified materials? Not her constant lying to the public about those poor decisions?
Was trying to convince a colleague of mine the other day that I'm not voting for her for reasons that have nothing to do with her gender. It took surprisingly long for me to get the point across to him. There's definitely a subset of the liberal base that can't see past the gender-based argument, and it's downright frustrating at times.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#248 Sep 14 2016 at 9:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
someproteinguy wrote:
Was trying to convince a colleague of mine the other day that I'm not voting for her for reasons that have nothing to do with her gender.

Is it because you hate America? Is that why?

There's perfectly valid reasons to not prefer Clinton. Although I suspect that a number of people have reasons that are gender related -- not plainly "Ew, girls" but rather cultural conditioning of the "He's strong and aggressive but she's a bitch" and "He's really passionate but she's so shrill" variety.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#249 Sep 14 2016 at 9:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Jophiel wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Was trying to convince a colleague of mine the other day that I'm not voting for her for reasons that have nothing to do with her gender.

Is it because you hate America? Is that why?

There's perfectly valid reasons to not prefer Clinton. Although I suspect that a number of people have reasons that are gender related -- not plainly "Ew, girls" but rather cultural conditioning of the "He's strong and aggressive but she's a bitch" and "He's really passionate but she's so shrill" variety.
So wait... cooties isn't a valid reason then? Smiley: frown

Watching the Democratic side is being asked to embrace a career politician after Obama campaigning against that mindset for so long has been amusing though.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#250 Sep 14 2016 at 9:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
someproteinguy wrote:
Watching the Democratic side is being asked to embrace a career politician after Obama campaigning against that mindset for so long has been amusing though.

Well, versus what? The other career politician that was running for the nomination? Versus Trump? That sort of ignores the sort of change people were (and likely still are) looking for. If I'm tired of McDonald's and my choices are Wendy's or a roadkill opossum, I'm not picking the opossum just because it's the most different. People were looking to Obama for change is a particular direction and Trump represents the opposite of that.

That said, I'm not personally opposed to career politics. Politics is a job and experience is a virtue. You can be experienced and useless, of course, like a guy who has inhabited a corporate cubical for 20 years and stays just because his longevity makes people assume he has value. But to be against someone purely because they have a wealth of experience is nonsensical. I'm opposed to term limits for the same reason; if you don't like the job someone is doing you have the option of voting against them.

Edited, Sep 14th 2016 10:59am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#251 Sep 14 2016 at 10:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Jophiel wrote:
But to be against someone purely because they have a wealth of experience is nonsensical. I'm opposed to term limits for the same reason; if you don't like the job someone is doing you have the option of voting against them.
Generally it's not the experience people are opposed to when it comes to career politicians, it's usually the corruption, conflicts of interest, not-criminal-because-loophole behavior, and things like that which turn people off from them. Hillary is certainly not alone in having those problems.

Quote:
Well, versus what? The other career politician that was running for the nomination? Versus Trump?
Indeed; does it even matter what you do if you're not given a reasonable candidate to vote for that matches your values? Sorry, there's only career politicians this time around. Sorry, both the major candidates are for increasing military spending. Is it any wonder voter turnout is so low?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 306 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (306)