Hillary Clinton

fair? lol. ok, we will call that video 'fair'.

I mean anyone can speculate idly on the internet, the problem is when a 'journalist' wants to pick it up and run with it as source. That's probably going to get you fired (or at least should get you fired) unless your article is about internet speculation videos.

The Healtherism is fucking ridiculous. Trumpists: choose one of the following:

1) Hillary's mental and physical health is rapidly deteriorating! She's mentally deficient! Seizures!

2) Hillary is a criminal mastermind, the likes of which the world has never seen!

You get ONE narrative. Not both.

"

LostForm wrote:

fair? lol. ok, we will call that video 'fair'.

I mean anyone can speculate idly on the internet, the problem is when a 'journalist' wants to pick it up and run with it as source. That's probably going to get you fired (or at least should get you fired) unless your article is about internet speculation videos.

The way he said it, he didn't treat it as a source but as a reference. But no matter the content of the article, the way the HuffPo handled it is awful. At the very least they should have put an editor's note in place of the deleted articles, explaining their reasons for the deletion.

"

Applefarm wrote:

"

Manocean wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHhNr5jeTIw

Journalists who want to independently look into the Clintons having to preface their statements with "I'm not clumsy or depressed" without a hint of irony. Yep, nothing to see here folks.

That's the environment today, too many coincidences revolving around people who look into the Clintons ending up in caskets.

"

Antnee wrote:

The Healtherism is fucking ridiculous. Trumpists: choose one of the following:

1) Hillary's mental and physical health is rapidly deteriorating! She's mentally deficient! Seizures!

2) Hillary is a criminal mastermind, the likes of which the world has never seen!

You get ONE narrative. Not both.

Hillary does have health issues, that is a fact. I don't believe they effected her ability to be conniving, she just has no stamina, has moments of confusion, irritability, and is physically weakening. None of these stop someone from being smart and conniving.

You can be very smart and conniving even if you have bouts of confusion, some mental issues, and some physical issues. You just aren't able to go full steam in public, do non-stop interviews, press conferences, and multiple rallies per day.

In fact, I'd be interested to see the difference in amount of appearances and length of appearances between the two front running presidential candidates. It seems like Donald Trump is always on the move, and works non-stop.

It could all be explained by Hillary Clinton just being stressed beyond belief and cracking, all her symptoms point toward that, that would also explain her outbursts towards USSS agents, and her irrational responses toward people who disagree with her in general or ask her tough questions that she knows she has to lie about.

"

Manocean wrote:

Hillary does have health issues, that is a fact.

Facts and assertions/speculations are not the same. Right wing folks care more about conspiracy theories than facts, it seems now. Most of the time it´s not even worth commenting on all this crap.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/24/hillary-clinton-health-rumors-doctor-column

"

Manocean wrote:

"

Antnee wrote:

The Healtherism is fucking ridiculous. Trumpists: choose one of the following:

1) Hillary's mental and physical health is rapidly deteriorating! She's mentally deficient! Seizures!

2) Hillary is a criminal mastermind, the likes of which the world has never seen!

You get ONE narrative. Not both.

Hillary does have health issues, that is a fact. [citation needed] I don't believe they effected her ability to be conniving, she just has no stamina, has moments of confusion, irritability, and is physically weakening. [citation needed] None of these stop someone from being smart and conniving.

You can be very smart and conniving even if you have bouts of confusion, some mental issues, and some physical issues. [citation needed] You just aren't able to go full steam in public, do non-stop interviews, press conferences, and multiple rallies per day.

In fact, I'd be interested to see the difference in amount of appearances and length of appearances between the two front running presidential candidates. It seems like Donald Trump is always on the move, and works non-stop. [citation needed]

It could all be explained by Hillary Clinton just being stressed beyond belief and cracking, all her symptoms point toward that, [citation needed] that would also explain her outbursts towards USSS agents, [citation needed] and her irrational responses toward people who disagree with her in general or ask her tough questions that she knows she has to lie about. [citation needed]

See? I can low-effort shitpost, too!

"

Antnee wrote:

See? I can low-effort shitpost, too!

Has anyone questioned your ability in this regard?

"

Antnee wrote:

This is, without a doubt, the most pants-on-head retarded thing you have ever said.

"

Antnee wrote:

Do you have a single critical, original thought about any of this crap?

"

Antnee wrote:

Please, enjoy your hard fought victory, and the delicious taste of your big fat fuckin nothing burger.

"

Antnee wrote:

Yeah, same. I just don't have the energy for forum drama of this nature.

I like how deep you had to go for that last one.

If you'd like someone to talk to, you know, about life or just whatever is clearly bothering you, I can refer you to some excellent mental health professionals in the New England area.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

"

Manocean wrote:

Hillary does have health issues, that is a fact.

Facts and assertions/speculations are not the same. Right wing folks care more about conspiracy theories than facts, it seems now. Most of the time it´s not even worth commenting on all this crap.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/24/hillary-clinton-health-rumors-doctor-column

While the author of that (insert talking point 1 here) speech might be a doctor, she didn't give a single piece of evidence to support her points (insert talking point 2 here), nor any analysis, nor any diagnosis(insert talking point 3 here).

All she did was insert talking points, and try to divert attention away from Hillary's health by talking about other people's health.

Let's break that down to see how utterly dishonest that is:

You go to the doctor to find out if that tumor they took a biopsy on is benign or malignant.

Instead of talking about your biopsy, the doctor talks about other people who didn't have biopsies, then goes into a history of biopsies that have gone wrong.

A smart person would realize that what she is doing (the hypothetical doctor) is obfuscating and diverting - that doctor is trying to find a way - not to give you the news that the biopsy came back with a malignant reading.

The doctor in the article here seems to be using the same tactics.

What she should be doing is giving her counter analysis of what she is seeing, and explaining why Hillary's may not be clinical manifestations of seizures or whatever is being claimed.

There are specific indicators for some conditions and the presentation or lack thereof tell a competent medical provider that they need to look a little closer, or they don't need to worry about a particular etiology for those symptoms.

She mentioned fact correction backfiring and then linked an study. They study was flawed before it even began. Their methodology could have been sound, but they tried to use a drive by information session to alter a person's long standing beliefs.

They also failed to make the connection that information is processed in multiple parts of the brain, changing one part does not necessarily change others, or the outcome of decisions.

So - my analysis, is that the article linked is useless. I was hoping it might be decent.