It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should Hillary Clinton's Age, Health and Weight be an Issue in 2016 ?

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: nugget1

Exactly!
Too many other reasons for her not to run, besides the ones being questioned in the OP.




posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

I think her utter incompetence as a leader should be front and center. But for the stupid voters the fat caboose ads might work. Targeted messaging.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Personally it shouldn't be much of a consideration. It could lead to a VP becoming the President if something were to go awry, however if they deem her psychologically and physically fit to run, ok, run.

I'd personally like to see someone who's the country and it's citizens rights and liberties at heart and not their own agenda taking the spotlight and focus.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
W# her age. That whore is terrible against your constitution! Why support trash?!



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: BobAthome

Menopause at 69?

I hope she runs.
edit on 15-5-2014 by MOMof3 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I believe it wont play a huge role in the campaign. Christie's health may play a key role though. The question will be asked in many ways, "Can a man who has succumb to obesity take care of others when he can't take care of himself?". I don't claim to know how this next election will turn out but the biggest factor in play will be espionage imho.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Should Hillary Clinton's Age, Health and Weight be an Issue in 2016 ?

Age? -- not a big deal

Weight? -- not a big deal

Physical Health? -- needs to be considered and so does effects of medications.

Mental Health? -- BIG factor. All candidates should be examined by psychiatrists and psychologists and screened for psychopathy, sociopathy, psychical etc. etc. and how those and related medications affect decision making.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I have read that a lot of women voted for JFK and Bill Clinton because they thought they were attractive.

Why shouldn't men decide not to vote for her because she is not attractive?

I am not saying that a person should vote for a person because of their looks, just saying that a lot of people do just that.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: BobAthome

Menopause at 69?

I hope she runs.


At her age, perhaps she should just walk.




posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: amazing

Health should be a huge factor for anyone running for high office.
Why would you vote for someone in bad health?


To a point yes, but Hillary is in good enough health to run and govern and that's why we have vice presidents and a whole line of succession to the throne...I mean oval office.

The issue is where do we draw the line on health. She's healthy enough, but then health becomes a distraction from issues if say she would run against someone like Bobby Jindal who is slim and in good shape. I'd much rather have topics about real policies than distractions about who is heavier or in better health etc.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

To be fair, there is nothing fair about considering someone's age or weight for the job she wants. IMHO the only thing that matters is if she is qualified and sound of mind.

Yeah, I know... a lot opf people think she is not sound of mind. You know what I mean... not going demented or having such simular illnesses.

Personally I would not vote for her but that doersn't mean I consider her unfit because of her age or weight.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
Before you immediately say it does not matter, let's be fair.......

Do you feel any of these questions are out of bounds because she is a Woman ?

If we are to have total equality should we have a different standard for a Women ?

Thoughts ? Mud ? Can't wait to see the replies...

I really like the oxymoron above, the one I made bold. How can you have equality and different standards for different people at the same time, it flies in the face of logic and reason?

Its health is an important issue, but more important is its track record in both the public (political) and private sector arenas. This thing called hillary is quite the scumbag and there is at least one very pointed documentary on it that it managed to get banned almost everywhere. I did manage to get a copy however before it was pulled. My personal opinion concerning hillary requires that I refer to it, as "it," so this is not political trolling, rather simply an opinionated form of disdain and disgust for its more than corrupt and egocentric behavior, and its contempt for the American people.

Narcissistic sociopaths and psychopaths come in all forms, shapes, sizes, genders, breeds (race), classes and religious affiliations, hillary is no exception to that rule and is an exemplary example of some, maybe all, of the worst traits in its questionably human behavior.

Just don't ask me how I really feel, to express that would violate the T&C ;-)

Cheers - Dave
edit on 5/15.2014 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Why is this even a question that needs raised?

She will not be a candidate to me even if she does decide to run. Does this have anything to do with her age/weight/appearance? No.

It has to do with the fact that she is a proven liar. She is one of "them", and by that I mean that she is in the group of people that seem to never relinquish power of this country.

Let me put it this way. If a name that I've heard before now runs for president, they are not getting my vote. I refuse to vote for someone that has been part of the problem.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

Yes, it all should. HOWEVER>

She is a Far Left Liberal Dumocrate. So that means you are a

1: Racist
2: Sexist
3: Inflamatory
4: Ignorant
5: or a Tea Party member
6: Or whatever else they can think of to Deamonize you.

Her worst proplem is HERSELF. She has shown she is just as useless as that scum husband of hers that was impeached.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

Hillary Clinton isn't that person.

We would be far better off w/ Palin.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: anon72
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

Hillary Clinton isn't that person.

We would be far better off w/ Palin.


We'd be better off with Putin, even.

I think Vladdy should defect so he can run for US president*, and have Palin as his running mate, just to hear the talking heads say that over and over.

Putin/Palin.
edit on 15-5-2014 by ScientiaFortisDefendit because: *We've already had ONE foreign president...



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: anon72
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

Hillary Clinton isn't that person.

We would be far better off w/ Palin.


Oh God! Not that buffoon Palin!

There are dozens' of better conservative female leaders than Palin! Hundreds even!



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   
her health has NOT been good enough to stand trial or even answer questions about benghazi so NO she is not qualified nor healthy for POTUS. I would sooner off myself than have her dictate the route we use on our downward spiral.

what happens when something major occurs? she'll have another fall or a heatstroke and unavailable for comments for :months:

hahahaha sorry but no. I'd rather clifford the big red dog become a hologram and be the leader of our country, atleast he doesn't lie



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

I have no doubt that people, being generally critical of those they don't like, will jump on ANYTHING that will diminish their opponent (at least in their own eyes). Weight, age, health, general appearance, her being a woman, etc. are going to be attacked, because that's what people do.

Now general health - physical, mental and emotional, are all fair game for any candidate AS LONG AS it relates SOLELY to their ability to hold office. That won't happen, of course, as people will talk about a woman's "fashion" and "style" her "motherly or grandmotherly roles" as being relevant to leadership, her "emotionality" if she shows she has any feelings at all (cause when men cry its manly and when men shout its manly, etc.) her "moods" will no doubt be discussed and the b-word come into play, also, the weight issue - is she *gasp* NOT FASHIONABLY THIN?!?!? I could go on, but why?


People will pick and pick and pick, because that's what we've learned to do to someone who is "on the other team" - we deliver "smack talk" and earn points with fellow team mates when we diminish "the other team"

*sigh*

I just wish we'd all grow up a bit.

peace,
AB



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

I think the reason we have got to this point because of a lack of Leaders.

I have not been inspired then impressed by either Party.

I am hoping a leader will emerge. I am just not betting on it




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join