Hillary Clinton Drops Out...What Happens?

[Adam White]

The fact that nothing about pneumonia was disclosed prior is, uh, just a little fishy.  Questioning her health after that evidence is just common sense.

Ya think?? The Clintons aren't exactly known for their truthfulness (esp after the past months of leaks, collusion, email servers, etc). So yeah, ya'll will have to forgive me if I don't just take her word for it. No one with half a brain should.

And to Adam (who's dying to be noticed), no I didn't read your link (why would I?). Media manipulation is at a fever pitch, and I don't need some low wage journalist (who probably licks party butthole for a living) telling us all what we do/don't see. We could play the linky poo game all day. Doesn't change anything.

the linky poo game?  So now we just use no verification, and its about what we 'feel' is 'truthy'?  What could possibly go wrong?

Funny how that happened isn't it.



P.S. Here's the guy, Tim Swift, who wrote that short BBC article that we're all apparently supposed to swallow (just because...it was posted I guess?). https://twitter.com/TimSwiftBBC Yeah, seems real fair & balanced. No agenda at all you guys. 

So yes. As I stated, this is the problem with the linky poo game & why I don't like to play it as much as some people here. It means nothing in this context & the only people that truly know aren't gonna be writing articles.

"Verification", lol. That's funny.

So, if you don't trust the media (and therefore don't read or watch it), how do you "know" Clinton has been having all the problems you ascribe to her? Did you happen to be in all those places when they happened?


As far as Tim Swift goes - I know nothing of the man. But your ad hominem attacks are weak. If you think there is an issue with the article, point out the part of the article that is suspect (and why) - don't just dismiss it out of hand because you don't like the guy's personal twitter feed.

I posted a link to a story which attempts to explain where the 'theory' about Clinton's health came from and how it got legs. That's it. It's more evidence than you've provided. Yet you dismissed it without initially reading it - and apparently you think everyone but you has some sort of biased agenda. I don't get it.

I'll let you in on a little tip, just because you're so nice to me: dismissing stuff out of hand doesn't make you any better than the people who unquestioningly accept everything. They're two sides of the same coin.

[peestandingup]

So, if you don't trust the media (and therefore don't read or watch it), how do you "know" Clinton has been having all the problems you ascribe to her? Did you happen to be in all those places when they happened?

Yes, because the only way to view things these days is by having a biased talking head MSM douche feed it to me while they give their own worthless opinions on top.

As far as Tim Swift goes - I know nothing of the man.

There's your problem. Just Googling then quickly posting the first article that fits the narrative you're trying to push isn't anything of substance, which is what you did & why I dismissed it. Esp if its coming from a guy who has an obvious hard on for the Clintons. Why not just post links from Salon, Vox & HuffPo while you're at it. At least that way we can automatically dismiss it instead of having to find out about some no name journalist.

I posted a link to a story which attempts to explain where the 'theory' about Clinton's health came from and how it got legs. That's it. It's more evidence than you've provided.

That isn't "evidence". What, because its online its evidence now? That'd be like me posting a story of how Obama is really a wolfman-like creature & calling it evidence. It doesn't mean shit without actual hard proof. MSM, of all kinds, has turned into an opinionated hug-box of partisan trash. You all know it. You just don't wanna say that if its coming from a place that supports your views or opinion. That's why trust in media is at an all time low. It's what we've prob all known for a while, but the normies are catching on now because they're turning it up in ways we've never seen before.

The fact is, as I've already said, no one really knows what's going on with her aside from her & a select few who aren't writing articles. So all we can do is watch unfiltered & make our own decisions, which I've done. And its my personal opinion (not Alex Jones, Breitbart, or anyone else you wanna throw out there) that she's not been well the past few months & she's giving a dozen lame excuses as to why. And she has a massive string of known lies trailing her, which doesn't help. So call me crazy, but no. I don't believe her. In fact, I don't think she knows when she's telling the truth & when she's lying anymore. All the while she's going to war with cartoon frogs & make believe "alt right" hipster Nazis during a Presidential race, looking like a person who's losing their minds.

So there you go. Not much more I can say about it. You guys can see what you see, I can see what I see, and we'll just agree to disagree.

[Adam White]

So, if you don't trust the media (and therefore don't read or watch it), how do you "know" Clinton has been having all the problems you ascribe to her? Did you happen to be in all those places when they happened?

Yes, because the only way to view things these days is by having a biased talking head MSM douche feed it to me while they give their own worthless opinions on top.

As far as Tim Swift goes - I know nothing of the man.

There's your problem. Just Googling then quickly posting the first article that fits the narrative you're trying to push isn't anything of substance, which is what you did & why I dismissed it. Esp if its coming from a guy who has an obvious hard on for the Clintons. Why not just post links from Salon, Vox & HuffPo while you're at it. At least that way we can automatically dismiss it instead of having to find out about some no name journalist.

I posted a link to a story which attempts to explain where the 'theory' about Clinton's health came from and how it got legs. That's it. It's more evidence than you've provided.

That isn't "evidence". What, because its online its evidence now? That'd be like me posting a story of how Obama is really a wolfman-like creature & calling it evidence. It doesn't mean shit without actual hard proof. MSM, of all kinds, has turned into an opinionated hug-box of partisan trash. You all know it. You just don't wanna say that if its coming from a place that supports your views or opinion. That's why trust in media is at an all time low. It's what we've prob all known for a while, but the normies are catching on now because they're turning it up in ways we've never seen before.

The fact is, as I've already said, no one really knows what's going on with her aside from her & a select few who aren't writing articles. So all we can do is watch unfiltered & make our own decisions, which I've done. And its my personal opinion (not Alex Jones, Breitbart, or anyone else you wanna throw out there) that she's not been well the past few months & she's giving a dozen lame excuses as to why. And she has a massive string of known lies trailing her, which doesn't help. So call me crazy, but no. I don't believe her. In fact, I don't think she knows when she's telling the truth & when she's lying anymore. All the while she's going to war with cartoon frogs & make believe "alt right" hipster Nazis during a Presidential race, looking like a person who's losing their minds.

So there you go. Not much more I can say about it. You guys can see what you see, I can see what I see, and we'll just agree to disagree.

I think the fact that you believe you can "watch unfiltered" is telling.

[peestandingup]

Wow. Pee Standing up, I think you should take a deep breath and come out of the rabbit hole and into the sunlight for a little while.  Sometimes, down there you are seeing visions and the connected rabbit tunnels that lead to everything.

But sometimes, its just a bad case of magic mold thats giving you the visions.

Nah, bro. I'm the wokest guy you know.

[fsquid]

Hold on, Michelle Obama was born a man?

[Adam White]

Hold on, Michelle Obama was born a man?

Sure, why not? You can probably provide a link to evidence that refutes that, but it's no more valid than anything I can come up with that says otherwise.

[peestandingup]

Wow. Pee Standing up, I think you should take a deep breath and come out of the rabbit hole and into the sunlight for a little while.  Sometimes, down there you are seeing visions and the connected rabbit tunnels that lead to everything.

But sometimes, its just a bad case of magic mold thats giving you the visions.

Nah, bro. I'm the wokest guy you know.

I dont think that 'woke' means that you no longer accept any outside information except from a few sources which validate an amorphous pre existing world view, curated and verified by no one other than yourself.

I think thats actually one of the major plot elements of the Matrix.

Who said I didn't? I thought we were talking about Hillary's health? But if you're asking if I just grab whatever worthless opinion article I can off Google without looking into it & throwing it up as a counter argument like so many folks here, then no. I don't do that. Haha, whatta nutjob. Amiright??

But its nice to see you've moved on from the discussion at hand right into the "when all else fails, make poster look crazy" routine. That's Dare Tactic 101. Usually means the discussion is over.

[Adam White]

Wow. Pee Standing up, I think you should take a deep breath and come out of the rabbit hole and into the sunlight for a little while.  Sometimes, down there you are seeing visions and the connected rabbit tunnels that lead to everything.

But sometimes, its just a bad case of magic mold thats giving you the visions.

Nah, bro. I'm the wokest guy you know.

I dont think that 'woke' means that you no longer accept any outside information except from a few sources which validate an amorphous pre existing world view, curated and verified by no one other than yourself.

I think thats actually one of the major plot elements of the Matrix.

But if you're asking if I just grab whatever worthless opinion article I can off Google without looking into it & throwing it up as a counter argument like so many folks here, then no. I don't do that. Haha, whatta nutjob. Amiright??

I, for one, didn't just "grab whatever wortheless opinion article off Google without looking into it". And after I posted the link, you didn't even look at it before discounting it based on your own assumptions. And then, instead of responding to the content of the article, you attack the author.

You've offered little other than ad hominems, yet we're the ones with the problem?

[menace1069]

Well, I started this as a hypothetical discussion on a candidate dropping out before the election as I was 100% sure HRC would not drop out of the race unless she dropped dead, but now I am not so sure.  After events and revelations over the last few days I am almost certain that she has advanced Parkinson's Disease (Stage IV and moving in to Stage V).  Alas, I still think there is no way she quits unless she collapses on stage during a debate (which is increasing in probability every minute).

Since this site is heavily populated by Democrats I have to ask, if she in fact does have Stage IV Parkinson's Disease would you prefer her to drop out and let someone else campaign, or just ride it to the end?

Her Secret Service agents swear that she suffers from Tourette's.
What if she has ebola?

Have you ever been around anyone who has parkinsons?