I would be asking for a complete physical and mental evaluation before I invested one $ on her candidacy.
The woman is ill.
Off topic. But, what type of brace is HRC wearing these days?
- Thread starter Robinjopo1
- Start date
Help Support Doomsday Prepper Forums:
I would be asking for a complete physical and mental evaluation before I invested one $ on her candidacy.
The woman is ill.
It is a possibility, but I don’t think they will. They need to win badly so my gut tells me that whomever they run will be a relative moderate who can pull votes from disgruntled Republicans as well as Democrats. However, some recent wins indicate that moderate Democrats are not doing as well as Social Democrats, so who knows? I think Bernie would have done better than Hillary in the 2016 election against or current president. I guess we will wait and see. I don’t think my vote here in AL counts.....they even took me off of the active voter list and I vote every election. I could really get paranoid! [emoji3]
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
They should do that for ANY candidate, and make sure the evaluation is done by an impartial group of doctors.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Maverick
Top Poster
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 10,652
- Reaction score
- 26,523
Who’s going to do the mental evaluation? Practically every psycho doctor is on antidepressants aka psych meds.
That is a very good question... maybe a panel of varied backgrounds might help.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
This is already done by the groups of people that nominate candidates. Then they are vetted by everyone and then voted in by the people, then get a physical and mental evaluation by doctors.
Last edited:
Maverick
Top Poster
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 10,652
- Reaction score
- 26,523
Mental health is subjective in science, I would caution the use mental health as a basis to approve or deny ones ability. One’s attitude and or demeanor doesn’t dictate mental derangement, some may base mental deficiencies on perception alone.
It has to be an unquestionable source. Trumps doctor admitted that he did not examine him thoroughly, but rubber stamped an excellent report with weight and height inaccuracies (what else?) the doctor was later let go for his dubious practices. The method of review must be better than that, and when problems come up, redone.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You do not understand. Who determins the unquestionable quilifications? Who determins what a problem is? The persons enemies, there family?
A consensus of experts? I know it isn’t simple, but there should be some way to insure that the one with the keys to the kingdom is worthy, sane, etc.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I do understand. That is why I said a diverse group as to minimize bias. I don’t have an answer, but each member would have to be carefully vetted.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Maverick
Top Poster
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 10,652
- Reaction score
- 26,523
Every human has biases and those biases influence studies (human nature)
I hunt, the blood and guts don’t bother me, some will say I would have to be psychotic not to have it bother me, bad guys gets shot I will say things such as let the sob bleed out some will say I’m a psychopath. What basis does he or she base that judgment on? Personal biases! I seen psycho doctors on MSNBC claiming Trump has a mental problem! So he bases his diagnosis on perception and personal biases even though the doctor never had personal interaction.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who would want to be President in this current political environment must be batshit crazy. LOL
Gazrok
A True Doomsday Prepper
I doubt it. Bernie was given the Lake House to be quiet and go away....
Warren? Pelosi? Hillary? Do they WANT to just go ahead and swear Trump in for a second term? Because this is how to do it.
Well, last time, she simply BOUGHT the DNC, so they really didn't have a choice in the matter...LOL. It's even feasible she could eke out a win, but with just one reminder of her little pouting session after the election (where she left her supporters high and dry), that should be the nail in the coffin. And there are a LOT of other nails to bang into that lid.
Kennedy wouldn't be a bad choice, but sexist as it is, the DNC really needs to field a gal in this. The other problem is that Kennedy is just barely even old enough to be POTUS. That could be a good thing, like JFK before him...but in this anti-establishment culture, being a known name in politics is likely to work against you. It also seems as if he doesn't WANT to run (though may be a VP contender). (hell, Warren was this guy's TEACHER in law school, lol).
Biden is a possibility. It was rare that he DIDN'T run in 2016 though. Kind of a given for the VP to make a bid after a two-term run. But creepy uncle Joe isn't going to get any pass on his own gropiness, either. And not running in 2016 will come back to bite him.
Simply put, the DNC has no message. So far, their only message is "We're not Trump!". That's all fine and good, but dumb as they think the American public is, they're still going to need a bit more than that. It's obvious, the DNC still doesn't "get it". They don't know what they did wrong, so they have no idea how to "fix" it.
If I was the head strategist of the DNC, I would choose Kamala Harris as my horse in this race. Female, mixed race, easy on the eyes, not well known for scandal. Well-qualified. A bit too liberal for my tastes, being from CA, but I still think she checks all the boxes for what the Dems need. Question is, are they smart enough to realize it? Probably not.
Warren? Pelosi? Hillary? Do they WANT to just go ahead and swear Trump in for a second term? Because this is how to do it.
Well, last time, she simply BOUGHT the DNC, so they really didn't have a choice in the matter...LOL. It's even feasible she could eke out a win, but with just one reminder of her little pouting session after the election (where she left her supporters high and dry), that should be the nail in the coffin. And there are a LOT of other nails to bang into that lid.
Kennedy wouldn't be a bad choice, but sexist as it is, the DNC really needs to field a gal in this. The other problem is that Kennedy is just barely even old enough to be POTUS. That could be a good thing, like JFK before him...but in this anti-establishment culture, being a known name in politics is likely to work against you. It also seems as if he doesn't WANT to run (though may be a VP contender). (hell, Warren was this guy's TEACHER in law school, lol).
Biden is a possibility. It was rare that he DIDN'T run in 2016 though. Kind of a given for the VP to make a bid after a two-term run. But creepy uncle Joe isn't going to get any pass on his own gropiness, either. And not running in 2016 will come back to bite him.
Simply put, the DNC has no message. So far, their only message is "We're not Trump!". That's all fine and good, but dumb as they think the American public is, they're still going to need a bit more than that. It's obvious, the DNC still doesn't "get it". They don't know what they did wrong, so they have no idea how to "fix" it.
If I was the head strategist of the DNC, I would choose Kamala Harris as my horse in this race. Female, mixed race, easy on the eyes, not well known for scandal. Well-qualified. A bit too liberal for my tastes, being from CA, but I still think she checks all the boxes for what the Dems need. Question is, are they smart enough to realize it? Probably not.
Bernie’s lake house was not even a purchase, but a swap from an inherited house in Maine that wasn’t used, that had been in their family since 1900...so you can’t hold that against him. And before you go to the Bernie bought an expensive car that was posted on that great source of truth (a mime) that was proven to be some one who looked like him, but not him.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Bernie Sanders is a communist pretending to be a democratic socialist. Nothing else really matters and any excuses or explanations you give is pointless.
Gazrok
A True Doomsday Prepper
Well aware of the car photo hoax.
As for the house, yeah, that's what the "paperwork" may say (but I'm not buying it, or the timing). But it still doesn't mean his wife didn't basically bankrupt her college and skate out like a bandit, nor does it excuse 4 decades in politics with no meaningful legislation beyond naming a couple of post offices.
He was a joke choice, chosen by the DNC to give the illusion of choice. They about messed in their pants when he started to get traction, and their own internal e-mails spell this out quite plainly. His "plans" were going to cost us ALL more money (3 out of 5 of his initiatives would have raised taxes no matter what bracket you were in). But, at least he HAD some plans. Unlike his competitor.
TexasFreedom
A True Doomsday Prepper
Everything seems to be XXX 2.0 nowadays. So, I'll predict 1984 version 2.0. Anyone old enough to remember Dukakis? What a loser! Remember the little boy look sticking his head out of a tank?
Democrats are desperate to get rid of Trump. But they also know he'll be unbeatable, other than the total nutjobs in the party (ok, yes, that may be a big section of their leadership and many more).
By 'unbeatable', I'm just looking at the track record so far. They've thrown everything at him including the kitchen sink, an F5 tornado, entire nations and races and 'sexual orientations', and not one thing has stuck. They keep trying to stick a crowbar between Trump and his voters and all they keep doing is hammering their own thumbs.
I predict that the 2020 election will be one of the worst losses of all time in a presidential race. Hence my Dukakis reference, I think Reagan got 49 of the 50 states! Yes, it could be that bad for democommunists. So sure, let's see who the democrats put up in 2 years.
Democrats are desperate to get rid of Trump. But they also know he'll be unbeatable, other than the total nutjobs in the party (ok, yes, that may be a big section of their leadership and many more).
By 'unbeatable', I'm just looking at the track record so far. They've thrown everything at him including the kitchen sink, an F5 tornado, entire nations and races and 'sexual orientations', and not one thing has stuck. They keep trying to stick a crowbar between Trump and his voters and all they keep doing is hammering their own thumbs.
I predict that the 2020 election will be one of the worst losses of all time in a presidential race. Hence my Dukakis reference, I think Reagan got 49 of the 50 states! Yes, it could be that bad for democommunists. So sure, let's see who the democrats put up in 2 years.
I disagree. Hillary got more votes than our current president, and I doubt if he has gained any supporters. The Split between candidates pushed the electoral vote over, but I think the lesson was learned. I think more people are upset and former supporters that have been hurt or frightened by his policies, mistakes, and reversals will not support him again. We will see.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
