Welpee wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

Welpee wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:And the Hussain Obama is used to make to make the point this this current administration bends over backwards to defend everyone around the globe but our fellow Americans. NOT to be racists towards our black President

When are you guys going to give the whole "Hussain" thing a rest? Everybody knows what you're trying to do. It didn't work eight years ago, it didn't work four years ago, it doesn't work now. Cheap shots may make YOU feel good, it turns off people on the fence who could actually be persuaded to joining your side if you weren't so divisive. Think about it (though I'm sure you won't since I'm sure you probably believe being PC is a bad thing).

Who's you guys?ni voted for Obame 4 & 8 years ago

Sure you did. So what's with the "Hussain" act? Why are playing that game with someone you (claim) you supported...twice?

Not playing games. People here keep bringing up the housing discrimination over 40yrs during a time when New York was in shambles. I was also trying to refute the idea that he is racist for calling him Hussain. I find it hard to believe these people actually believed Obama was not an American. The purpose behind it is to make the point that he is more sympathetic to everyone than actual Americans.

I don't have a solid opinion on the matter but you guys can provide your own and decide if you feel Obama does enough to protect America

DrAlphaeus wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

Welpee wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:And the Hussain Obama is used to make to make the point this this current administration bends over backwards to defend everyone around the globe but our fellow Americans. NOT to be racists towards our black President

When are you guys going to give the whole "Hussain" thing a rest? Everybody knows what you're trying to do. It didn't work eight years ago, it didn't work four years ago, it doesn't work now. Cheap shots may make YOU feel good, it turns off people on the fence who could actually be persuaded to joining your side if you weren't so divisive. Think about it (though I'm sure you won't since I'm sure you probably believe being PC is a bad thing).

Who's you guys?ni voted for Obame 4 & 8 years ago

Yea but you are defending the use of the terms as some point about his lack of love for the USA. So defend it or agree it's wack... which is it?

I don't quite follow. I hope the above answers your question. Regardless I would never vote for Hillary because the other candidate may have said one thing I wholeheartedly disagree with. It would take a lot more than simply not calling the President by his name.

Welpee wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

blkexec wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:Assange: Next Release Of 100,000 Clinton Docs Will Finish Hillary
http://yournewswire.com/assange-next-release-of-100000-clinton-docs-will-finish-hillary/

small quote:

We have tens of thousands, possibly as many as a hundred thousand, pages of documents of different types, related to the operations that Hillary Clinton is associated with, the WikiLeaks founder said in a radio interview with Sean Hannity.

There are some, several … in response to the DNC publications, a lot of people have been inspired by the impact, and so they have stepped forward with additional material.

Good to hear that more people are coming forward.

So for the Trump supporters.....Are Clinton supporters suppose to believe that Trump doesn't have a similar crooked email traffic? We are talking about a guy who refuses to release his taxes. Just think for a second, if Trump released his taxes...and the Govt released his deleted emails, will Trump supporters still follow? Yes.....Because it's deepers than Hillary's emails.

Emails that jeopardize our national security?

Which of Hillary's emails actually jeopardized U.S. Security? So far nothing that has been reported has been shown to do that. In Theory it could've happened but there's been nothing brought forth to this point.

That's a great question. Everyone always says the other political party is compromising national security. There has to be some burden of proof to show that this actually happened.

When emails are classified as secret or top secret, by definition they can compromise (national) security. We are talking the Secretary of State. Not a small town Mayor.
She CLEARLY put lives at risk and what this all amounts to as far as overall US security going forward is a bit scary. (The following is months old and the email leaks have gotten worse in that time and more are on the way.)
(Read these in order)
http://observer.com/2015/10/hillarys-email-troubles-are-far-from-over/
http://observer.com/2016/02/breaking-hillary-clinton-put-spies-lives-at-risk/

First of all, the emails found on her server were of the lowest classification, no header on those documents stating classification...3 of 30k were marked with a small (c)..I think the actual number is 36k..But that's .0001% of the emails on her server...

What old and new leaks are you taking about??..The FBI release more emails after the initial batch..I think the FBI director is trying ti screw Hillary but that's just me..The more to come you are referring to, is the hacked emails by Russia of the DNC, which were forwarded to Wikileaks, who claims to have more goods on Hillary...Obama and Hillary were trying to extradite Julian Assange to bring him up on charges...This is payback for Assange with Russia's help..

She broke the law. The FBI's job or the DOJ, is not to show intention, it is just to enforce the law. She broke it.
Regarding more leaks, see here: https://www.yahoo.com/news/assange-says-wikileaks-release-significant-clinton-campaign-data-023226471.html

The FBI has already said that there is no link found between Russia and the leaks. It was Hillary who went down that route. (Tough thing to prove anyway.)

What law did she break???..It is not illegal to have a personal server...It cannot be proved she forwarded the three emails that had the (c) in the body of the email. So what law did she break??..Look it up...

The FBI cannot prove Russia passed the hacked emails to Wikileads...The US government knows that Russia hacked the DNC..And what does Hillary have to do with the DNC being hacked???

It is illegal for government officials to have official emails on a private server.
No, it isn't illegal to have private email on a private server, but that is not the case.

You guys all know about the Freedom of Information Act? Well, Hillary just removed years of emails from those records. Think about that.

So you decided "NOT" to look it up...Well there happens to be precedence..

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law

What's more, the Supreme Court held that the Kissinger documents did not have to be turned over under FOIA — even though they were notes taken while Kissinger was at State — because State did not have possession of them.

Then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the majority in 1980:

"We hold today that, even if a document requested under the FOIA is wrongfully in the possession of a party not an 'agency,' the agency which received the request does not 'improperly withhold' those materials by its refusal to institute a retrieval action. When an agency has demonstrated that it has not 'withheld'requested records in violation of the standards established by Congress, the federal courts have no authority to order the production of such records under the FOIA."

Laws were update in 2014 and sign by Obama, after Hillary left the State Department...

That is besides the point. My mentioning of the FOIA is on top of the real problem - breaking the law.
Anyway, it wrong for a government official to essentially remove from records something that will in time belong to the public - law or no law.

ps - I would really not use the War Mongerer Kissinger in any points you would like to prove.

Are you now claiming that you know these records were removed by her and not sent to her??..Are you also claiming the origin of these "classified" emails were from State Department or another governmental database with classified restrictions and not drawn up by another person on another private server??

It is very clear she wanted that private server. They gave the man responsible immunity.

I'm saying she is one of the most corrupt people in a field full of corruption.
I'm saying she is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people because of Libya.

Basically, I'm saying I fear for my family and the rest of the world if she ever gets in the White House. She wants war with Iran and probably then Russia.

Watch those two short clips of the video and tell me she is not sick.

I know that sounds very apocalyptic and the world will come to an end if Hillary is elected. Every four years somebody claims they're leaving the country if _____ is elected president. However, we have had people in the white house FAR more corrupt than Hillary (both republican and democrat) and we somehow managed to survive. The only reason Trump's corruption hasn't been as consequential is because he hasn't been in public office. Does anyone in their right mind think Trump is going to be less corrupt than anyone who has ever run for public office?

I really don't think Trump would want war. He wants to be remembered for turning America around.
In simple English, he is not a part of the club. Hillary and hubby are an integral part of it.

Hillary has had a few thousand show up for her talks (and the media with their clever camera angles try to distort things) - Trump has had 10's of thousands.
I really think the race isn't close. The establishment, at all costs, wants her in there.

But to answer your question - Yes, he will be MUCH less corrupt, cause he wants to turn the country around - he wants that legacy. He is very egoistic, but not a cold hearted killer.
Hillary wants to be president for "the club". She could care less about America, or people anywhere, for that matter. (e.g. Hillary going against military commanders and going in Libya.)
Last thing I want is for a president with that kind of pull - going against military advisors.

Welpee wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:Clinton diagnosed with pneumonia(on Friday)..

And what about all the other Parkinsons like behavior? Was that the Pneumonia coming on for a few months?
They will cover this up until they can no longer do so.(Business as usual)

I have seen doctors physically examine a patient and make the wrong diagnosis, much less some guy making an assessment on the internet...

You don't need a doctor for this, use your own eyes. Tell me what you think.
Real simple guys - forward and watch at 7:42 and 9:57. The lady clearly has either Parkinsons or some form of epilepsy.

And that guy who produced that video is laughing his behind off at how gullible folks are. She may indeed be hiding some type of illness, but this video reveals nothing. I guarantee if I recorded hundreds of hours video of you over a 12 month period I could put together a video package to post on youtube to make you appear to have whatever medical narrative I decided on pin on you.

Are your serious? I've never seen anyone (not drunk) act like that, especially holding public office. Whether it is Parkinsons or some other Neurological disease.
If you can watch that video and think all is ok, I'm speechless. I wouldn't want someone displaying that behavior watching my kids, much less running the country.

earthmansurfer wrote:

Welpee wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

blkexec wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:Assange: Next Release Of 100,000 Clinton Docs Will Finish Hillary
http://yournewswire.com/assange-next-release-of-100000-clinton-docs-will-finish-hillary/

small quote:

We have tens of thousands, possibly as many as a hundred thousand, pages of documents of different types, related to the operations that Hillary Clinton is associated with, the WikiLeaks founder said in a radio interview with Sean Hannity.

There are some, several … in response to the DNC publications, a lot of people have been inspired by the impact, and so they have stepped forward with additional material.

Good to hear that more people are coming forward.

So for the Trump supporters.....Are Clinton supporters suppose to believe that Trump doesn't have a similar crooked email traffic? We are talking about a guy who refuses to release his taxes. Just think for a second, if Trump released his taxes...and the Govt released his deleted emails, will Trump supporters still follow? Yes.....Because it's deepers than Hillary's emails.

Emails that jeopardize our national security?

Which of Hillary's emails actually jeopardized U.S. Security? So far nothing that has been reported has been shown to do that. In Theory it could've happened but there's been nothing brought forth to this point.

That's a great question. Everyone always says the other political party is compromising national security. There has to be some burden of proof to show that this actually happened.

When emails are classified as secret or top secret, by definition they can compromise (national) security. We are talking the Secretary of State. Not a small town Mayor.
She CLEARLY put lives at risk and what this all amounts to as far as overall US security going forward is a bit scary. (The following is months old and the email leaks have gotten worse in that time and more are on the way.)
(Read these in order)
http://observer.com/2015/10/hillarys-email-troubles-are-far-from-over/
http://observer.com/2016/02/breaking-hillary-clinton-put-spies-lives-at-risk/

First of all, the emails found on her server were of the lowest classification, no header on those documents stating classification...3 of 30k were marked with a small (c)..I think the actual number is 36k..But that's .0001% of the emails on her server...

What old and new leaks are you taking about??..The FBI release more emails after the initial batch..I think the FBI director is trying ti screw Hillary but that's just me..The more to come you are referring to, is the hacked emails by Russia of the DNC, which were forwarded to Wikileaks, who claims to have more goods on Hillary...Obama and Hillary were trying to extradite Julian Assange to bring him up on charges...This is payback for Assange with Russia's help..

She broke the law. The FBI's job or the DOJ, is not to show intention, it is just to enforce the law. She broke it.
Regarding more leaks, see here: https://www.yahoo.com/news/assange-says-wikileaks-release-significant-clinton-campaign-data-023226471.html

The FBI has already said that there is no link found between Russia and the leaks. It was Hillary who went down that route. (Tough thing to prove anyway.)

What law did she break???..It is not illegal to have a personal server...It cannot be proved she forwarded the three emails that had the (c) in the body of the email. So what law did she break??..Look it up...

The FBI cannot prove Russia passed the hacked emails to Wikileads...The US government knows that Russia hacked the DNC..And what does Hillary have to do with the DNC being hacked???

It is illegal for government officials to have official emails on a private server.
No, it isn't illegal to have private email on a private server, but that is not the case.

You guys all know about the Freedom of Information Act? Well, Hillary just removed years of emails from those records. Think about that.

So you decided "NOT" to look it up...Well there happens to be precedence..

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law

What's more, the Supreme Court held that the Kissinger documents did not have to be turned over under FOIA — even though they were notes taken while Kissinger was at State — because State did not have possession of them.

Then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the majority in 1980:

"We hold today that, even if a document requested under the FOIA is wrongfully in the possession of a party not an 'agency,' the agency which received the request does not 'improperly withhold' those materials by its refusal to institute a retrieval action. When an agency has demonstrated that it has not 'withheld'requested records in violation of the standards established by Congress, the federal courts have no authority to order the production of such records under the FOIA."

Laws were update in 2014 and sign by Obama, after Hillary left the State Department...

That is besides the point. My mentioning of the FOIA is on top of the real problem - breaking the law.
Anyway, it wrong for a government official to essentially remove from records something that will in time belong to the public - law or no law.

ps - I would really not use the War Mongerer Kissinger in any points you would like to prove.

Are you now claiming that you know these records were removed by her and not sent to her??..Are you also claiming the origin of these "classified" emails were from State Department or another governmental database with classified restrictions and not drawn up by another person on another private server??

It is very clear she wanted that private server. They gave the man responsible immunity.

I'm saying she is one of the most corrupt people in a field full of corruption.
I'm saying she is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people because of Libya.

Basically, I'm saying I fear for my family and the rest of the world if she ever gets in the White House. She wants war with Iran and probably then Russia.

Watch those two short clips of the video and tell me she is not sick.

I know that sounds very apocalyptic and the world will come to an end if Hillary is elected. Every four years somebody claims they're leaving the country if _____ is elected president. However, we have had people in the white house FAR more corrupt than Hillary (both republican and democrat) and we somehow managed to survive. The only reason Trump's corruption hasn't been as consequential is because he hasn't been in public office. Does anyone in their right mind think Trump is going to be less corrupt than anyone who has ever run for public office?

[i]I really don't think Trump would want war.[/i] He wants to be remembered for turning America around.
In simple English, he is not a part of the club. Hillary and hubby are an integral part of it.

Hillary has had a few thousand show up for her talks (and the media with their clever camera angles try to distort things) - Trump has had 10's of thousands.
I really think the race isn't close. The establishment, at all costs, wants her in there.

But to answer your question - Yes, he will be MUCH less corrupt, cause he wants to turn the country around - he wants that legacy. He is very egoistic, but not a cold hearted killer.
Hillary wants to be president for "the club". She could care less about America, or people anywhere, for that matter. (e.g. Hillary going against military commanders and going in Libya.)
Last thing I want is for a president with that kind of pull - going against military advisors.

earthmansurfer wrote:

Welpee wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:Clinton diagnosed with pneumonia(on Friday)..

And what about all the other Parkinsons like behavior? Was that the Pneumonia coming on for a few months?
They will cover this up until they can no longer do so.(Business as usual)

I have seen doctors physically examine a patient and make the wrong diagnosis, much less some guy making an assessment on the internet...

You don't need a doctor for this, use your own eyes. Tell me what you think.
Real simple guys - forward and watch at 7:42 and 9:57. The lady clearly has either Parkinsons or some form of epilepsy.

And that guy who produced that video is laughing his behind off at how gullible folks are. She may indeed be hiding some type of illness, but this video reveals nothing. I guarantee if I recorded hundreds of hours video of you over a 12 month period I could put together a video package to post on youtube to make you appear to have whatever medical narrative I decided on pin on you.

Are your serious? I've never seen anyone (not drunk) act like that, especially holding public office. Whether it is Parkinsons or some other Neurological disease.
If you can watch that video and think all is ok, I'm speechless. I wouldn't want someone displaying that behavior watching my kids, much less running the country.

gunsnewing wrote:

Welpee wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

Welpee wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:And the Hussain Obama is used to make to make the point this this current administration bends over backwards to defend everyone around the globe but our fellow Americans. NOT to be racists towards our black President

When are you guys going to give the whole "Hussain" thing a rest? Everybody knows what you're trying to do. It didn't work eight years ago, it didn't work four years ago, it doesn't work now. Cheap shots may make YOU feel good, it turns off people on the fence who could actually be persuaded to joining your side if you weren't so divisive. Think about it (though I'm sure you won't since I'm sure you probably believe being PC is a bad thing).

Who's you guys?ni voted for Obame 4 & 8 years ago

Sure you did. So what's with the "Hussain" act? Why are playing that game with someone you (claim) you supported...twice?

Not playing games. People here keep bringing up the housing discrimination over 40yrs during a time when New York was in shambles. I was also trying to refute the idea that he is racist for calling him Hussain. I find it hard to believe these people actually believed Obama was not an American. The purpose behind it is to make the point that he is more sympathetic to everyone than actual Americans.

I don't have a solid opinion on the matter but you guys can provide your own and decide if you feel Obama does enough to protect America

Markji wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

mreinman wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:Clinton diagnosed with pneumonia(on Friday)..

And what about all the other Parkinsons like behavior? Was that the Pneumonia coming on for a few months?
They will cover this up until they can no longer do so.(Business as usual)

I have seen doctors physically examine a patient and make the wrong diagnosis, much less some guy making an assessment on the internet...

You don't need a doctor for this, use your own eyes. Tell me what you think.
Real simple guys - forward and watch at 7:42 and 9:57. The lady clearly has either Parkinsons or some form of epilepsy.

unfortunately, I know a lot about parkinsons and the 7:28 mark with the hand position makes me queasy.

Just curious what your experience is with Parkinson's and why you might believe the media hysterics about this. I experienced it up close for over 30 years with my father (who was diagnosed with the disease in his 40s) as well as separately over another 25 year period with my a Great Uncle. I've also performed extensive research into Neuro-Muscular diseases (I'm a biochemist by education and work in Pre-Clinical research in the Pharmaceutical industry). In my completely non-professional opinion and observance of the limited youtube videos Hillary is not exhibiting symptoms of Parkinson's disease.

- Parkinson's disease symptoms are (very) generally stiffness, low/mumbling voice, facial stiffness (think of someone who has problems smiling) and constant tremors (usually shaking) which at first on-set hit the outer extremities (fingers/hands). The tremors are generally constant and not of the Epileptic type shown in the Hillary videos....in my opinion the videos showing Hillary shaking her head during an interview are an over-reaction on her part and not epilepsy nor Parkinson's. For comparison, Muhammad Ali is a public figure who exhibited typical Parkinson's symptoms.

- To the point made on Hillary's hand positions as shown on the youtube speech. Her hand positioning suggested a mild atrophy which might not be consistent with early stage Parkinson's (her hands might be slightly shaking in that case)....as it might for other diseases such as ALS or MS. However pointing to one video as an example of early on-set Neuro-Muscular disease seems extremely curious when there is an infinite number of air time / videos for an extremely visible politician which might suggest otherwise.

- Pneumonia - could suggest a number of things. Pneumonia is an infection of the lungs generally caused by Bacterial Infection or Virus, Fungus or Parasite.

Regarding Hillary's illnesses:
I have to commend Hillary for the incredible physical and mental strength she has shown, and even more so with all the illnesses that everyone thinks she has. She has been campaigning full-time for over a year; constant travelling; answering questions from reporters and citizens; meetings; interviews; numerous accusations and scrutiny; debates; etc. It is a gruesome schedule, especially for someone who turns 69 yrs old next month. So I don't find fault with her for displaying some health issues. And if she is on medication for pneumonia, that in itself can tire a person and make one more sensitive to the sun and heat and be a cause for her being unwell while standing outside at the 9/11 ceremonies.

Assorted antibiotics, sulfa drugs, cold and allergy medicines and pain killers are among the medications that can make people more vulnerable to sun and heat.
http://www.lhsfna.org/index.cfm/lifelines/august-2012/medications-can-make-you-more-sun-and-heat-sensitive/

To be on the record though, I would rather have seen, or possibly still see, either Biden or Bernie or even Elizabeth Warren as the Democratic candidate. Anyone who can/will defeat Trump. And if Hillary is still the candidate come election day, I will vote for her.

P.S. To give some props to the other candidate's and their physical stamina - Trump just turned 70; Bernie recently turned 75; Biden will be 74 in November. They all have very strong constitutions, IMO.

It's honorable for sure but she is running for President not a $10 an our desk job. I just America realizes the importance of a Presidential election. It's more than just a news media reality show for ratings

gunsnewing wrote:

Markji wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

mreinman wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:Clinton diagnosed with pneumonia(on Friday)..

And what about all the other Parkinsons like behavior? Was that the Pneumonia coming on for a few months?
They will cover this up until they can no longer do so.(Business as usual)

I have seen doctors physically examine a patient and make the wrong diagnosis, much less some guy making an assessment on the internet...

You don't need a doctor for this, use your own eyes. Tell me what you think.
Real simple guys - forward and watch at 7:42 and 9:57. The lady clearly has either Parkinsons or some form of epilepsy.

unfortunately, I know a lot about parkinsons and the 7:28 mark with the hand position makes me queasy.

Just curious what your experience is with Parkinson's and why you might believe the media hysterics about this. I experienced it up close for over 30 years with my father (who was diagnosed with the disease in his 40s) as well as separately over another 25 year period with my a Great Uncle. I've also performed extensive research into Neuro-Muscular diseases (I'm a biochemist by education and work in Pre-Clinical research in the Pharmaceutical industry). In my completely non-professional opinion and observance of the limited youtube videos Hillary is not exhibiting symptoms of Parkinson's disease.

- Parkinson's disease symptoms are (very) generally stiffness, low/mumbling voice, facial stiffness (think of someone who has problems smiling) and constant tremors (usually shaking) which at first on-set hit the outer extremities (fingers/hands). The tremors are generally constant and not of the Epileptic type shown in the Hillary videos....in my opinion the videos showing Hillary shaking her head during an interview are an over-reaction on her part and not epilepsy nor Parkinson's. For comparison, Muhammad Ali is a public figure who exhibited typical Parkinson's symptoms.

- To the point made on Hillary's hand positions as shown on the youtube speech. Her hand positioning suggested a mild atrophy which might not be consistent with early stage Parkinson's (her hands might be slightly shaking in that case)....as it might for other diseases such as ALS or MS. However pointing to one video as an example of early on-set Neuro-Muscular disease seems extremely curious when there is an infinite number of air time / videos for an extremely visible politician which might suggest otherwise.

- Pneumonia - could suggest a number of things. Pneumonia is an infection of the lungs generally caused by Bacterial Infection or Virus, Fungus or Parasite.

Regarding Hillary's illnesses:
I have to commend Hillary for the incredible physical and mental strength she has shown, and even more so with all the illnesses that everyone thinks she has. She has been campaigning full-time for over a year; constant travelling; answering questions from reporters and citizens; meetings; interviews; numerous accusations and scrutiny; debates; etc. It is a gruesome schedule, especially for someone who turns 69 yrs old next month. So I don't find fault with her for displaying some health issues. And if she is on medication for pneumonia, that in itself can tire a person and make one more sensitive to the sun and heat and be a cause for her being unwell while standing outside at the 9/11 ceremonies.

Assorted antibiotics, sulfa drugs, cold and allergy medicines and pain killers are among the medications that can make people more vulnerable to sun and heat.
http://www.lhsfna.org/index.cfm/lifelines/august-2012/medications-can-make-you-more-sun-and-heat-sensitive/

To be on the record though, I would rather have seen, or possibly still see, either Biden or Bernie or even Elizabeth Warren as the Democratic candidate. Anyone who can/will defeat Trump. And if Hillary is still the candidate come election day, I will vote for her.

P.S. To give some props to the other candidate's and their physical stamina - Trump just turned 70; Bernie recently turned 75; Biden will be 74 in November. They all have very strong constitutions, IMO.

It's honorable for sure but she is running for President not a $10 an our desk job. I just America realizes the importance of a Presidential election. It's more than just a news media reality show for ratings

I agree with some of yours and others statements on Hillary - that there is a lot to dislike or question about her. She is not my first or even 2nd choice for President. But in a 2 person race she is far superior to Trump. And so is Tim Kane if for some reason, he has to take over the presidency.