Reply to Trump looks so sick

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Trump looks so sick"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I ran Trump's lipid panel and meds and some other details like his age and the fact that he is obese through Chat GPT to get feedback on his health status. Just as I suspected--because heart disease runs on both sides of my family and I am on statin therapy myself--he is being aggressively treated for heart disease, which HE ALREADY HAS or is AT HIGH RISK FOR. Some points from ChatGPT.

*His lipid panel looks excellent because it is being pharmaceutically managed to be excellent.
*The numbers tell us his doctors are following secondary prevention protocols (meaning he either already has cardiovascular disease or is considered extremely high risk).
*It doesn’t mean he is “healthy overall” — only that his cholesterol-related risk is tightly controlled.

Concerns / Remaining Risks:

*Obesity: Even with controlled lipids, obesity raises risks of diabetes, hypertension, sleep apnea, fatty liver disease, arthritis, and functional decline.
*Age (79 years): Frailty, sarcopenia (muscle loss), kidney health, and medication side effects become major considerations.
*Aspirin: In an older adult, there’s a trade-off between preventing heart attack/stroke and increased bleeding risk—so it’s usually continued only if there’s a clear cardiovascular history.[/quote]

All this is very frequent past a certain age, PP. My husband is a doctor and that sort of profile doesn't faze him in the least. The President is frail and ill with cardiovascular disease, yes. But it doesn't mean we can predict the date of the terminal outcome. He could linger for years like this.[/quote]

Yes, people with dementia can live decades. [/quote]

True but just FYI to the nut jobs who elected Trump & Biden- they shouldn't be president!!!![/quote]

Why are people so confused on here. Biden isn't the president. Trump is. The but what about Biden poster has to be suffering from Early Alzheimers/Dementia, because he keeps repeating himself over and over and talking about Biden like he's still relevant. Just like Trump keeps talking about Obama like he's also still president. Dude it's 2025 Trump is the president. [/quote]

Trump is president thanks to Joe Biden. I think that's the problem many people fairly have with Biden but you're right, time to focus on the current and future problems instead of a problem from our past. [/quote]

Really?  The Republican Party chose Trump as their candidate because of Biden?  If that were a reasonable argument, you’d think that the Republicans would have chosen someone younger — instead of someone who will not only be older than Biden at the end of his second term, if he makes it that far, but who is showing clear signs of decline, to put it mildly.

So, PP, since I’m sure I’m missing something, how exactly is Trump president “thanks to Joe Biden?”[/quote]

Correct, the nominations of Trump and Biden are completely baffling. Biggest mistakes our electorate has made in modern history for sure.[/quote]

At least the Dems were smart enough to show Biden the door after one failed term. The GOP idiots are making us endure two terms of Trump failures.[/quote]

Biden admin rescued the country that Trump tried to sink. He was shown the door before his second term. [/quote]

That would be a fair argument had Biden's 2024 campaign debacle not gifted our worst POTUS ever a second term. Biden's legacy is now defined by Trump's second term which doesn't bode well for Biden's legacy. [/quote]

Nope. The voters are to blame for this mess. 💯

Trump was not an unknown, the extent of his incompetency was on full display 2017-2021.[/quote]

The Dem voters weren't given a chance to nominate a candidate running in a fair, open, and competitive primary in 2016, 2020, and 2024. This is how a weak and unfit candidate like Trump is capable of winning two of three general elections. It's a very sad state of dysfunction throughout our political landscape.[/quote]
Are you an idiot?  Primaries were held in all three of those election years, and in every state.  In 2016 voters chose Clinton rather than Sanders but the race was competitive at first.  In 2020 it was a wide open field, and both Warren and Harris briefly led, and Buttigieg making a strong showing as well.  In 2020 Biden overwhelmingly won each primary because he was the incumbent (just as Trump had no real primary challenger in 2020).  Stop lying about how “undemocratic” Democrats are.  [/quote]

Lol.. tell us you know nothing about the toxic influence of money in politics without telling us you know nothing about the toxic influence of money in politics!

2016- mega donors had been making it clear since 2009 that HRC was their choice for the 2016 nominee and this is why HRC's only competition was Sanders, the Marianne hippy, and some other nobody ex-marine who I can't remember their name. After having 8 years to plan and prepare for the 2016 primary, there were only two viable candidates worthy of being on a primary debate stage- HRC and Sanders. Sanders was competitive enough to make the mega-donors nervous and angry and therefore the DNC used their underhanded tactics to quell Sander's momentum. Disgusting!!

2020- Sanders and Warren were leading in the polls summer/ early fall 2019 which of course drew the ire of mega-donors. Needless to say, a public messaging campaign was formed to push the idea of a more mega-donor friendly nominee. No one is more mega-donor friendly than a swamp 50 year politician who has always played nice with mega-donors.

2024- Biden unfortunately had every right to run for a second term as the incumbent POTUS and the fate of the 2024 election was sealed the day the very unpopular 80 year old sitting POTUS announced his intent to seek a second term.

Sorry, I know these truths hurt but that doesn't mean we should ignore these truths. All this being said; at least the Dem Party isn't the party who nominated Trump three consecutive times!![/quote]

A lot of Dem women hated the Bernie Bros. They’re toxic. That’s why Bernie wasn’t going win. Warren lost to Biden because of sexism. There are studies about this and the sexism by proxy that tanked her.

If Dems had ranked choice and single day primaries we’d have better candidates. I never got to vote for Warren. [/quote]

Warren lost because her voice is like driving a nail through everyone's head. She (and Hillary) remind me of a Chihuahua with the personality to match.[/quote]

We get it, you hate qualified women.

Is this how you pick your surgeons?

“Well she has a raspy voice, so I’m going with the guy that went to Trump Medical School.”[/quote]
DP. I really like Warren and wish she were the president. But the only time Trump has been successful was against women. She would have been a bad choice. I do think Bernie could have beat him. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics