A recent Rasmussen poll indicated that a majority of voters want to see Hillary Clinton’s health records. With her health issues becoming apparent to the public, should she and other high level candidates for office be forced to release their medical records?

Sheffield, Jamaica Correspondent-If you’re delving into the deep dark pits of politics, be prepared for the worst. On that note, if the Rasmussen poll indicates that the vast majority of voters would love to glance at Hillary Clinton’s medical history, by all means, appease them. It’s called politics and in most instances, they say the voters are always right.  My vote will be buried at the bottom of the sea.  I’ll never allow those politicians that honor.  I know…It’s not about me, but I just felt like ranting because I can.

But, in all honesty, when Hillary Clinton’s records are made open for public scrutiny, what next? Should this only apply to her because voters requested such info?  I believe in justice.  Dealing fairly and justly, will always be my forte.  On that note, if poor Hillary is coerced into revealing her medical records for the public to tear apart, it’s only right to have others reveal their medical history as well. That should be applicable to all other high level candidates who are flocking foolishly after life in the White House.

I couldn’t care less, but I think it’s just fair. If Hillary’s medical records hit the scene, why should the other candidates not reciprocate? Release all those records.  We want to see them.


Owatonna, MN Correspondent-There has been much debate over the personal lives of political candidates in recent decades. While knowing as much as possible about a candidate helps voters make a more informed choice when voting, there is such a thing as too much information. In the case of health records, it is difficult to imagine why that should be a major factor in assessing a candidate.

Because political campaigns have become more the equivalent of a marathon than a sprint in recent years, it must be assumed that any candidate who makes it through the primaries and into the general election is in reasonably good physical condition. Whether they have a certain health issue should be irrelevant to the candidates’ ability to govern and make responsible decisions, unless the issues concern mental or psychological health. However, mental health is probably tested more during a campaign that physical health, which essentially pre-qualifies candidates who survive past the primaries.

Even if health issues are required to be disclosed or done so voluntarily, modern medicine is more than capable of treating the disease or condition well enough to allow candidates to exercise their duties if elected.

The most important reason to not require candidates to disclose health issues is to prevent their health from being used against them in negative ad campaigns or somehow imply that someone in less than perfect health is unfit to govern. The vast majority of American voters have at least some minor health problems, yet manage to perform their jobs and go about their lives reasonably well without having to disclose them to anyone except where a job requires a certain level of health or fitness. With health issues, we should require no more of our candidates than we do of ourselves. Let the candidates decide if they wish to share health history with voters.

 Prescott Valley, AZ Correspondent-Hillary Clinton’s health issues have been in question since her tenure as secretary of state. With the varying degree of health complications that have come as a result of a concussion she suffered and other health related issues incurred, there are ongoing questions as to her ability to serve and survive the rigors of a candidacy and a possible presidency. There are simply too many signs of head trauma with her speech, movements and concentration.

With the Rasmussen poll indicating that 59 percent of those responding were in favor of the major party candidates being required to release their most recent medical records to the public, there is mounting pressure for Clinton to relinquish those reports. Even those democrats participating in the poll felt candidates should comply with requests for medical records.

Clinton had indicated in 2014 that she would release her medical records if she ran for president, but the following year she felt differently and reneged.  The leaks as to her health difficulties following her concussion have led medical experts to diagnose and formulate a number of reasons behind her physical actions that include aphasia or brain damage to the part of the brain that controls language.

The leaked findings also resulted in varying diagnoses such as stroke, partial seizures, vascular dementia and a combination of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, as well as central nervous system damage.  These medical indicators would explain her inability to complete a sentence, lose her train of thought, substitute words, exhibit strange head and neck movements, cough uncontrollably, maintain balance and require assistance to climb stairs and other barriers, not to mention her exhaustion, low energy and absence from simple and limited campaign stops.

With the public display of symptoms and the knowledge of the medications administered, it would seem absolutely essential that Hillary Clinton’s medical records be released as should those of any other candidate running for high office.  All records should be carefully examined regardless of the candidate’s party affiliation or current state of health, and no candidate should be given a pass because of former association with the presidency or any other offices held.

There are inherent risks involved with this kind of illness and the security concerns are even greater for her and the country.  No one in a fragile and precarious state of health should be allowed to run for office, particularly the presidency.  If she is suffering from post concussion syndrome, it is a concerning issue that needs to be pursued and not pushed aside in order to satisfy her presidential aspirations and those backing her.  She needs to step aside and manage her health issues and not the critical concerns of the United States.

It will be interesting to see whether the Rasmussen poll results will have any bearing on the release of Clinton’s medical records and whether she will feel any sense of obligation to reveal her health woes to those supporting her and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) before the General Election.    Voters have a right to know the health issues of their future leaders and if those running refuse to divulge their medical histories, what more will they try to hide from their supporters?   Anyone with those kinds of issues and cover up involvement should be declared unfit for office and be required to step down as a nominee.

 Gastonia, NC Correspondent-I’m going to take a bit of issue with the premise of this week’s question, although I heartily agree with the overarching theme.  The issue of Hillary Clinton’s health is exclusively the purview of right-leaning news organizations and political groups, with the charge being led by discredited mouthpieces like Rush Limbaugh and the pseudo-journalist subhumans at Breitbart.  I’m no fan of Ms. Clinton, but this is just dirty, sexist politics at its absolute nadir.

Is Hillary in perfect health? Probably not. Who among us can say we are?  But I am a political junkie and I’ve watched her public appearances closely and not seen a whit of anything to indicate any sort of chronic or systemic illness.  She has a twitchy hand when deep-pocketed donors are around, and selective memory loss when it comes to her email habits, but I honestly don’t think she’s sick.

That said, I do very firmly believe that candidates for president should be required to release all details of a comprehensive physical exam to the public.  My reasoning behind this is very simple: We require those signing up for military service to undergo exhaustive physicals to prove their fitness to serve, and those health records become part of their service records, which can be made accessible to the public under certain circumstances.  Shouldn’t the person wanting to become the commander in chief of our armed forces be subject to the same rules?  And given the magnitude of the office and the fact that they attain the “rank” via a vote of the masses, those masses have the right to know.

I still want to see Trump’s tax returns, but I’m far more interested in knowing both candidates are sound in body and mind.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s