Is Hillary Clinton A 'Weak' Woman?

Also this: warning NSFW

So is she [Clinton] weak or not?

more like a cancer of humanity

Incidentally, this statement applies to people convinced the government is oppressing them. Same irrationality.

ftfy

Works both ways, really.

We finally have some success here.

Eh... I see the point you're trying to make, but people who think the government is on their side don't engage in the kind of attention-whoring whining fits that the paranoid delusionals do, which was the point I was going for.

It doesn't make for a very interesting news day to interview people who say, "Yeah, I think the President and Congress are doing a decent job." But there's a line of whacked-out loonies prepared to rant for 30 minutes about CIA mind control and how food bought with EBT is secretly infected with super-AIDS in order to kill all the poor people.

So, statically speaking, on a bell curve, where do we place the irrationality limit? 99.6% of people are rational? or do we go further away from that?

That's a good one.

If I had to make something up, I would say 88% of all people are irrational whereas the other 12%, 99.6% of those 12% would still be considered rational if not for their perceived irrational beliefs.

I've been on the streets of NYC my entire life and I'm calling you a big fat liar. It isn't an everyday sight but I've seen enough women get heckled, cat called or generally having to deal with cringeworthy suitors to know it's a thing.

Hey ma...
Deathstares at 'dat ***.
Wolf howls (holy cringe)
Overt sexual imagery.

Who wants to know that someone wants to stick a *** in you walking down the street? Pretty sure few people.

Rationality is when cognition overrides emotion. I'd estimate 1% of the population is rational with any consistency.

I wasn't calling any wide group irrational, however. I was referring to the reasoning behind their actions as being motivated by an identical form of irrational thinking.

Must be a different part of the city. I'm talking Penn Station to Hell's kitchen, going through Broadway and sometimes around (34th and 11th) to that huge place where they occasionally have modeling at. I never saw anything like that.

But like you said it isn't an everyday sight. Also I haven't taken the subway since I was a kid, I always walk it. Maybe it's a subway thing, idk, lol.

34th and 11th up through Hell's Kitchen is legit a high class area full of mostly gay people, old rich people and yuppies. Hardly the area you're going to see females getting harassed.

Hmm... you do have a point there. That might be it then.

I don't live in NYC, but I've only ever witnessed this behavior done openly by construction workers who aren't native to the city. Which makes a certain morbid sense if you think about it: they're only here for a little while and want to get their knob wet before they depart again, so they feel fewer inhibitions than the locals do.

But I've watched men and women alike stare at and comment on various people all the time. I'm told I've been the "victim" of more than a few lingering glances and double-takes, too, but I'm thoroughly oblivious.

Putin's answer is pretty based, probably the best he could have given as a human, not so much as a president. But given his situation and the US trying their best to propaganda against him, that was a very good answer, if not the best.

I find it quite funny how some people are getting their panties in a bunch for a rather trivial remark. "Muh sexism".

As for the question, is Hillary weak, it's hard to tell as her public face is a facade and she's essentially a pawn. I'd say Putin was nice in simply stating that she was a woman, at least he stated the obvious and didn't insult her political career and position, which are both a joke compared to Putin's.

No, I meant the standard deviation of normal.

Meaning that, on a bell curve, should we consider 1 standard deviation (1 sigma) or 2 standard deviation (2 sigma) to be irrational?

Mind you, this will be on only one side, so 99.7% or 97.8% (1 sigma/2 sigma respectfully) rational humans?

Actually, that is a strong sign of weakness.

If she takes other's orders and never gives orders herself, that shows that she has weak to no leadership skills.

So every acting and operational manager at every McDonald's ever.

Additionally, I don't believe Hillary becoming president is really in the best interests of any other nation watching the US, specifically Canada.

Oh you wanna do it this way.

First you'd need two bell curves and then a 3rd one that would only consist of only 1 sigma from each original bell curve. The 3rd bell curve of course would be the one that matters, but it would only exist in comparison to the other two, which would be opposite each other.

Not sure if there's even a form of mathematics for this yet, I haven't looked.

Care to elaborate why?

Fascism 101.

Call them names that mean they hate a specific group of people that you belong to if you can't form a good argument.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/1xwx9x/hillary-s-laugh-track

As stated, she does come off as a weak political opponent, let alone as a presidential candidate, who is ready to take orders, rather than give.

As the primary figure head of the US, some of her stances on foreign policy, even as Secretary of State, have begun to alienate more people domestically and abroad.

Granted, in that regard, Obama was a better fit for foreign diplomacy to fix the US's international image in the long run, despite dragging his feet on the Keystone XL pipeline, which has screwed contract deals on energy investments with Canada.

Hillary, or as per her "common folk" name, "Hilldawg", is quite a bit more abrasive, though not really aggressive, in diplomacy.

Half of this is perception as to what we actually see reported by various news channels and online reports, including US and Canadian journalist interpretations.

Granted, given the current situation, she might still be the best candidate over-all, since neither are really in the best interests of Canada in terms of trade and business.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the president (Or future president, sorry Rand Paul) supposed to be weak by design?

Stop expanding executive power!

Ohnoes our leader appears weak and ineffective!

Make your *** mind up world. Maybe we should just invade Baja as our own Crimea. It's called a part of California anyway.

screw canada!

Yep, and screw almost 40% of the imported energy from Canada as well.