Recent polls (IE. Quinnipiac) show people polled prefer Hillary over Trump on foreign affairs, because “she has experience.” I can’t help but wonder how the questions were asked.
There’s no debating she has more experience as Secretary of State. However, is it purely experience that is required? Shouldn’t it be how one performed gaining that experience? Is experience gained while one fails time after time in their performance a good thing?
Here is how I measure Hillary’s experience on foreign policy under her leadership: Honduras and Haiti, FAIL. Afghanistan, FAIL. Benghazi, FAIL. Libya, FAIL. Egypt, FAIL. Iraq, FAIL. Syria, FAIL. Ukraine (she laid the groundwork for the overthrow of the neutral government), FAIL.
Telling the truth about her foreign policy failures, success! She lies every time.
It’s not hard to see simply having experience demonstrates she did a good job. Not even a poor job. Her experience illustrates she is now the worse Secretary of State in the history of our nation.
I honestly can’t think of one success she had as Secretary of State.
She promises more of the same if elected president. After witnessing how much of our planet she has set ablaze and devastated, it surpasses simple logic that so many people will vote for her and more of the same failure. I’d call that glutton for punishment for which we all would have to pay.
NOTE: Please direct all comments and questions to Dave. Thank you.