She's terrible at this. The whole reason he's doing well is because the public thinks your idea of "well qualified" is corrupt bullshit.

Why do you say getting "Japan and South Korea to pay for their own militaries" as if it was obviously silly?

Fixed that for ya :D

Thanks!  Been a while since I looked at their descriptors.  

You are quite the ignorant aren't you? Trump is claiming that Japan and S.Korea should pay more to maintain U.S. military bases in thier countries. He must study the history of US-Japan security treaty again America has engaged this treaty with Japan under Japaneas constitution stating disarmament. How can you go through the American school system and somehow miss the whole reason Japan and America have ties to begin with? We are at the loss of words!

Obama was elected to the Illinois state Senate in 1997. Experience of any sort matters, and being First Lady for 20 years at a State and National level isn't going to help after a while - not quite sure how you let the fact that Bill wasn't president for 20 years slide but jumped all over Obama's Senate terms, by the way. 

She built bridges with party insiders and lobbyists. She passed three pieces of legislation, one of which I believe was to create funding for a small state park in NY. These are the bridges you build when your term in the Senate is only resume padding for your ultimate goal, not an attempt to genuinely help your constituents. 

And lastly, it's not foreign policy but she is "tough" on Wall Street so let's just go ahead and ctrlv this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/15/clintons-911-comments-give-sanders-an-opening-on-her-wall-street-ties/

That's literally Family Guy levels of bad. 

For me, any comparison between Hillary and Trump is wholly unfair.

Trump's rise in the political scene was when he lead the obscene and ridiculous Birther movement against President Obama. He was rightfully mocked and laughed off of the national political stage only to return in June '15 to announce that he will be running for the Presidency. An announcement that was less conservative/republican and more nationalistic/populist. One in which he proposed some of the more insane ideas in modern political history... to build a wall separating us from Mexico. In the months following his rhetoric endangers us all. He has proposed bans of entire populations of people, he's proposed full on trade wars without fully understanding the economic fallout. All of his ideas are extremist and dangerous.

Hillary is a decisive political figure but at least one that has a breadth of knowledge and real geopolitical and economic experience. I'm fine with people disagreeing with her but at least she will not burn his country and all our relationships with the world down to the ground. Trump isn't a "f*** you to the establishment", he represents a real dangerous threat to the entire world. And yes, is completely unqualified to be president. It's a national embarrassment that he made it this far.

Everything he says can't happen, and he knows it. The difference between him and Hillary is he doesn't have a filter between his brain and his mouth, for better or worse. At the very least, people know whatever he's thinking at that moment.

Hillary is on the opposite end of the danger spectrum as a known habitual liar. The people will never know what she intends to do until it has already happened, giving no chance of retaliation.

Hillary is a joke figure, just as much as Trump. Many people just refuse to see it because the media tells them to hate Trump and conveniently makes no mention of Hillary (except Fox, but they're liars, too; pot calling the kettle black right there).

The real tragedy is that Bernie will probably not make it into the Democratic ticket at this point, all thanks to a Socialist witch hunt led by people who don't even know what the word means.

The real national embarrassment is that we've come down to choosing between a sack of shit and a lying sack of shit.

You were the one that mentioned foreign policy. Why would I backpedal on a stipulation you named that I never acknowledged? Pretty much anything else you said here just doesn't add up; if it were so tough to get bills to the floor in a Republican Congress, why was Sanders the leading politician to do so (as an independent, no less)? With all the respect you insinuate Hillary would have, you'd think she'd have been effective. Moreover why would bringing Bill back into the fray be necessarily a good thing when he took over in essentially the best possible time to be President, and STILL thought it'd be good to push NAFTA through, on top of other missteps? W could have kept the economy stable during the dotcom boom for God's sake! And then you insinuate that Superdelegates mean anything in the scope of things here when they'd have (and may still) jumped all over Biden or any other establishment Dem. Superdelegates are a way to keep the thumb on the scale, it's no testament to Hillary's respect in the party that they're choosing her over a self-proclaimed socialist!

She's unqualified to be the Democratic Nominee or  the President. She's more qualified than Trump on the former, but Trump is far more representative of his party ideals that Hillary is, considering she's never been remotely liberal. And for reference, Obama wasn't qualified either. We haven't had a truly qualified president since Bill at the latest. Even then, Bill's qualifications are shifty considering he only won because Ross Perot dropped out while on the path to victory and reentered just to play spoiler, and considering Bill was essentially given the nomination as a safe, moderate Jimmy Carter style grassroots candidate. His lengthy prior experience offsets that though. 

Everyone in the world is aware of that. But I asked for a reason, not a treaty. You seem to think treaties are binding facts of nature of something? What a non-ignorant person would assume is that Trump means we'll change those agreements to be more in line with 2016, a time when there's almost no chance of Japan going to war with the west (and therefore no good reason for US military to be in Japan).