Hillary: Trump is dangerous, not qualified

[DivinePaladin]

PDF said:

DivinePaladin said:
If you're talking about qualifications, prior experience is important. She's held 8 uneventful years in elected office, fewer than Obama overall at the time of his presidential campaign announcement, four controversial years as SoS and 20 years as a moderate-at-best political figurehead as First Lady. 20 years standing next to a State's and then the nation's Atlas is significant but not something quantifiable, especially in one of if not the safest period to be President in the last century. I'm not saying 12 years of experience is bad, obviously - especially not compared to Trump - but in her time in either field she accomplished essentially nothing other than the forwarding of her own political goals. Her first term in the Senate is essentially defined by the fact that she stayed silent publicly while building bridges in Congress for herself. To paraphrase you slightly, you claimed that she had one of the most impressive resumes in recent memory for a candidate. That's simply false. And then if we take her actual candidacy into account here, the holes start widening; she begins to fall back on her gender when pressed hard rather than give strict responses, and now she's turned her back on effectively 40% of the left voter base with continued attacks, astroturfing, and hostility. A qualified candidate has the maturity to not throw his/her hands in the air when a legitimate challenge is brought forth and the most important thing in an election is the perception of qualification, not the qualifications themselves. (If it was the latter it'd be a Sanders/Jeb! election.) When a candidate once inevitable hasn't mathematically eliminated a fringe candidate, that's cause for concern whether you personally agree or not.

I'm not sure who you are replying to but your first statement is wrong.  Obama was elected Senator in 05 and Ran in 08.  She has been in the Senate longer than Obama.  You yourself stated that she built bridges in congress, which only furthers her ability to use those bridges later.  How is that a negative???

When has Clinton been pressed on foreign policy and go "oh but I am woment and to question me is sexist" or do the same for the economy.  To claim she falls back on being a women when ever pressed is your imagination.  

Also I am drunk right now.  So take that for what its worth.

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.