Donald vs Hillary

[bush_cheney2004]

Interesting. Do Reagan and Trump seem similarly qualified to you? Did Reagan also ask "Why can't we use nukes if we have them?" during his security briefings?

Yes he did....and wanted to put ALCMs + Pershing II missiles in Europe. I love the 80's !

[Argus]

Interesting. Do Reagan and Trump seem similarly qualified to you? Did Reagan also ask "Why can't we use nukes if we have them?" during his security briefings?

I bet he didn't say "I love war" like Trump did.

[?Impact]

Raegan wanted to shoot down nuclear weapons, Trump wants to launch nuclear weapons.

[bush_cheney2004]

I bet he didn't say "I love war" like Trump did.

No, Reagan made better jokes than Trump, while he was President of the United States:

"My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_begin_bombing_in_five_minutes

It is apparent that many of the 'fraidy cats in Canada (or the USA) are too young to know/remember any of this.

Relax, it is just another U.S. election.

[bush_cheney2004]

Raegan wanted to shoot down nuclear weapons, Trump wants to launch nuclear weapons.

Actually, Reagan wanted to do both. ALCMs and Pershing II missiles were nuclear warhead capable. Trump is playing the same game that Reagan did with less diplomacy. Eastern Europe was free only years later.

[?Impact]

Actually, Reagan wanted to do both. ALCMs and Pershing II missiles were nuclear warhead capable. Trump is playing the same game that Reagan did with less diplomacy. Eastern Europe was free only years later.

While Pershing II played out during Reagan's tenure, the decision to deploy happened during the Carter years. I give Reagan a lot of credit for some positive foreign policy evolution, it almost makes up for his terrible economic policy. Reagan had personality, Trump has none.

[bush_cheney2004]

While Pershing II played out during Reagan's tenure, the decision to deploy happened during the Carter years. I give Reagan a lot of credit for some positive foreign policy evolution, it almost makes up for his terrible economic policy. Reagan had personality, Trump has none.

Then, as now, it matters not what you think/thought of either. Carter canceled more strategic and tactical nuclear programs than Reagan started.

Like Reagan, Trump wants to use the threat of military power to achieve his objectives.

[Argus]

No, Reagan made better jokes than Trump, while he was President of the United States:

"My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_begin_bombing_in_five_minutes

He didn't know the mike was live. He was doing a test. It was never meant to be broadcast.

What Trump said was "I love war", in front of an audience, in front of cameras, and he most certainly didn't say it in a joking way. If you want the full quote:

Trump, Nov. 12, 2015: This is the Trump theory on war. But I’m good at war. I’ve had a lot of wars of my own. I’m really good at war. I love war, in a certain way, but only when we win.

The video of his quote is here.

[bush_cheney2004]

Clinton was supposed to mop the floor with Trump at last night's town hall meeting. She was supposed to be better in every way, but stumbled badly for someone with her "experience" and "gravitas". Trump was just Trump, low expectations to start with.

Clinton hopes she can ride out the festering email scandal (which now includes illegal destruction of subpoenaed documents) long enough for Trump to implode with major gaffes.

I liked a fellow veterans question about her handling of classified information, something that would have put us in a bad way after court martial/trial.

[Argus]

I liked a fellow veterans question about her handling of classified information, something that would have put us in a bad way after court martial/trial.

Here's how I would have handled that guy.

"You clearly don't know what is even involved. The arcane rules, as explained to me, were that there would be a very visible border along the top of any email which was classified. None of the emails had this border. The FBI interpreted them after the fact as emails which should have had it, but I certainly didn't know at the time. There were a couple of emails with a small 'c' on them, which indicates confidential, but those were merely memos telling me to call people. The military is quite a bit different from civilian life in that you can go to jail for disobeying an order, or for talking back to a superior or for any number of things which aren't criminal in the civilian world, including trying to quit. However, no military person, and no civilian person has ever gone to jail for mistakenly replying to emails which they thought were unclassified."

[?Impact]

Carter canceled more strategic and tactical nuclear programs than Reagan started.

True, but not sure what your point is? What nuclear programs did Reagan start. I am aware he restarted enhanced radiation weapon (neutron bomb) production but more as a threat and shut it down again. The only real weapon you could assign to Reagan would be the MX missile (aka Peacekeeper) that was deployed on his watch. It was a replacement weapon, and designed and developed long before Reagan came on the scene. He was however the catalyst for it becoming operational.

[?Impact]

Clinton was supposed to mop the floor with Trump at last night's town hall meeting.

Last night was a couple of interviews by Matt Lauer of both Clinton and Trump. It was not a town hall, and the candidates did not face off. I was going to watch it, but other things happened and I forgot to PVR it (will look on web). From what I am hearing, Matt Lauer is taking a lot of heat for basically having a biased agenda with Clinton and allowing Trump to walk over him. The actual debates will be interesting to see.

[bush_cheney2004]

Here's how I would have handled that guy.

"... However, no military person, and no civilian person has ever gone to jail for mistakenly replying to emails which they thought were unclassified."

Very poor response from somebody who is supposed to know better after membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee and service as Sec'y of State. Classified information security becomes second nature, as does the responsibility to protect it. Clinton made a big mistake, and then tried to hide it with an even bigger mistake.

As seen so many times before, it is the cover-up that gets them in the end.

Edited September 9, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Bonam]

As seen so many times before, it is the cover-up that gets them in the end.

Indeed. A simple "I screwed up and I'm sorry" is infinitely better than trying to cover things up. Unless you committed murder or something.

[bush_cheney2004]

True, but not sure what your point is?

The point is that Donald Trump is not being any more bellicose than one of America's most beloved presidents.

[Bonam]

The point is that Donald Trump is not being any more bellicose than one of America's most beloved presidents.

Which would be more reassuring if there was anyone that thought Trump even knew what the word "bellicose" means.

[bush_cheney2004]

Which would be more reassuring if there was anyone that thought Trump even knew what the word "bellicose" means.

Frankly, I am not certain that Reagan knew either. It was the common Cold War way of applying leverage.

[?Impact]

Which would be more reassuring if there was anyone that thought Trump even knew what the word "bellicose" means.

Isn't that the person in a Trump hotel that arranges a hooker for you.

It was the common Cold War way of applying leverage.

The world is a very different place, and the application is not at all comparable.

[bush_cheney2004]

The world is a very different place, and the application is not at all comparable.

Yes and no....Trump is a product of his time, and that includes the Cold War. He also likes half of what what Teddy Roosevelt said about speaking softly and carrying a big stick. Even President Obama clumsily embraced the scope and range of American military power to affect desired foreign policy. He also spent billions of dollars to modernize America's nuclear arsenal.

Edited September 9, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[?Impact]

I finally got a chance to watch the Lauer gong show. Clinton was very articulate and answered the questions clearly. Trump only answered one question (illegal immigrants who want to serve in the Armed Forces), in all other cases he went entirely off on a tangent. People may not like what Clinton has to say, and many will probably say she is being untruthful, but at least you will get an answer. Trump is just a bag of wind.

I suggest anyone who disagrees, actually watch the Trump segment and tell me what questions they think he answered.

[Argus]

Very poor response from somebody who is supposed to know better after membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee and service as Sec'y of State. Classified information security becomes second nature, as does the responsibility to protect it. Clinton made a big mistake, and then tried to hide it with an even bigger mistake.

Drivel. As someone who worked for years in an office environment filled with a variety of ever-changing classification systems on emails and instructions on what could and could not be sent various ways I can tell you that 95% of people who work in offices with confidential material send some improperly on an ongoing basis or simply find workarounds. For example, I would send a list of social insurance numbers to a contact at another government department, with no names or information attached, then call her up and have her run searches on the numbers for criminal histories. If I had actually written anything about the numbers the email would have had to be encrypted, which was a huge pain in the ass.

[Argus]

I finally got a chance to watch the Lauer gong show. Clinton was very articulate and answered the questions clearly. Trump only answered one question (illegal immigrants who want to serve in the Armed Forces), in all other cases he went entirely off on a tangent. People may not like what Clinton has to say, and many will probably say she is being untruthful, but at least you will get an answer. Trump is just a bag of wind.

I suggest anyone who disagrees, actually watch the Trump segment and tell me what questions they think he answered.

The complaints also are that Lauer interrupted Clinton repeatedly, spent ten minutes talking about email, and never challenged Trump on his lies but basically told him "Nobody expects you to know much about foreign policy". Did he ask Trump about his "I love war" statement from last year?

In the opening segment of the made-for-TV event, moderator Matt Lauer interrupted Clinton’s answer to his first question, about what it takes to be commander in chief, to set up 10 minutes of questions about her use of a private email system and her vote for the Iraq war.

Trump seemed to skate by a half hour later as he repeated — unchallenged — the false claim that he was against the war, even though he voiced support for it in a 2002 interview. When Lauer introduced a question about how the Republican nominee is boning up on issues, he told Trump, “nobody would expect you” to have delved deeply into foreign policy.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/hillary-clintons-supporters-say-she-is-held-to-a-harder-standard-than-donald-trump-its-an-argument-that-is-becoming-increasingly-difficult-to-ignore

[Argus]

Frankly, I am not certain that Reagan knew either. It was the common Cold War way of applying leverage.

Reagan was willing to acknowledge what he didn't know and accept advise and correction from experts. It's far from clear Trump does either. In fact, he gives every indication of a guy who has surrounded himself with yes-men his entirely life and cannot accept either criticism or disagreement.

Honesty, who else would have the gall to say "I know more about ISIS than the generals" given he knows pretty much ZERO about ISIS.

And his plan to defeat them? This plan comes from a guy with zero military experience, and no history of ever having the slightest interest in anything military.

[bush_cheney2004]

....And his plan to defeat them? This plan comes from a guy with zero military experience, and no history of ever having the slightest interest in anything military.

That would make him just as qualified as the present prime minister of Canada.

[Argus]

That would make him just as qualified as the present prime minister of Canada.

You are making my case for me.

At least Trudeau doesn't have control of nuclear weapons.