8
8
0
I have been an avid supporter of Donald Trump since he began his campaign, what I can't understand is how with all the scandals and corruption surrounding Hillary Clinton that people still support her and want her to be president. I know that no candidate is perfect, but I strongly believe that Trump has America's best interest at heart and he is not a politician and that is exactly what we need in the White House. So for those of you that support Hillary Clinton, please give me factual reasons as to why you support her and not Trump.
Office of the President (POTUS)
Democrats
Republicans
Support
Politics
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 23
2
2
0
All the scandals, all the corruption, was created by the GOP to smear her. Think about it. 4 diplomats tragically died in a suprise attack on a high threat post. Sure there were mistakes there, but does that mean she was a terrible, corrupt person. She was the Secretary of State, with the entire Middle East on fire simultaneously. Do you really think she wanted those people to die? Do you think she wouldn't do everything she could to save them? I think she would.
(2)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Considering she claims to have spent her career serving others, how does her net worth over 45bil dollars? How is it a Supreme Court judge who openly opposed HRC and Obama has perfect health and dies suddenly but no autopsy is perfermed and they claim he died of "natural causes". That's fishier than the Clinton Foundation.
(0)
(0)
LTC Patrick Sauer, MHA, FACHE, CMPE
She sacrificed them, so Obama could win the election. Otherwise the narrative of "on their heals" would not fit. You could have been any one of the four killed, and Hillary would have lied to your family while looking then in the eye.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
I supported Ted Cruz in the Virginia Primary SSG(P) (Join to see)
After watching Donald Trump develop along the way, my wife and I now support Donald Trump for President.
I have read through his plan for the VA and listening to his comments on reviewing bilateral treaties as well as multiple-nation treaties such as NAFTA I concur with his approach to do what is best for the USA from a treaty relationship.
I also like his approach to having the nations we have bases in contribute more to the arrangements so that we could break even instead of subsidizing the defense of our allies.
After watching Donald Trump develop along the way, my wife and I now support Donald Trump for President.
I have read through his plan for the VA and listening to his comments on reviewing bilateral treaties as well as multiple-nation treaties such as NAFTA I concur with his approach to do what is best for the USA from a treaty relationship.
I also like his approach to having the nations we have bases in contribute more to the arrangements so that we could break even instead of subsidizing the defense of our allies.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
Everyone needs to think about who the candidates will appoint to the supreme court before they vote. There is one opening and probably at least another before the next POTUS will leave office. These appointments will have a huge impact on our country.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I'm not voting for either. They are both scandal-ridden liars. And Trump is an idiot. Hillary is a moron.
But as far as military goes, Hillary would help the military far more than Trump...
Trump:
-isolationist foreign policy means less need for military (ie depleted funding)
-advocates more nukes for other countries is dangerous
-wants to pull out of the pacific. That's where the worlds booming economies and merging threats are. 1/3 of the marine corps and 100,000+ Air Force/Army stationed there. He stated he wants to cut sling load on Asia.
-disrespects POWs, Families of fallen brothers, wounded warriors, etc
-fraudulently denies funds raised for veterans organizations
-in the private sector, rank and file employees were low paid, treated like commodities, and replaced by foreigners (I don't yet know what that will equate for his new federal employees like Soldiers)
-no positive record what so ever toward military or veterans
Hillary:
-1st NY Senator to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee
-Increased military survivor benefit from $12,000 to $100,000. (Yes, we all like that for spouses or kids above SGLI... That was actually her bill)
-Sponsored Heroes at Home Act, help families get medical treatment for returning Soldiers with traumatic brain injuries
-co sponsored the Support for Injured Servicemembers Act
-Fought as a NY Senator to keep open the Niagara Falls Air Base and - instead of closing & losing 800 local jobs - increased the number of civilian and military jobs needed at the base
-worked with Sen Lindsey Graham (Republican from the other side of the aisle) to together come up with a plan to get Reservist & National Guardsmen the ability to enroll themselves & dependents in full Tricare, which is now common place
-As Sec of State, pushed for increased drone strikes- stopping excessive boots on the ground but still accomplishing missions (Ghadaffi elimination)
-at State Dept, sat on the council that managed the Bin Laden assassination
-brokered temporary peace deal between Israel & Hamas (creating a year of less violence and U.S. involvement than any in more than a decade)
-She convinced Obama to finally listen to Generals running Afhganistan who did not want to cut sling load but instead wanted a transition out of there
Which record (if I redacted the names) would show a better track record for veterans?
~note: I'm not a Democrat or Republican. I am a hater. I hate Trump for his gross lack of understanding of politics, military, and people as well as his poor ability to plan what he says. I hate Hillary for being the average corrupt establishment politician in the pocket of lobbyists and donors. I whole heartedly believe BOTH will do or say anything to garner support, whether it's an idiotic statement or a bold faced lie.
Besides a hater, I'm also a optimist. They're not all bad as one media outlet or the other claims. Everyone has something they're good at. I'll firmly stand behind which ever one gets elected and support their policies. *Dont drink the cool aid that the conflict building media wants you to drink.
But as far as military goes, Hillary would help the military far more than Trump...
Trump:
-isolationist foreign policy means less need for military (ie depleted funding)
-advocates more nukes for other countries is dangerous
-wants to pull out of the pacific. That's where the worlds booming economies and merging threats are. 1/3 of the marine corps and 100,000+ Air Force/Army stationed there. He stated he wants to cut sling load on Asia.
-disrespects POWs, Families of fallen brothers, wounded warriors, etc
-fraudulently denies funds raised for veterans organizations
-in the private sector, rank and file employees were low paid, treated like commodities, and replaced by foreigners (I don't yet know what that will equate for his new federal employees like Soldiers)
-no positive record what so ever toward military or veterans
Hillary:
-1st NY Senator to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee
-Increased military survivor benefit from $12,000 to $100,000. (Yes, we all like that for spouses or kids above SGLI... That was actually her bill)
-Sponsored Heroes at Home Act, help families get medical treatment for returning Soldiers with traumatic brain injuries
-co sponsored the Support for Injured Servicemembers Act
-Fought as a NY Senator to keep open the Niagara Falls Air Base and - instead of closing & losing 800 local jobs - increased the number of civilian and military jobs needed at the base
-worked with Sen Lindsey Graham (Republican from the other side of the aisle) to together come up with a plan to get Reservist & National Guardsmen the ability to enroll themselves & dependents in full Tricare, which is now common place
-As Sec of State, pushed for increased drone strikes- stopping excessive boots on the ground but still accomplishing missions (Ghadaffi elimination)
-at State Dept, sat on the council that managed the Bin Laden assassination
-brokered temporary peace deal between Israel & Hamas (creating a year of less violence and U.S. involvement than any in more than a decade)
-She convinced Obama to finally listen to Generals running Afhganistan who did not want to cut sling load but instead wanted a transition out of there
Which record (if I redacted the names) would show a better track record for veterans?
~note: I'm not a Democrat or Republican. I am a hater. I hate Trump for his gross lack of understanding of politics, military, and people as well as his poor ability to plan what he says. I hate Hillary for being the average corrupt establishment politician in the pocket of lobbyists and donors. I whole heartedly believe BOTH will do or say anything to garner support, whether it's an idiotic statement or a bold faced lie.
Besides a hater, I'm also a optimist. They're not all bad as one media outlet or the other claims. Everyone has something they're good at. I'll firmly stand behind which ever one gets elected and support their policies. *Dont drink the cool aid that the conflict building media wants you to drink.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
She has 8 years of experience as a Senator, 4 as Secretary of State and her 8 years as First Lady all gave her experience at the National and International level needed to be President. She is very well versed on foreign and domestic policy, has well thought out and detailed plans for her Administration and has a roadmap for her first 100 days in office. She has a relationship with leaders around the world, and can step into the job on Day 1. She has NOT jeopardized our standing in the world by questioning our commitment to our allies, she has been quick to reassure them a Clinton administration will honor our long-standing defense treaties.
The "scandals and corruption" which are constantly brought up and her constant "lying" are, for the most part, non-starters. If people would take the time to read the actual report on Benghazi or the reports of the many Congressional committees who investigated the incident again and again and again there is only one conclusion, the Secretary of State did nothing wrong. One of the committee chairs even admitted his investigation was politically motivated. The e-mail debacle would not even have received any press if she wasn't running for office; does this make it right? No, but this does not make her the Anti-Christ either. The well respected republican Director of the FBI was given sole discretion on the decision to indict or not and he concluded their was wrong doing that did not rise to the level that warranted charges being brought. Has she been dishonest in how she portrays this event - yes she has. She needs to own up to it and move on. She is not the first, nor the last high ranking civilian official to do this. My question has always been why didn't the State Dept. secure her network.
Someone on this thread mentioned the "scandals" when she was FLOTUS. I don't remember the Clinton health plan being a scandal, people were scandalized the First Lady was involved. She was passionate about this issue, she has an exceptional mind and her husband trusted her work, nothing scandalous there. Whitewater, the travel office, Vince Foster, etc., all ended up being mostly smoke and mirrors; a man committed suicide and political operatives could not let his friends grieve in peace.
A long winded answer. Is she perfect - NO. Will I vote for her - YES. If I have made any errors, please let me know - with FACTS.
P.S. I'm not interested in being called names, or having my parentage being called into question. I can't stop you, of course, that's one of the terrific things about living in the U.S.A.!
The "scandals and corruption" which are constantly brought up and her constant "lying" are, for the most part, non-starters. If people would take the time to read the actual report on Benghazi or the reports of the many Congressional committees who investigated the incident again and again and again there is only one conclusion, the Secretary of State did nothing wrong. One of the committee chairs even admitted his investigation was politically motivated. The e-mail debacle would not even have received any press if she wasn't running for office; does this make it right? No, but this does not make her the Anti-Christ either. The well respected republican Director of the FBI was given sole discretion on the decision to indict or not and he concluded their was wrong doing that did not rise to the level that warranted charges being brought. Has she been dishonest in how she portrays this event - yes she has. She needs to own up to it and move on. She is not the first, nor the last high ranking civilian official to do this. My question has always been why didn't the State Dept. secure her network.
Someone on this thread mentioned the "scandals" when she was FLOTUS. I don't remember the Clinton health plan being a scandal, people were scandalized the First Lady was involved. She was passionate about this issue, she has an exceptional mind and her husband trusted her work, nothing scandalous there. Whitewater, the travel office, Vince Foster, etc., all ended up being mostly smoke and mirrors; a man committed suicide and political operatives could not let his friends grieve in peace.
A long winded answer. Is she perfect - NO. Will I vote for her - YES. If I have made any errors, please let me know - with FACTS.
P.S. I'm not interested in being called names, or having my parentage being called into question. I can't stop you, of course, that's one of the terrific things about living in the U.S.A.!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Neither candidate is qualified for the position. Trump has zero experience with diplomacy and would rather run his businesses into the ground and then declare bankruptcy than do anything else besides sue or be sued. Hillary is a scandal ridden liar who has no credibility (other than the Russians hate her even though she and Bill have taken millions from Russia into the Clinton Foundation), lacks experience in the political arena (her one term as a NY senator was laughable), and her 8 years in the White House as First Lady showed a despicable, unorganized, screamer who attacks and provides a level of cronyism that should have gotten her thrown out. Neither candidate can see over the balcony in their ivory tower.
As for what to do with your vote, it should never be about "the lesser of two evils" as that is, truly and literally, a wasted vote. Basically, people will say 'a vote for a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) party candidate (there is an average of 14 candidates running for president every 4 years) is a wasted vote.' that is a misnomer because you then vote for someone you don't want. Vote for who you think is right for you whether your a sheep and want Hillary, are frustrated and go with Trump, or look into other candidates who may not fully be who you want but may have some of your interests (which neither Hillary nor Trump do0. Only politician I see with even a chance is Gary Johnson, an actual politician with governor experience. He ain't perfect, but then again Lincoln was the 3rd party candidate for the election of 1860 and he won in a surprise match.
As for what to do with your vote, it should never be about "the lesser of two evils" as that is, truly and literally, a wasted vote. Basically, people will say 'a vote for a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) party candidate (there is an average of 14 candidates running for president every 4 years) is a wasted vote.' that is a misnomer because you then vote for someone you don't want. Vote for who you think is right for you whether your a sheep and want Hillary, are frustrated and go with Trump, or look into other candidates who may not fully be who you want but may have some of your interests (which neither Hillary nor Trump do0. Only politician I see with even a chance is Gary Johnson, an actual politician with governor experience. He ain't perfect, but then again Lincoln was the 3rd party candidate for the election of 1860 and he won in a surprise match.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google