12-15-2016, 09:40 PM
(12-15-2016, 04:11 PM)David Horn Wrote:(12-15-2016, 12:34 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(12-14-2016, 01:07 PM)David Horn Wrote:(12-14-2016, 11:51 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: You expected the military to vote for "what does it matter any more" Clinton? If the Democrats wanted the military vote, they should have nominated Webb.
Why is Trump better in this regard? He dodged the draft, and he's never shown any interest in the military until he ran this time. Why is that better?
Lack of interest is better than actual harm.
In other words, Benghazi by a different name. Sorry, that doesn't fly. Ronald Reagan never had a problem with the military, and he put 168 unarmed Marines "in barracks" under hostile conditions. The "barracks" were in the open on an airfield. The hostiles had higher ground, and just butchered them. That's true malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance, yet he got a bye anyway -- because he was a Republican.
Reagan did not refuse to send in aid that was available - granted, that was Obama not Clinton - and Reagan did not later go into denial about it, the way Clinton's quoted remark does. Instead, Reagan adjusted his tactics and won. Soldiers like victory.