Confused Democrat
reidmill
Sr. Member
Posts: 2,055
|
 |
« on: October 19, 2016, 01:45:16 PM » |
|
This question has been bouncing around my head for a while now.
Let's assume that this theoretical attack occurs the day after tonights debate. If it were to have occurred around the time after the RNC, I would have said that this attack would benefit Trump politically. Now I'm not so sure.
My gut is still telling me that Trump would benefit, but my head is telling me Clinton. Trump has botched his response to every terrorist attack this election cycle. Clinton on the other hand has reacted/responded pretty well to these attacks. She's been firm, cautious, and pretty clear in how she plans to combat ISIS and protect Americans at home and abroad. Trump just rambles on about how he's going to bomb the sh**t out of ISIS, and implement "EXTREME VETTING" (whatever that means).
I feel like the American people would feel more comfortable with Clinton as their President after such an attack because of her preparedness, calmness, and steadiness. They would be looking at her and Obama to guide them through such an atrocity.
I don't think Americans would take to well to Trump after such an attack. They would perceive him as unstable and risky. I don't think Americans would want such a figure leading their country after such an attack. However, Trump could play it to his advantage. He could say Obama and Clinton failed to protect the American people. He would have to be very careful with this line of attack though, because it could backfire. I could also see Trump bringing up nukes in the wake of this attack, which could really turn people off of him.
What do y'all think?
|
Poll
