2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTrump is trumpeting his endorsement by 88 retired military leaders. Romney got 500.
Ooops.
Retired military traditionally back Republicans. Hillary has fewer endorsements than Trump, but more than any Democrat in decades (if ever). And she is backed by more "prominent ex-military and national security leaders."
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/why-trumps-support-from-military-leaders-isnt-that-impressive/498806/
Clinton received her own high-profile military endorsement from retired Marine Corps General John Allen, who served as deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, commander of the war in Afghanistan, and as Obamas special envoy for the global coalition fighting the Islamic State. Allen joined other former military and national-security officials in speaking on Clintons behalf at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia in July. Trumps public feud with the Khan family after that convention further eroded his support in the polls. And on Tuesday morning, Clinton released a new ad that is silent except for images of military veterans and families listening with concern to Trumps comments denigrating John McCains capture in Vietnam and comparing his own sacrifice in business to that of U.S. servicemen.
The practice of retired officers endorsing candidates in partisan elections is not without controversy; critics charge that it risks politicizing the military, and the overwhelming majority of retired general and flag officers havent publicly endorsed either candidate.
Trump does retain one advantage over Clinton: Polling of military households and veterans shows him with a lead. Here, too, his performance trails well behind that of other recent Republican candidates. Among prominent ex-military and national-security leaders, the edge clearly belongs to Clinton, and the 88 generals and admirals backing Trump on Tuesday dont provide quite the impressive show of unified support that it might seem on first blush.
niyad
(113,778 posts)mango mussolini, not so much.
Ilsa
(61,710 posts)A hundred or so? I'll look for it.
Here we go:
Snip
"Those three were among more than 100 Republican foreign policy elites who signed a March open letter opposing Trump on the grounds that he is unqualified to oversee American national security a searing concern that Trump has not assuaged with his shifting statements on foreign policy and unfamiliarity with basic issues. In a sign that Trump has largely failed since the end of primary season to win over reluctant critics within his party, at least a dozen of those people now say they expect to cast a ballot for Clinton."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/national-security-clinton-trump-225137#ixzz4JX1fHx2a
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/national-security-clinton-trump-225137
Gothmog
(145,805 posts)MFM008
(19,829 posts)Kill Bill pt 1.