Why Hillary would make a more dangerous President than Trump

[EnglishPete]

Commentator and cartoonist Scott Adams (best known for his 'Dilbert' comic strip) has published a great article today on why Trump would likelybe a safer candidate both for America and the World than Hillary Clinton

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/151288850856/presidential-temperament

[Yank2133]

Trump has literally said he might not fulfill our Nato obligations and trade deals, which have been the bedrock of world stability for the last 70 years. He has no worldview or any understanding of foreign policy(Man just suggested that China should invade North Korea WTF).

But HRC says mean things about Putin, so she is clearly the dangerous one here.

[EnglishPete]

Trump has literally said he might not fulfill our Nato obligations and trade deals, which have been the bedrock of world stability for the last 70 years. He has no worldview or any understanding of foreign policy(Man just suggested that China should invade North Korea WTF).

But HRC says mean things about Putin, so she is clearly the dangerous one here.

NATO countries are obliged by treaty to spend 2% of GDP on Defence. The US, UK, Poland, Greece and Estonia are the only NATO countries that fulfil their side of the bargain. If Trump insists that the other countries will also have to pay up if they want the US to keep its side of the bargain then they have a simple choice. Pay up or leave NATO. Given that stark choice most of them will choose to pay up (if Estonia, Greece and Poland can do it then the others all can as well). Problem solved.

As for for foreign policy more generally Trump makes it very clear, if you're nice to me I'll be nice to you. If you hit me I'll hit you back proportionately. International leaders will get the message very quickly and respond accordingly.

As for trade deals if the most powerful country on earth insists on some renegotiations then most politicians are realists. There will be new negotiations and modified deals.

[Sorenroy]

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/150919416661/why-i-switched-my-endorsement-from-clinton-to

If you can read this and not find it stupid, then you've got something one me. He litterally finds fault with Clinton's "why am I not 50 points ahead" statement after it was pointed out she was speaking over a crowd. Sadly, the site is blocked at my school, so if someone else wants to pull out the quotes that make it just about the worst endorsement, that would be really nice.

(I didn't post this before because I found it unimportant, but if this still hasn't been done when I leave school I'll do it.)

[Yank2133]

Trump has literally said he might not fulfill our Nato obligations and trade deals, which have been the bedrock of world stability for the last 70 years. He has no worldview or any understanding of foreign policy(Man just suggested that China should invade North Korea WTF).

But HRC says mean things about Putin, so she is clearly the dangerous one here.

NATO countries are obliged by treaty to spend 2% of GDP on Defence. The US, UK, Poland, Greece and Estonia are the only NATO countries that fulfil their side of the bargain. If Trump insists that the other countries will also have to pay up if they want the US to keep its side of the bargain then they have a simple choice. Pay up or leave NATO. Given that stark choice most of them will choose to pay up (if Estonia, Greece and Poland can do it then the others all can as well). Problem solved.

As for for foreign policy more generally Trump makes it very clear, if you're nice to me I'll be nice to you. If you hit me I'll hit you back proportionately. International leaders will get the message very quickly and respond accordingly.

As for trade deals if the most powerful country on earth insists on some renegotiations then most politicians are realists. There will be new negotiations and modified deals.

Yeah, and this kind of thinking is dumb, especially concerning the Pacific.

And Trump has no clear foreign policy views. It is all incoherent bullsh**t and loads of fluff. For all this talk of him being a peace candidate, while Clinton is a hawk, he is still being advised by Bush Admin. era neocons and not the A team might I add.

[egalitt]

Clinton is much more belligerent  and cruel and presents a real threat to the whole world. See how she rejoiced watching Gadaffi's murder. She is sure to open hostilities against my country if elected. 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5484y_Jythk

[ursulahx]

Anyone citing Scott Adams as evidence for anything - except perhaps trivial workplace irony, of the sort which is now commonplace on social media - has instantly lost credibility.

[Ronnie]

Scott Adams is one of the most shameless, overreaching Trump apologists out there.  And that's saying a lot.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Obama please drone.

[publicunofficial]

Lol Scott Adams