There is no use of voting a war mongerer to office (a.k.a rebuild the armed forces); and then complain that America goes to war when not needed, has a increasing debt burden and is unable to care for its veterans. The voters have to prioritize what (three things) are important for them and who is the most likely to deliver on those priorities. There is no use of "wanting ones cake and eating it too" as one often sees across the world. Smoke and Mirror is "wanting ones cake and eating it too". I personally am glad to see Ms. Carly Fiornio go down the tubes. Debating skills and stage performance is poor substitute for good governance and a track record. That unfortunately is what this election appears to have come down to. For a pro-Hillary argument - How about? Since World War II, during her tenure as Secretary of State the US had the least number of US armed forces personnel die in military conflict; not with-standing Benghazi. That is comparing her performance to an all male about twenty+ Secretary of State office-holders since WW II. And who said that displaying military power / war is a sign of failed-diplomacy? IMO Secretary of State Kerry is an abysmal failure. Regards, GL
Venantius J Pinto wrote: If elected, she would indeed be America's first woman President. None of the other pro-Hillary arguments have even that much going for them: they all on smoke and mirrors.
