Clinton’s history shows she’s unfit for presidency
I am writing about attention to detail. Can we agree that attention to detail is critical to being commander in chief? Any misstep as president can turn into something very bad, very fast. This being the case, I want to take a look at Hillary Clinton’s past.
Let’s digress to her initial run for New York Senate. She was interviewed by a radio station in Erie County, Pa., when she thought she was on the air in New York. She had no idea.
Now, let’s move along to her time as secretary of state. Let’s start with Benghazi. “What difference does it make?” Well, let’s see. People died under her watch; I believe, because of lack of attention to detail. We’ll know more about this in October, but again, this reeks of lack of attention to detail. No one seemed to know anything and it all seemed very confusing.
Lastly, the email scandal. Security breaches, cover-ups, denials or should I say outright lying. This, too, reeks of gross attention to detail. Since she entered the political ring, there’s an easy pattern to see here. Clinton has an acute lack of attention to detail. Do we really want a president with this kind of history behind her? Vladimir Putin would have a ball, along with the Chinese. How can she be trusted to make clear-headed decisions at the most tense moments? Based on this history, I have to deem Clinton as unfit to be commander in chief. We need a strong, decisive leader, which she has clearly demonstrated she is not.