Does Hillary Really Have the Foreign-Policy Advantage?

The Atlantic ^ | June 11, 2016 | Uri Friedman

[MuttTheHoople]

Ambassador Stevens has no comment.

[Elsie]

Clinton noted that she visited 112 countries...

PFFT!

So has Moochell!

[Elsie]

... Clinton noted that she visited 112 countries as secretary of state.

Since WHEN does flying over them considered to be a VISIT?

[Elsie]

One word is sufficient about Hillary's foreign policy:

She was so effective that Chelsea and her were Dodging Sniper Fire in Bosnia!

[faithhopecharity]

Hillary helped Obama screw up our foreign policy terribly. Donald, on the other hand, hasn’t launched illegal wars or enabled Moslem enemies to amass nuclear icbm’s with which to destroy their “great Satan” (USA). Advantage ———————Donald. By far.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Hillary Benghazi Clinton?

Foreign policy experience?

Who? What? Where? When? How?

[Clutch Martin]

Pathological. No doubt about it.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

She has lots of FP experience, but unfortunately the world has plenty of experience with her experience, and it’s a dismal, abysmal failure on every count.

[Chewbarkah]

The Atlantic’s implication is that foreign policy is a significant factor in US Presidential elections. It’s not, except during major wars. Most Americans can’t name 5 foreign heads of state, and have no broader view than their next handouts. They have no understanding of international issues, treaties, trade agreements, etc.

On Hillary’s expertise — she always brags about visiting 112 countries or whatever. And what does she have to show for it? Apparently nothing she finds worth talking about.

[Homer1]

ISIS wouldn’t be the threat that it is today without her help...

[Ez2BRepub]

Well, she already has all of the phone numbers and email addresses of all the foreign people/businesses that can bribe/pay her off. That is the only foreign policy advantage I can think of that she has.