If these 5 leaders could pick between Hillary or Trump, which would they favor?

[Uncle Sparky]

During his year end press conference, Putin favoured Trump.

[Ellestar]

Probably Clinton, she's less likely to start a world war. ISIS would probably want Trump.

Clinton is a lead representative of the Hawks. How the main Hawk presidential candidate can be the most anti-war is beyond me. Well, i guess it's some Western logic, like the West gave Nobel War-Is-Peace prize to Barack Obama who started multiple wars, and didn't stop previous one as he promised.

[Ellestar]

During his year end press conference, Putin favoured Trump.

Naturally. Non-US residents are very unlikely to want a Hawk president like Clinton to be a president of the most aggressive and warlike country of the world. It's like wishing Hitler to be the leader of Germany - it's unlikely to be supported outside of the country.

[giblets]

Clinton is a lead representative of the Hawks.

umm.... what?

[Kidlicious]

The Hawks are planning to invade Russia too, I assume.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Vladimir Putin - Trump - they will be able to get along well on a personal level
Xi Jinping - Hillary - Will be able to set US policy even better with with Hilary at the helm
Hassan Rouhani - Trump - angry rhetoric means more recruits
Kim Jong-un - Hilary - less likely to go nuclear on NK
Nicolás Maduro - Hilary - will continue the trade while loudly complaining

Hilary FTW.

[Sir Og]

The previous prez Clinton was not very good at not bombing other countries. I have no hopes that if Hilary wins we will see less US involvement abroad.
In fact it might be worse than Trump for example.
She is both a woman and a democrat and is likely to bomb some place just to show that she is tough and to be able to counter her critics.

[Bereta_Eder]

Well said my bulgarian neighboor

[Kidlicious]

Trump won't be able to do anything. Congress will fight him the whole 4 years, and he has no political experience at all, besides bribing politicians.

[Ellestar]

The previous prez Clinton was not very good at not bombing other countries. I have no hopes that if Hilary wins we will see less US involvement abroad.
In fact it might be worse than Trump for example.
She is both a woman and a democrat and is likely to bomb some place just to show that she is tough and to be able to counter her critics.

Don't forget her personal record as a Secretary of State under Barack Obama, she was always on the Hawkish side of the possible solutions. Her position of Secretary of State was used to force military solutions by the Hawks clique, the same thing will happen again if she'll become a President.

http://swampland.time.com/2014/01/14/hillary-clintons-unapologetically-hawkish-record-faces-2016-test/

[Ellestar]

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military

See? Even Pentagon says that Obama administration (and that's Hillary Clinton as a leader of Obama administration at that time) armed ISIS, despite the resistance of Pentagon. So i don't think anyone abroad will want to see a rabid dog as a president of USA.

[Egbert]

Thank you Ellestar. That was, to say the least, an interesting read.

[PLATO]

Thank you Ellestar. That was, to say the least, an interesting read.

I couldn't agree more.

Thanks Ellestar.

[Berzerker]

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour...ry-to-military
See? Even Pentagon says that Obama administration (and that's Hillary Clinton as a leader of Obama administration at that time) armed ISIS, despite the resistance of Pentagon. So i don't think anyone abroad will want to see a rabid dog as a president of USA.

sounds like Rand Paul was right about the CIA arming the Syrian opposition

no wonder we're stuck in the ME, we've had idiots running foreign policy for the last 25 years

[Egbert]

Trump won't be able to do anything. Congress will fight him the whole 4 years, and he has no political experience at all, besides bribing politicians.

So he knows what to do. Bribe the Congress.