Hillary Clinton refuses to acknowledge Armenian genocide as a genocide

Hillary has lots of experience with bombing innocents, look at Libya

yes

Genocides of goyim that Jews were involved in rarely do..

You do know about the Jewish involvement in the Armenian genocide right?

Of course not. Such a thing is anti-semetic!

How stupid are we?

Genocide is something reserved only for the Jews.. questioning it is a crime.

I think refusing to acknowledge something is preferable to wanting to bomb innocent people:

skip to 1:39

[video="youtube;WWiaYQUV2oM"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWiaYQUV2oM[/video]

You appear to have neglected economics, energy, trade, international relations, gun control, anti-terror stance, diplomacy, equality in society, etc..

ALL of which Hillary Clinton's policies are vastly more developed - regardless of whether you agree with them or not.

Will you admit that Hillary should be criticised, regardless of whether Trump is worse or not? That is the heart of the issue, but you tried to deflect criticism away from Hillary by making this about Trump.

And Donald Trump has no political experience. He's an outsider assuming that radical change is easily achievable, chances are that he will get into office and be unable to accomplish anything whatsoever

Alright, that's an interesting point about experience.

Would you rather have Adolf Eichmann running the death camp or Leni Riefenstahl?

irrelevant attempt to derail the topic, clinton will get more done solely based on her experience, trump probably wouldn't even finish half of his stupid wall

Please answer the question. It's not an attempt to derail. I simply want to get an idea if you would want the experienced or inexperienced person running the death machine.

What I get from your answer is you'd choose Eichmann.

drop this assumptive, tangential argument style, I know it might be the only way you feel you can discredit me, but its off topic and boring

Of course she does. Apparently the world's only superpower doesn't have quite enough power to be able to afford slightly offending the world's 8th most populous Muslim country with the 15th largest military expenditure.

I don't want to discredit you, I want a goddam answer. You are using experience in this case as a positive, so from that I get the impression you would choose Eichmann. However, you still haven't answered the question, so I am only going off of the evidence that you have provided me to make an educated prediction.

I could, of course, be wrong.

Experience in politics is entirely different in experience at running death camps.

You'll have your answer once you acknowledge the irrelevance and absurdity of your derailment.

obviously I would, but criticism of Clinton doesn't make Trump more reputable

You are the one who brought up Trump.

Nitpicking individual things that Clinton may have done does not negate this fact.

Just out of curiosity, are you capable of criticising Hillary without mentioning Donald?

Yeah because its a choice between two people. When you consider the benefits and cons of either, Clinton comes massively on top.

Nitpicking individual things that Clinton may have done does not negate this fact.