Clinton confidence grows with national security at forefront

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is emboldened by the rise of national security as an issue in the presidential race.

The threat from international terrorism has become a huge issue since last month’s deadly attacks on Paris that killed 130 people, with fears of terrorist attacks in the United States fanned further by Wednesday’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., in which 14 people were killed.

{mosads}Team Clinton has noted the shift in the public mood, and Clinton has sought to underline her national security credentials — a point she emphasized at the Democratic debate held the day after the Paris attacks.

“Clearly there’s a premium on these issues where there wasn’t a year ago or so,” said one foreign policy expert who is following the 2016 presidential campaign closely. “And it certainly isn’t going to hurt her.”

Campaign officials who believe the former secretary of State and New York senator is well positioned for national debates about terrorism in both the primary and general elections say she’ll tout her tenure at Foggy Bottom throughout the campaign from a position of strength.

As evidence for their confidence, allies point to a recent Washington Post poll that found Clinton is the “most trusted” 2016 candidate from either party on the issue of terrorism. 

The survey, released late last month, indicated that she beats Republican front-runner Donald Trump on the issue, 50-42 percent.

Republican candidates argue that rising public worries about terrorism will help their own party as they joust for position.

Trump on Thursday said his own poll numbers have gone up at times of crisis because voters believe in his message of strength. He has unnerved some Republicans, however, with harsh rhetoric toward Muslims that Democrats believe could be a liability next fall.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, whose support is rising in New Hampshire, is emphasizing his prosecutorial background in making the case that he is ready to lead his party on national security. He’s suggested Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), both ahead of him in national presidential polls, aren’t ready for the Oval Office.

Rubio and Cruz, for their parts, have battled over whether reforms to National Security Agency surveillance programs have left the homeland more vulnerable.

There are signs that Republicans are worried about their chances in the fall if Trump becomes their nominee.

Yet they also believe the rise of terrorism and national security as a potent issue in the race could hurt Clinton, especially if she is matched against a candidate such as Rubio, who they believe would provide a favorable contrast. Rubio is ahead of Clinton in the Real Clear Politics average of polls pitting the two against one another.

Clinton is tied closely to President Obama after serving in his cabinet, something Republicans have been quick to point out. They have argued that the Obama-Clinton foreign policy birth of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the terrorism of Boko Haram and upheaval in the Middle East.

“The fact is that she can’t point to a major success as secretary of State, and under her watch, the Middle East has descended into chaos and we’ve seen with that the rise of ISIS,” said Republican strategist Ron Bonjean.

The Washington Post poll revealed that 54 percent disapprove of Obama’s policies on terrorism, with 57 percent disapproving of his handling of ISIS.

Bonjean argued it would be difficult for Clinton “to overcome her severe liabilities.”

“Even though she does have experience, it shows what type of leader she was,” Bonjean added. “Things have gotten worse under her watch.” 

Jeff Bechdel, the communications director for the GOP super-PAC America Rising, said that while the controversy surrounding Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of State was damaging, “her failed leadership in public life may be what actually hurts Clinton most among voters in the long run.”

Allies of Clinton scoff at those suggestions.

“So be it,” said William Galston, a senior fellow of governance studies at the Brookings Institution, which recently hosted Clinton for one of her foreign policy speeches. “She’s proud of her record and she’s going to stand on it and run on it.”

Galston, who served in the Bill Clinton White House, pointed out that the Democratic front-runner — who served on the Senate Armed Services Committee along with her time at Foggy Bottom — “unlike a lot of Democrats in the past has nothing to fear from the elevated discussion of national security issues.”

Clinton has made an effort to distance herself from Obama’s foreign policy while pointing out their differences, a sign not only of their real division on policy but of the potential political liability.

Clinton pointedly said the goal should be to destroy ISIS and not to contain it, as Obama said before the Paris attacks.

“We have to break the group’s momentum and then its back,” she said last month in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations several days after the Paris attacks.

Nicholas Burns, a career foreign service officer at the State Department who served as a policy adviser for the Clinton campaign, noted that she recommended a more aggressive strategy on Syria than Obama.

Burns, who also worked under the George W. Bush administration, said Clinton is the right person to be president, given the threats from abroad.

“I think that given the times we live in and the multiplicity of threats … we need an experienced, tough-minded person in the Oval Office,” he said.