Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have each answered a questionnaire from the International Association of Chiefs of Police and, as always, the differences between the two candidates are really rather noticeable. That’s true on the level of detail offered:
Trump’s four-page response does not go into great detail [...]
Clinton’s 12 pages of answers are much more detailed [...]
And it’s true where their policy ideas can be compared, from gun laws to drug laws to bias in law enforcement. But the Washington Post’s story opens with a particularly vivid example of Trump’s level of command of the facts:
In response to a question from the International Association of Chiefs of Police about improving the “important” partnership between federal and local law enforcement, Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump recently wrote that, “Currently, there is no noticeable partnership between the federal government and state and local law enforcement.” He then added, “That will dramatically change in a Trump administration.”
The lack of partnership may come as a surprise to the numerous joint federal-local task forces currently focused on terrorism, drugs, gangs, human trafficking, Internet sex crimes and more. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, in response to the same question, said she would continue President Obama’s “inclusive approach to governing.”
You have to wonder if Trump’s view of the partnership between federal and local law enforcement is based entirely on TV shows where the feds show up, assert jurisdiction, and sideline resentful local police.
It’s really hard to imagine two more different candidates, on tone or substance.