Senator Mark Kirk says Trump 'unfit' to serve as commander in chief

Illinois Senator Mark Kirk is locked in the political fight of his life, running uphill for re-election in deep blue Illinois. He's opposed by Rep. Tammy Duckworth, a war hero and key ally of President Obama.

Previously, Kirk has tried to distance himself from Trump without disowning him. But with Duckworth hammering away at the incumbent for being "complicit" in Trump's rise, Kirk is running ads this weekend that say Trump is "unfit" to be commander in chief.

There hasn't been an independent poll this year, but Kirk's own poll shows him trailing Duckworth 42-39.

IBT:

U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., who broke ranks earlier this month and announced he would not support Donald Trump as his own party’s presidential nominee, became the first GOP incumbent to run an anti-Trump ad Friday.

Kirk, who is considered one the most endangered Republican incumbents, dropped a 30-second ad titled “Even More,” which declares Trump “is not fit to be commander in chief.”

The ad portrays Kirk, 56, who suffered a devasting stroke in 2012 that kept him off the job for nearly a year, as the un-Republican, CBS News reported, touting his bipartisan support for some Democratic positions, including calling for a vote on President Barack Obama’s U.S. Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. Senate GOP leaders have refused to give the nomination an airing.

“Mark was the first Republican to support a vote on President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee,” the ad says. “He’s a leader on protecting a woman’s right to choose.”

The junior senator from Illinois was first elected to Obama's former seat in 2010 and is among those being targeted by the Democrats in the fall. He faces Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a disabled Iraq war veteran who forced Kirk to come out against Trump by calling the suburban Chicago Republican “complicit” in Trump’s campaign of “hate and division.”

The Chicago Tribune reported that Kirk bought $230,000 in broadcast time for a weeklong ad run in Chicago and $35,520 in cable TV time to promote himself as independent of his party.

“After facing death, Kirk returned even more committed to serve Illinois,” a female narrator says, alluding to the stroke.

The Duckworth campaign issued a statement, highlighting Kirk’s past misstatements about his military record, which were an issue in 2010, and accusing him of trying to portray “himself as a liberal Democrat in Chicago while apparently hoping no one else across the state notices.”

Kirk is, indeed, running as a Democrat. This is a questionable strategy because the voter usually asks himself, "Why should I vote for the imitation when I can have the real thing"?

As for Trump being unfit to be CIC, there have been few presidents who were qualified to be commander in chief. Eisenhower comes to mind and some sitting vice presidents who were privy to national security details and issues. But beyond that, even Hillary Clinton is going to have to get up to speed on national security.

Having said that, there is a huge gap in Trump's knowledge about security matters and the candidate is unfamiliar with handling classified information (most real estate developers are). He will soon be recieving intelligence briefings to try and get him up to speed before the election. There has been some fear mongering that Trump will blurt out details from these briefings, but that's not likely. 

Kirk is entitled to his opinion, but historically speaking, Trump is no more unqualified to be commander in chief than just about any other candidate who has run for president.

Illinois Senator Mark Kirk is locked in the political fight of his life, running uphill for re-election in deep blue Illinois. He's opposed by Rep. Tammy Duckworth, a war hero and key ally of President Obama.

Previously, Kirk has tried to distance himself from Trump without disowning him. But with Duckworth hammering away at the incumbent for being "complicit" in Trump's rise, Kirk is running ads this weekend that say Trump is "unfit" to be commander in chief.

There hasn't been an independent poll this year, but Kirk's own poll shows him trailing Duckworth 42-39.

IBT:

U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., who broke ranks earlier this month and announced he would not support Donald Trump as his own party’s presidential nominee, became the first GOP incumbent to run an anti-Trump ad Friday.

Kirk, who is considered one the most endangered Republican incumbents, dropped a 30-second ad titled “Even More,” which declares Trump “is not fit to be commander in chief.”

The ad portrays Kirk, 56, who suffered a devasting stroke in 2012 that kept him off the job for nearly a year, as the un-Republican, CBS News reported, touting his bipartisan support for some Democratic positions, including calling for a vote on President Barack Obama’s U.S. Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. Senate GOP leaders have refused to give the nomination an airing.

“Mark was the first Republican to support a vote on President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee,” the ad says. “He’s a leader on protecting a woman’s right to choose.”

The junior senator from Illinois was first elected to Obama's former seat in 2010 and is among those being targeted by the Democrats in the fall. He faces Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a disabled Iraq war veteran who forced Kirk to come out against Trump by calling the suburban Chicago Republican “complicit” in Trump’s campaign of “hate and division.”

The Chicago Tribune reported that Kirk bought $230,000 in broadcast time for a weeklong ad run in Chicago and $35,520 in cable TV time to promote himself as independent of his party.

“After facing death, Kirk returned even more committed to serve Illinois,” a female narrator says, alluding to the stroke.

The Duckworth campaign issued a statement, highlighting Kirk’s past misstatements about his military record, which were an issue in 2010, and accusing him of trying to portray “himself as a liberal Democrat in Chicago while apparently hoping no one else across the state notices.”

Kirk is, indeed, running as a Democrat. This is a questionable strategy because the voter usually asks himself, "Why should I vote for the imitation when I can have the real thing"?

As for Trump being unfit to be CIC, there have been few presidents who were qualified to be commander in chief. Eisenhower comes to mind and some sitting vice presidents who were privy to national security details and issues. But beyond that, even Hillary Clinton is going to have to get up to speed on national security.

Having said that, there is a huge gap in Trump's knowledge about security matters and the candidate is unfamiliar with handling classified information (most real estate developers are). He will soon be recieving intelligence briefings to try and get him up to speed before the election. There has been some fear mongering that Trump will blurt out details from these briefings, but that's not likely. 

Kirk is entitled to his opinion, but historically speaking, Trump is no more unqualified to be commander in chief than just about any other candidate who has run for president.