I disagree w/ your characterization. I think Trump ratchets up the fearmongering on terrorism bigtime, and not in a rational way. If he laid out policies that were counter to Clinton's on how to address ISIS and terrorism, and how his way is better than Clinton's, then your argument would have more merit. But "we'll wipe out ISIS so fast that your head will spin" doesn't really cut it. In fact, most in the field think that the policies that he has talked about - many of which would alienate Muslim allies who we need in the region - would be counter-productive.
So, to me, it is just naked fearmongering. You're drawing a distinction between being afraid of getting nuked, an being afraid of a terrorist attack. I just don't see it.
Again, and you'll fault me for this, but I see Hillary as a pretty run-of-the-mill politician. Her dishonesty & fearmongering is playbook stuff, and stuff I've seen from almost every candidate on both sides for years.
I have never seen anyone really pit people against each other based on religion, ethnicity & gender, at least the way Trump does. I don't like Hillary, and don't like what she does in terms of rhetoric. But I don't think it's incendiary. We've seen its clone so many times - and there haven't been the kind of riots & confrontations that we've seen at Trump rallies.
I think those results beg the question: what is different? It's not what Hillary is saying. Politicians have used her brand of fearmongering for decades.
