Trump is trumpeting his endorsement by 88 retired military leaders. Romney got 500.

Ooops.

Retired military traditionally back Republicans. Hillary has fewer endorsements than Trump, but more than any Democrat in decades (if ever). And she is backed by more "prominent ex-military and national security leaders."




http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/why-trumps-support-from-military-leaders-isnt-that-impressive/498806/

Clinton received her own high-profile military endorsement from retired Marine Corps General John Allen, who served as deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, commander of the war in Afghanistan, and as Obama’s special envoy for the global coalition fighting the Islamic State. Allen joined other former military and national-security officials in speaking on Clinton’s behalf at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia in July. Trump’s public feud with the Khan family after that convention further eroded his support in the polls. And on Tuesday morning, Clinton released a new ad that is silent except for images of military veterans and families listening with concern to Trump’s comments denigrating John McCain’s capture in Vietnam and comparing his own “sacrifice” in business to that of U.S. servicemen.

The practice of retired officers endorsing candidates in partisan elections is not without controversy; critics charge that it risks politicizing the military, and the overwhelming majority of retired general and flag officers haven’t publicly endorsed either candidate.

Trump does retain one advantage over Clinton: Polling of military households and veterans shows him with a lead. Here, too, his performance trails well behind that of other recent Republican candidates. Among prominent ex-military and national-security leaders, the edge clearly belongs to Clinton, and the 88 generals and admirals backing Trump on Tuesday don’t provide quite the impressive show of unified support that it might seem on first blush.