The Clinton campaign has some strange ideas about what motivates voters. The New York Times reports:

While Mrs. Clinton must be cautious not to alienate liberal Democrats who oppose some of her hawkish foreign policy stances, her campaign says national security could be the catalyst that drives independents and wavering Republicans to support her this fall.

There are probably a handful of voters that vote primarily on foreign policy that choose Clinton for this reason, but other than that it is more likely not to matter or might even be a liability for her. The safe bet is that foreign policy qualifications will have almost no effect on voting intentions, but if it does have an effect it probably won’t be the one that Clinton’s allies want.

There are a few pitfalls for Clinton in emphasizing foreign policy during the general election. First, it draws attention to her generally lousy record and bad judgment on foreign policy. Strong partisans and other liberal hawks think her record is fine, but no one else believes that. Trump isn’t all that well-positioned to exploit her weaknesses on these issues because he knows so little and holds jumbled, scattershot views himself, but any time spent during the campaign in which Clinton is trying to tout foreign policy as one of her strengths is time poorly spent.

Another danger for Clinton is that too much foreign policy talk could put off many voters that want the government’s attention focused at home much more than it is, and that could work in Trump’s favor. Apart from her record of bad judgment, Clinton’s predicament is that she has to reassure the public that she isn’t going to jump into every new conflict that comes along. Talking about her record certainly won’t do that, since her record shows that this is what she has wanted to do for decades. Casting herself as the guardian of the Washington consensus status quo doesn’t do that, either. Clinton’s campaign wants to make people believe in her “foreign policy sure-footedness,” but it is nearly impossible to do that when you consider the unnecessary wars she has supported over the years.