News Analysis: Trump, Clinton continue to butt heads over terror threat amid worldwide attacks

Amid a recent rash of terror attacks worldwide, U.S. presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton compete to claim he or she would tackle the terror threat better than the other.

Over the weekend, terror attacks struck several countries, including Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh and Turkey, in the wake of the June 12 massive shooting in the U.S. state of Florida, as the terror group Islamic State (IS) targets civilians all over the world.

Though the area under the IS control has been shrinking under a barrage of U.S.-led air attacks, the group is exporting war to the West and other Muslim countries in a bid to remain relevant and boost morale and recruitment efforts.

The terror threat is emerging as a major issue in the U.S. race to the White House, with each candidate blasting the other over how he or she would handle the terror threat.

Republican presumptive nominee Trump is continuing his narrative that his Democratic rival Clinton is soft on terror, while Clinton continues to bill Trump someone who lacks her experience and credentials as a former U.S. Secretary of State.

Through one of his social media accounts, Trump on Monday slammed Clinton as too weak to handle terror threats, writing: "In Bangladesh, hostages were immediately killed by ISIS terrorists if they were unable to cite a verse from the Koran. 20 were killed! We do not have leadership that can stop this!"

Indeed, Trump is continuing his ongoing criticism of how the current U.S. administration is handling the IS threat, and tying Clinton to the administration, as she was Secretary of State in U.S. President Barack Obama's first term.

"Trump will put the attack into his narrative that grew out of (recent terror attacks in) Paris, Brussels, and Orlando - which is that the United States is unsafe from terrorists, and that Obama's policies, and, by extension, Clinton's policies, are leaving the American people and allies unsafe," Dan Mahaffee, an analyst with the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress, told Xinhua.

Trump will also try to tie this to the fact that Turkey and other allies haven't been pulling their weight in fighting terrorism, and thus the U.S. must be more willing to either go it alone or "pull up the drawbridge" to keep immigrants and refugees from entering the country, Mahaffee said.

While Clinton hasn't focused as much on national security as Trump, the attacks will fit her narrative of the importance of a steady, experienced hand during a time of global instability -- with her as the experienced hand and Trump as a dangerous variable, he said.

Still, the challenge for Trump is to sway independent voters to his side of the issue, in a presidential race that may well be determined by those who do not belong to either party.

"Trump will be able to make that case to his ardent supporters, but that will be preaching to the choir," Mahaffee said.

Trump's recent unpredictable performance has sewed many doubts in the American people about his temperament for the office and dealing with issues of national security.

Clinton could continue to be seen as the safer bet in trying times, while Trump could be seen as the candidate tougher on fighting terror if there are new terror attacks, especially ones that target the U.S. homeland, Mahaffee said. Endit