EIGHTY+ US DAILY NEWSPAPERS ENDORSE CLINTON: ZERO US PAPERS ENDORSE TRUMP

…The Latest National Paper to endorse Hillary Clinton

 

Per the Washington Post: As president, Trump would pose a grave danger to the nation and the world.

 

According to the mainstream media, including all of the daily newspapers across this country, “not one daily US newspaper has endorsed the Republican nominee, Donald Trump.”

 

This is an historical record as even Mitt Romney in the 2012 election had received 21 major US newspaper endorsements, but so far, it’s zip for Mr. “Make America Great Again”, and there’s not much time for “The Donald” to obtain one.

 

There is another historical record of endorsements, and that’s in the endorsements for Hillary Clinton.

 

Even with all the noise being made against Ms. Clinton from the Trump supporters and the “Never Hillary” groups, Hillary Clinton has received the endorsements from over 80 major US newspapers, and that does not include a number of news organizations outside of the US such as in Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan and Great Britain.

 

Here is a sample of some of those newspaper organizations.  Please note, only those daily newspapers with circulations in excess of 20,000 customers are included.

 

New York Times, Washington Post, New York Daily News, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Baltimore Sun, Houston Chronicle, Chicago Sun Times, Dallas Morning News, Arizona Representative, Portland Press Herald, Akron Beacon Journal, Charlotte Observer, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Boston Globe, Birmingham News, St Louis Dispatch, Seattle Times, and many more.

 

The following are some excerpts from the Washington Post that are only examples of the kind of statements that are in the endorsements from many of the newspapers listed above.

 

·       “In the gloom and ugliness of this political season, one encouraging truth is often overlooked: There is a well-qualified, well-prepared candidate on the ballot. Hillary Clinton has the potential to be an excellent president of the United States, and we endorse her without hesitation.”

 

·       “Please allow us to anticipate a likely question: No, we are not making this endorsement simply because Ms. Clinton’s chief opponent is so dreadful.  If we believed that Ms. Clinton were the lesser of two evils, we might well urge you to vote for her anyway — that is how strongly we feel about Mr. Trump’s lack of qualifications. However, we would also tell you that was our judgment.  Fortunately, it is not.”

 

·       “We recognize that many Americans distrust and dislike Ms. Clinton. The negative feelings reflect in part the bitter partisanship of the nation’s politics today, and in part the dishonest attacks she has been subjected to for decades; and in part her genuine flaws, missteps and weaknesses.”

 

·       “No one will accuse Ms. Clinton of an excess of charisma: She has neither the eloquence of President Obama nor the folksy charm of former president George W. Bush or, for that matter, even her husband.  If Ms. Clinton is elected, she will attempt to govern an angrily divided nation, working with legislators who in many cases are determined to thwart her, while her defeated opponent quite possibly will falsely say that her victory was stolen.”

 

·       “What the hope is for a way out of the gridlock that frustrates so many Americans today. The temptation is to summon a “revolution,” as her chief primary opponent has imagined, or to promise to blow up the system, as per Mr. Trump. Both temptations are dead ends, as Ms. Clinton understands. If progress is possible, it will be incremental and achieved with input from members of both parties. Eloquence and charm may matter less than her policy chops and persistence.”

 

·       “It is fair to read Ms. Clinton’s career as a series of learning experiences that have prepared her well for such an environment. As first lady, she failed when she tried to radically remake the American health-care system. But instead of retreating, she reentered the fray to help enact a more modest but important reform expanding health-care access to poor children.”

 

·       “Contrary to Mr. Trump, the United States and Russia did make progress under Ms. Clinton’s leadership, including in nuclear-arms control and in facilitating resupply of US troops in Afghanistan across Russian territory. As Mr. Putin then became the Russian president and he reasserted himself, and Russia became more hostile.  Ms. Clinton was clear-eyed about the need to adjust US policy.”

 

·       “Colleagues in both parties have found her to be businesslike, knowledgeable, intent on accomplishment, willing to work across the aisle and less focused than most on getting credit.”

 

·       “Professionals in the State Department offer similar testimonials about her tenure as secretary during Mr. Obama’s first term: She reached out, listened to diverse points of view and, more than many politicians who come to that job with their own small teams, was open to intelligent advice. She was respected by employees and by counterparts overseas. She set priorities, including ensuring that “women’s rights are human rights” would rise from slogan to policy.”

 

·       “Her 2016 presidential campaign offers one more case study of lessons learned — a model of efficiency and of large egos subordinated to a larger cause — after her far less disciplined 2008 presidential effort.  Ms. Clinton, in other words, is dogged, resilient, purposeful and smart. Unlike Mr. Clinton or Mr. Bush when they ascended, she knows Washington; unlike Mr. Obama when he ascended, she has executive experience. She does not let her feelings get in the way of the job at hand. She is well positioned to get something done.”

 

·       Most of her agenda is commendable, and parts may actually be achievable: immigration reform; increased investment in infrastructure, research and education, paid for by higher taxes on the wealthy; sounder family-leave policies; criminal-justice reform. In an era of slowing growth and growing income inequality, these all make sense, as do her support for curbing climate change and for regulating gun ownership.

 

·       “Ms. Clinton also understands the importance of U.S. leadership in the world, her campaign-year anti-trade epiphany notwithstanding. Inside the Obama administration, Ms. Clinton was a voice for engagement on behalf of democracy, human rights and stability.”

 

·        “Clinton’s foreign-policy inclinations were sounder than her president’s. It is telling that, even as she tacked left to survive the primaries, she did not give ground to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on the core            value of American engagement in the world. Allies would find her more reliable than the incumbent and far more dependable than her opponent. The world would be more secure as a result.”

 

·       “The biggest worry about a Clinton presidency, is in the sphere where she does not seem to have learned the right lessons, namely openness and accountability. Her use of a private email server as secretary was a mistake, not a high crime; but her slow, grudging explanations of it worsened the damage and insulted the voters. Her long periods of self-insulation from press questioning during the campaign did not bode well.”

 

·       “The Clinton Foundation has done a lot of good in the world, but Ms. Clinton was disturbingly cavalier in allowing a close aide to go on its payroll while still at State, and in failing to erect the promised impenetrable wall between the foundation and the government. She would have to do better in the White House.”

 

·       “Mr. Trump actually makes Hillary look good. She has released years of tax returns. She has voluntarily identified her campaign bundlers. The Clinton Foundation actually is a charitable foundation, not a vehicle for purchasing portraits of herself as Mr. Trump’s foundation has done. She is a paragon of transparency relative to her opponent. 

 

·       Mr. Trump, by contrast, has shown himself to be bigoted, ignorant, deceitful, narcissistic, vengeful, petty, misogynistic, fiscally reckless, intellectually lazy, contemptuous of democracy and enamored of America’s dictatorial enemies. As president, he would pose a grave danger to the nation and the world.”

 

Please note that this is only a group of the basics that are offered from a majority of Hillary Clinton’s endorsers in the media.  As to the Washington Post’s specifics, they are asking their readers to go on-line to  wapo.st/thecaseagainsttrump.com  This is a timeline of Mr. Trump’s most alarming statements, accompanied by video and linked to some of the most insightful and accurate commentary from their columnists, guest contributors, editorial writers and cartoonists over the past 16 months.

 

According to The Post, their closing on-line argument is far from exhaustive, but is horrifying enough.  If you have any doubts about Mr. Trump’s unfitness, please take a look at the on-line offering.

 

Copyright G.Ater  2016