Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Saturday, October 1, 2016


The San Diego Union-Tribune hasn't endorsed a Democrat in 148 years.  Another newspaper acknowledges the danger in electing Trump to the presidency and goes against its more than a century of backing conservative candidates and endorses Secretary Clinton.

Another conservative newspaper showing moral courage.  

The number of these conservative publications supporting the Democratic candidate is unprecedented!

Why Hillary Clinton is the safe choice for president

Sixteen months into his campaign, Donald Trump remains Donald Trump. Despite constant counsel from GOP advisors and insiders to adopt a decorous public persona, Trump continues to lash out at critics, to insist complex problems can be solved with little effort and to depict an America that’s been “ripped off by every single country in the world,” as he said in this week’s debate. 

For millions of Americans upset with the status quo, it’s an entertaining show, and a convincing one. But if Trump is elected president, he will no longer just be putting on a show. Upon inauguration on Jan. 20, he would be in charge of the executive branch of a global superpower and possess enormous authority, operating with no coherent worldview besides “I alone can fix it.” 

Military leaders have said Trump will face pushback if he orders them to do illegal things, such as torturing the families of terrorists, but in many crucial parts of the government, a President Trump will be able to people his administration with individuals whose jobs depend on keeping him happy. 

Imagine that. 

Imagine President Trump. Based on what Trump has said, we could see an administration that’s friendlier to ruthless Russia — which is waging a cyberwar against America — than to such democracies and historic partners as Great Britain, Germany, Canada, Japan and Australia. 

We could see an administration that reneges on its treaty commitments to dozens of nations, throwing the world into turmoil and increasing tensions in regions that historically have relied on the United States to be a stabilizing force. 

 We could see an administration that ruins U.S. trustworthiness in international finance by seeking to refinance terms with debt-holders, putting a singular economic power in the same basket as Greece. We could also see an administration that launches a trade war by abandoning Republican tradition and abrogating international trade deals, destroying a framework that has greatly enriched our nation and the world, even if its benefits haven’t been as well-distributed as one would hope. And we could see an administration with an open enemies list, starting with Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, his Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN and more. 

 Now consider President Hillary Clinton. We understand the lack of enthusiasm for her candidacy, the anger over her private email server, family foundation and income from Wall Street speeches, and the questions about how America fared in foreign affairs when she was secretary of state. But despite Trump’s insistence otherwise, she has the better temperament to be president — and the experience, background and relationships with world leaders that we need in a president. 

 As secretary of state, she traveled nearly a million miles and visited a record 112 countries. As a U.S. senator, the Democrat showed she can collaborate with Republicans, using what Roll Call labeled an “incremental approach” that “could help restore a working relationship between the White House and Capitol Hill that has been in tatters” for years. 

As first lady, she expanded health coverage to millions of lower-income children after her husband’s administration lost the battle over universal health care and Democrats lost the Senate and the House. 

Diplomacy. Collaboration. Patience. Mitt Romney, whom we endorsed for president in 2012, exhibited those same traits as the moderate governor of Massachusetts and the business-savvy savior of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. 

Vengeful, dishonest and impulsive, Trump is no Romney. This is why Hillary Clinton is the safest candidate for voters to choose in a complex world. Terrible leaders can knock nations off course. Venezuela is falling apart because of the obstinance and delusions of Hugo Chávez and his successor. 

Argentina is finally coming out of the chaos created by Cristina Kirchner and several of her predecessors. Trump could be our Chávez, our Kirchner. We cannot take that risk. 

This paper has not endorsed a Democrat for president in its 148-year history. But we endorse Clinton. She’s the safe choice for the U.S. and for the world, for Democrats and Republicans alike. 


Shaw Kenawe said...

Some of the awesome responses to Trump's twitter catastrophe included:

“@realDonaldTrump I think the problem is you may accidentally cause WWIII at 3am based on the quality of your previous 3AM tweets.”

Another great one was:

“@realDonaldTrump sad!™ your team doesn’t love you enough to change your twitter password so you can stop self-destructing.”

And, can’t forget:

“The White House, 3 AM. The call comes in: North Korea has launched missiles at the US. Pres Trump *furiously tweeting* “Fat slut Alicia M…”

How can so many Americans not understand what a disaster Trump is?

Rational Nation USA said...

Heads buried in the sand. Or, ears to hear and eyes to see but both willfully closed.

Jerry Critter said...

"How can so many Americans not understand what a disaster Trump is?"

Because they think like he thinks.

Kevin Robbins said...

See! There is a liberal media!

Clinton Country said...

These are Republicans! I don't think we should accept their Hillary endorsements. Let them play in the mud with their pig Trump. These are the same scum who endorsed Bush even after we knew the Iraq invasion was a lie. These are the same scum who obstructed Obama for years. These are the same scum who ruined our economy. These are the same newspapers who endorsed the do nothing Republican Congress. These are the same newspapers who endorsed the the ruinous financial strategies (trickle down) since Reagan. I could go on and on. Even their party leaders are still endorsing Trump, but they get away with denouncing the worst part of Trump. Why praise them now when they are stuck with their lying, bigot candidate? I don't want their endorsements. I want them to be wounded for decades for simply making Trump their candidate. They should have been wounded for decades after endorsing Bush when we knew Bush lied and thousands of American soldiers died. They should have been wounded for decades for causing the financial crash. Now we are going to give them cover because they won't endorse their own bigoted candidate? You praise them, I won't.