How weird is it when NY Times columnist Tom Friedman, not known for any progressive tendencies, writes another scathing column highlighting the no-nothing nature of the Republican Party candidate, and the conservative Arizona Republic newspaper endorsed the Democratic Party presidential candidate for the first time since it began publishing in 1890.
Both write simply that Donald Trump is unqualified.
In his Times column, Friedman wrote:
My reaction to the Donald Trump-Hillary Clinton debate can be summarized with one word: “How?”
How in the world do we put a man in the Oval Office who thinks NATO is a shopping mall where the tenants aren’t paying enough rent to the U.S. landlord?
NATO is not a shopping mall; it is a strategic alliance that won the Cold War, keeps Europe a stable trading partner for U.S. companies and prevents every European country — particularly Germany — from getting their own nukes to counterbalance Russia, by sheltering them all under America’s nuclear umbrella.
How do we put in the Oval Office a man who does not know enough “beef” about key policies to finish a two-minute answer on any issue without the hamburger helper of bluster, insults and repetition?
And he proceeded on, point by point, from there.
And here’s just part of the Arizona Republic’s take on the presidential race.
Make no mistake: Hillary Clinton has flaws. She has made serious missteps.
Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State was a mistake, as she has acknowledged. Donations to the Clinton Foundation while she was secretary of State raise concerns that donors were hoping to buy access. Though there is no evidence of wrongdoing, she should have put up a firewall.
Yet despite her flaws, Clinton is the superior choice.
She does not casually say things that embolden our adversaries and frighten our allies. Her approach to governance is mature, confident and rational.
That cannot be said of her opponent.
Clinton retains her composure under pressure. She’s tough. She doesn’t back down.
Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads.
That’s beneath our national dignity.
Read the newspaper’s full endorsement here.
But, of course, the danger appears to be that enough voters, including some progressives and former Bernie supporters, could feel alienated enough to see Trump’s lack of qualifications as a virtue.
For those Bernie supporters who are still deciding whether to vote for Clinton in the end, I recommend this recent column by Shaun King in the New York Daily News (“KING: If you don’t vote against Donald Trump, we may all soon regret it“). Thanks to Bart Dame for the link, and for his comment (“What Shaun says. Ditto. To every detail.”).
Polls show that this campaign is more about voting against a candidate than it is voting for one.
I am that dude and I hate it. I’m voting against Donald Trump far more than I am voting for Hillary Clinton. I even hate writing this column because I am just not a fan of Hillary. To this day, I still believe that Bernie Sanders would have absolutely mopped the floor with Trump.
But that’s not where we are.
We are 45 days away from electing either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump as the next President of the United States.
I have 99 problems with Hillary Clinton, but I am 100% sure that she is a significantly better option than Donald Trump.
If you don’t see that, you are either lying to yourself, delusional or woefully misinformed.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
BERNIE WOULD HAVE WON! BERNIE CAN ACHIEVE ANYTHING AS PRESIDENT, JUST LIKE TRUMP! IT’S ALL A CONSPIRACY!
or
https://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/sanders-group-brings-in-former-campaign-manager-staffers-qui?utm_term=.bewqL16Ya#.gfDRd54zj
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/bernie-sanders-group-turmoil-227297
By Edward-Isaac Dovere and Gabriel Debenedetti
08/23/16 05:14 AM EDT
The revolution is already tearing itself apart.
Less than a week before its official launch on Wednesday, Bernie Sanders’ new political group is working its way through an internal war that led to the departure of digital director Kenneth Pennington and at least four others from a team of 15, and the return of presidential campaign manager Jeff Weaver as the group’s new president.
“Kenneth chose to leave the organization. He’d worked on the campaign from the very beginning … he decided to do something else I guess,” Weaver said Monday evening, but “we’re very happy to be putting the A-team back together.”
People familiar with what occurred say that the board, which is chaired by the Vermont senator’s wife Jane, was growing increasingly concerned about campaign finance questions being raised over the last week. Their concern reached a breaking point, one person deeply involved with the Sanders world said, with a story last Friday from ABC News about how the group would handle the particular tax questions raised by having a senator so closely associated with a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization that has strict restrictions on its political work……………….
As many as eight staffers have quit Our Revolution, the recently formed group meant to further Sanders’ political goals.
Aug. 23, 2016, at 12:18 a.m.
Just three weeks after its launch, Bernie Sanders’ new political organization has seen a change in top leadership followed by resignations from as many as eight staff members, two people close to the group said late Monday evening.
In the last week, the US senator from Vermont brought on his former 2016 campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, to run “Our Revolution,” a 501©(4) nonprofit that began soliciting its first donations at the start of this month.
Weaver’s entry came in the wake of a report by ABC News about the group’s structure and whether it might violate campaign finance rules, one source said.
A 501©(4) may accept unlimited cash without having to disclose donors, but as a senator, Sanders may not ask contributors for more than a certain amount — $2,700 to a campaign committee and $5,000 to a super PAC. Sanders, who is involved in the group’s management, signed Our Revolution’s first fundraising email.
As many as eight staffers from a variety of departments have since quit over the appointment of Weaver, their former colleague on this year’s campaign.
Under Weaver’s management, Sanders won 22 states and raised hundreds of millions against Hillary Clinton. He has long been and remains the senator’s close confidant, but could be seen as a polarizing figure among some staffers…………………………..
Some of the strongest put-downs of Trump have come from conservative pundits: Michael Gerson, Kathleen Parker among others. Even more surprising Hillary endorsements from venerable print journals never known to back a Democrat: Loeb family’s Manchester, N.H. Union Leader and the Phoenix Republic going back to the 19th century. (Parker observed that the markets saluted Hillary’s triumph over Trump at the debate with the Dow up 100 points, the peso rallied and Asian markets recovered.)
And yet with all of Trump’s negatives, the Pres. race is still a toss-up in the national polls. As Hillary said, “why is (she) not 50 points ahead?”
Even in the historic landslide of ’72, Nixon won the popular vote by about 23 points. Hillary expects to be winning by 50 points, with her level of unlikeability and lack of trustworthiness?
https://youtu.be/BlNzUHF9h1k
Even more startling than her words is her tone and demeanor. What explains this behavior? I could be charitable and say that Hillary was tired and stressed. But what does that say about her ability to effectively lead this country when she gets that 3 am phone call? I could say that her meds were out of whack at the time, but Hillary supporters criticize any talk of her health as being conspiratorial. So I guess that leaves me with but one conclusion. HRC simply feels entitled to the presidency.
“If you don’t see that, you are either lying to yourself, delusional or woefully misinformed.”
Is Shaun King preaching to the choir, or is he seriously trying to reach out to Bernie supporters/Millenials? If it’s the latter, then he’s sure doing a piss poor job of it. Addressing these folks in such a condescending and belittling manner hardly strikes me as being the right approach in convincing people to listen to what you have to say.
We should not be surprised by the rise of Trump. Years and years of garbage political messaging from two archaic political parties. On top of that, contempt and constant demonizing of citizens participating in the political process that don’t share establishment and politically correct views.
Trump supporters don’t want a clean and refined political message. They have heard thousands of perfect messages from politicians and pundits for years. Trump may be an ass and make a horrible president. But for the people that feel like they ave been treated like garbage by the establishment for their political views, he is an equalizer.