80 - 1 and Counting

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
More than 80 editorial boards have formally endorsed Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. Only one has endorsed Donald Trump. One.

These are the voices of newspapers from communities across America, large and small, conservative and liberal, traditionally Republican and traditionally Democratic, and they speak with one united voice in a manner unprecedented in the history of our country.

The stakes are high. Below find some reasons they ALL think the only sane and logical and, indeed, patriotic choice in this election is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Read, listen, absorb or not absorb. It's your choice. To me, and to them, representatives of towns and cities and regions from every part of our land, the choice is beyond clear, even from those papers who have NEVER endorsed a Democrat in their entire history!

Idaho Statesman: "Two people with strong, urban New York ties wouldn’t seem to bode well for understanding the needs of rural America. But during Clinton’s days in Arkansas, she developed a sensitivity and empathy for small towns and those living agrarian lifestyles. She reinvented herself and, more importantly, educated herself about the issues rural economies and workers face, and in doing so she is better prepared to understand many issues at the heart of our state."

San Diego Union-Tribune: "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 US and for the world, for Democrats and Republicans alike."

Chicago Sun-Times: "Allow us, as well, a special shout-out to those who understand what a danger Trump represents but are cool to Clinton: A vote for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, a man who could not even pass a basic world geography test, is not a principled protest gesture. It is a retreat to the sidelines."


The Dallas Morning News: "We don't come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections."

The Cincinnati Enquirer: "The Enquirer has supported Republicans for president for almost a century ... But this is not a traditional race, and these are not traditional times. ... We need a leader who will bring out the best in all Americans, not the worst."

New York Daily News: "Heaven help America were, unthinkably, Clinton to fail. She is all that stands between the United States of America and never-before-seen proof that the Founding Fathers weren't all that they've been cracked up to be."

Corpus Christi Caller-Times: "She is not, as has been sold, a mere lesser of two evils. Her experience and intellect would make her a standout in any group of candidates."

Akron Beacon Journal: "Hillary Clinton is the change. ... She knows her way around the partisan battles. The country doesn't need a revolution. It isn't a wreck. It requires the right brand of change."

Sun Sentinel: "Hillary's toughness and clear-headedness are reasons some of America's adversaries – Vladimir Putin, to name one – seem so eager to see Donald Trump in the White House. Hillary will look Putin in the eye and not blink."

The Tampa Bay Times: "Hillary Clinton is the only candidate for president with the values, experience and knowledge to meet the challenges at home and abroad."

Seattle Times: "Clinton brings a superior understanding of America’s challenges, opportunities and its role in building prosperity and stability around the world."

Bangor Daily News: "The choice is between voting for someone committed to a life of public service who has the experience, the intelligence and the temperament to lead the nation versus someone who is committed only to himself, who lies constantly and who regularly displays a lack of self-control."

News & Observer in Raleigh: "Let’s stop pretending Donald Trump is a reasonable choice in this presidential election. ... As a candidate, Clinton will not win by dividing and offering hollow promises of huge tax cuts and restoring some mythical former America. She will win on knowledge, competence and grit."

Niagara Gazette: "In this year’s presidential race, only one candidate has any idea what it means to serve something greater than self or the proven ability to do so, and that candidate is Hillary Clinton. ... She is smart, diplomatic, poised and worldly. She has a clear-eyed take on the universe and her place in it. She is an adult."

Los Angeles Times: "Perhaps her greatest strength is her pragmatism — her ability to build consensus and solve problems. As president, she would be flexible enough and experienced enough to cut across party lines and work productively with her political opponents."

The Arizona Republic: "This year is different. The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified. That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.

This is because the liberal media is against Trump. FAKE NEWS.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
did you intentionally bump this year old thread?

btw, the reason editorial boards didn't endorse trump is because he is a lying sack of shit.

Searching fake news stories, anti-Trump agendas. This thread is a great example.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,674
2,426
126
It never ceases to amaze me how often Trump himself, and his rabid supporters insist on revisiting the 2016 election. They never mention that Trump lost the popular vote by millions and that the only reason he won the Presidency was a 70,000 vote advantage over three states.

I do sincerely wish Trump would actually start to govern the WHOLE country instead of of endlessly rehashing the 2016 campaign. I lived through over a dozen presidential elections in my adult life and I've never seen any other winner or loser display such childish behavior. I'm convinced he doesn't have any governing philosophy other than (1) what will benefit him and his family the most and (2) what will drive up the day's "ratings."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Homerboy

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
It never ceases to amaze me how often Trump himself, and his rabid supporters insist on revisiting the 2016 election. They never mention that Trump lost the popular vote by millions and that the only reason he won the Presidency was a 70,000 vote advantage over three states.

I do sincerely wish Trump would actually start to govern the WHOLE country instead of of endlessly rehashing the 2016 campaign. I lived through over a dozen presidential elections in my adult life and I've never seen any other winner or loser display such childish behavior. I'm convinced he doesn't have any governing philosophy other than (1) what will benefit him and his family the most and (2) what will drive up the day's "ratings."


He didn't win the popular vote. There, you're wrong again too.

He won because he understood that the key to winning our democratic system is to win states. Our long standing system uses electoral votes, the millions more votes Billary got was from two states. But those two states, no matter what, are just two of 50. Our electoral system works great, it gives states a voice as we are a republic of 50 individual states with unique laws and even cultures.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,126
24,036
136
It never ceases to amaze me how often Trump himself, and his rabid supporters insist on revisiting the 2016 election. They never mention that Trump lost the popular vote by millions and that the only reason he won the Presidency was a 70,000 vote advantage over three states.

He didn't win the popular vote. There, you're wrong again too..

LOL slow is really butthurt today and even more stupid than usual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sheik Yerbouti

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,592
7,673
136
He didn't win the popular vote. There, you're wrong again too.
.

WHAT?
images
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,426
6,086
126
Searching fake news stories, anti-Trump agendas. This thread is a great example.
You are absolutely right in your criticism of the left and its journalistic monopoly. Just the other day I set out to prove bias against the Bubonic Plague in the media and couldn't find a single paper that had anything nice to say about it. The bias is so phenomenal it's beyond belief. The planet is covered by head bobbing droids that have sheep for eyes. Thank God Almighty Himself that at least you and I can see.

Thanks for posting and a tidbit for you for reward. I made a sock puppet for my left hand and named it Trump and wearing it at night when I masturbate has doubled the pleasure. Try that and let me know if you get similar results if you haven't already.
 

Snarf Snarf

Senior member
Feb 19, 2015
399
327
136
Slow doing a great job of reminding us that the modern GOP really only cares about being on the winning team. Keep pushing identity politics while our overlords take us all to the cleaners man.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,014
47,976
136
It never ceases to amaze me how often Trump himself, and his rabid supporters insist on revisiting the 2016 election. They never mention that Trump lost the popular vote by millions and that the only reason he won the Presidency was a 70,000 vote advantage over three states.

I do sincerely wish Trump would actually start to govern the WHOLE country instead of of endlessly rehashing the 2016 campaign. I lived through over a dozen presidential elections in my adult life and I've never seen any other winner or loser display such childish behavior. I'm convinced he doesn't have any governing philosophy other than (1) what will benefit him and his family the most and (2) what will drive up the day's "ratings."

They revisit it because he hasn't been doing much but failing since then. What else could they really point to?
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,041
8,732
136
This is because the liberal media is against Trump. FAKE NEWS.
You're one lazy fucking troll. From right in the post you quote, relevant parts highlighted in red you cannot continue your DISHONEST trolling.

San Diego Union-Tribune: "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 US and for the world, for Democrats and Republicans alike."

The Dallas Morning News: "We don't come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections."


The Cincinnati Enquirer: "The Enquirer has supported Republicans for president for almost a century ... But this is not a traditional race, and these are not traditional times. ... We need a leader who will bring out the best in all Americans, not the worst."

The Arizona Republic: "This year is different. The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified. That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sheik Yerbouti

repoman0

Diamond Member
Jun 17, 2010
4,475
3,314
136
Searching fake news stories, anti-Trump agendas. This thread is a great example.

Damn, this guy really has nothing useful to do with his time. Typical low value add Dump licker.

It's alright guy, I'd hate myself too if all I was good for was trolling forums all day.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
You're one lazy fucking troll. From right in the post you quote, relevant parts highlighted in red you cannot continue your DISHONEST trolling.

San Diego Union-Tribune: "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 US and for the world, for Democrats and Republicans alike."

The Dallas Morning News: "We don't come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections."


The Cincinnati Enquirer: "The Enquirer has supported Republicans for president for almost a century ... But this is not a traditional race, and these are not traditional times. ... We need a leader who will bring out the best in all Americans, not the worst."

The Arizona Republic: "This year is different. The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified. That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.


So only 90% of the sources were liberal? The establishment, the uniparty Dem-Rep's hate Trump. I'm not shocked that some publications that always backed Republican establishment types, that probably saw their preferred candidate get thrown through the Trump buzzsaw, didn't care for Trump.
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
He didn't win the popular vote. There, you're wrong again too.

I don't mean to make you look stupid, but, well...here we go.

Candidate Party Electoral Votes Popular Votes
✓ Donald J. Trump Republican 304 62,980,160

Hillary R. Clinton Democratic 227 65,845,063
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
I don't mean to make you look stupid, but, well...here we go.

Candidate Party Electoral Votes Popular Votes
✓ Donald J. Trump Republican 304 62,980,160

Hillary R. Clinton Democratic 227 65,845,063


So he did't win the popular vote, which is exactly what I said, that someone else said no Trump supporter ever acknowledges. I acknowledged it. I don't think you understand the exchange him and I had...