Is it that hillary is so great?? Or that trumpf is just so shitty??
Hillary Clinton has scored the endorsement of The Arizona Republic, the latest in a string of conservative editorial boards to break with tradition and back the Democratic nominee over Donald Trump.
In offering its endorsement to Clinton, the Phoenix-based newspaper stressed that it was breaking with more than 120 years of precedent in doing so.
"The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified," the editorial board wrote. "That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.'
With the support of Arizona's largest paper in hand, Clinton now has netted the endorsements of 11 major daily publications, while Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson has the stated support of four.
Trump, so far, has the backing of none.
The Republic editorial lists a series of contrasts between the two candidates, saying Clinton has the "temperament and experience to be president" and noting her "record of public service."
"She has withstood decades of scrutiny so intense it would wither most politicians. The vehemence of some of the anti-Clinton attacks strains credulity," the endorsement reads. "Trump won't even let the American people scrutinize his tax returns, which could help the nation judge his claims of business acumen."
As other editorial boards have been, The Republic is clear-eyed in acknowledging Clinton's "flaws" and "serious missteps," raising her use of a private email server as secretary of state and concern about donors to the Clinton Foundation seeking access to her while she served as the nation's top diplomat.
But those problems, The Republic says, "pale in comparison" to Trump's.
"She does not casually say things that embolden our adversaries and frighten our allies," the editorial board says. "Her approach to governance is mature, confident and rational."
"That cannot be said of her opponent," the endorsement continues. "Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads. That's beneath our national dignity."
The Republic compared "the hardline immigration road Trump travels" to Arizona's own experiment in 2010 with SB 1070, the much maligned "show me your papers" law that was largely gutted by the Supreme Court.
"Arizona understands that we don't need a repeat of that divisive, unproductive fiasco on the national level," the board wrote. "A recent poll shows Arizonans oppose both more walls and the mass deportations Trump endorses."
That poll found 68 percent of state voters opposed the deportation of all immigrants illegally in the U.S. and 55 percent said the country should "maybe not" or "definitely not" build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
In a state with a fraught recent history over immigration, a shared border with Mexico and large percentage of Hispanic residents, the poll underscores the degree to which Trump's immigration proposals have been particularly divisive.
Arizona has gone for Republicans in presidential elections since 1952, with the exception of narrowly voting to re-elect President Bill Clinton in 1996. Polls this year show an extremely tight race there between Clinton and Trump,
And while newspapers' influence might be on the decline as trust in the media sinks to historic lows, one study found surprise endorsements like The Republic's have the greatest impact on voters.
"The degree of this influence, however, depends upon the credibility of the endorsement," its authors wrote. "In this way, endorsements for the Democratic candidate from left-leaning newspapers are less influential than are endorsements from neutral or right-leaning newspapers, and likewise for endorsements for the Republican."
The Republic joins The Cincinnati Enquirer – which on Friday made its endorsement of Clinton its first of a Democrat in nearly a century – and The Dallas Morning News, which snubbed the Republican nominee for the first time since before World War II, in breaking decades of tradition in endorsing GOP candidates.
Hillary Clinton has scored the endorsement of The Arizona Republic, the latest in a string of conservative editorial boards to break with tradition and back the Democratic nominee over Donald Trump.
In offering its endorsement to Clinton, the Phoenix-based newspaper stressed that it was breaking with more than 120 years of precedent in doing so.
"The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified," the editorial board wrote. "That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.'
With the support of Arizona's largest paper in hand, Clinton now has netted the endorsements of 11 major daily publications, while Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson has the stated support of four.
Trump, so far, has the backing of none.
The Republic editorial lists a series of contrasts between the two candidates, saying Clinton has the "temperament and experience to be president" and noting her "record of public service."
"She has withstood decades of scrutiny so intense it would wither most politicians. The vehemence of some of the anti-Clinton attacks strains credulity," the endorsement reads. "Trump won't even let the American people scrutinize his tax returns, which could help the nation judge his claims of business acumen."
As other editorial boards have been, The Republic is clear-eyed in acknowledging Clinton's "flaws" and "serious missteps," raising her use of a private email server as secretary of state and concern about donors to the Clinton Foundation seeking access to her while she served as the nation's top diplomat.
But those problems, The Republic says, "pale in comparison" to Trump's.
"She does not casually say things that embolden our adversaries and frighten our allies," the editorial board says. "Her approach to governance is mature, confident and rational."
"That cannot be said of her opponent," the endorsement continues. "Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads. That's beneath our national dignity."
The Republic compared "the hardline immigration road Trump travels" to Arizona's own experiment in 2010 with SB 1070, the much maligned "show me your papers" law that was largely gutted by the Supreme Court.
"Arizona understands that we don't need a repeat of that divisive, unproductive fiasco on the national level," the board wrote. "A recent poll shows Arizonans oppose both more walls and the mass deportations Trump endorses."
That poll found 68 percent of state voters opposed the deportation of all immigrants illegally in the U.S. and 55 percent said the country should "maybe not" or "definitely not" build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
In a state with a fraught recent history over immigration, a shared border with Mexico and large percentage of Hispanic residents, the poll underscores the degree to which Trump's immigration proposals have been particularly divisive.
Arizona has gone for Republicans in presidential elections since 1952, with the exception of narrowly voting to re-elect President Bill Clinton in 1996. Polls this year show an extremely tight race there between Clinton and Trump,
And while newspapers' influence might be on the decline as trust in the media sinks to historic lows, one study found surprise endorsements like The Republic's have the greatest impact on voters.
"The degree of this influence, however, depends upon the credibility of the endorsement," its authors wrote. "In this way, endorsements for the Democratic candidate from left-leaning newspapers are less influential than are endorsements from neutral or right-leaning newspapers, and likewise for endorsements for the Republican."
The Republic joins The Cincinnati Enquirer – which on Friday made its endorsement of Clinton its first of a Democrat in nearly a century – and The Dallas Morning News, which snubbed the Republican nominee for the first time since before World War II, in breaking decades of tradition in endorsing GOP candidates.
