Thunderdome
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
The Mississippi of the west can't stomach Trump.
Arizona Republic endorses Clinton for president, first time ever backing a Democrat
By Daniella Diaz, CNN
Washington (CNN)The Arizona Republic, the state's largest newspaper, has never endorsed a Democrat for president -- until now.
In an op-ed published to its website Tuesday, the editorial board backed Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump for president.
"The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified," the editorial board wrote.
In the op-ed, the newspaper's editorial board breaks down why they believe that Clinton is more qualified than Trump -- specifically that the Democratic nominee has better temperament and experience, has a record of public service, and has withstood "decades of scrutiny."
The Arizona Republican joins other major papers with conservative editorial boards in endorsing Clinton or declining to endorse Trump. The Cincinnati Enquirer and Dallas Morning News are two other notable examples, with the Enquirer endorsing a Democrat for the first time in 100 years. The New Hampshire Union Leader, for the first time in 100 years, did not back Republican nominee Trump, opting instead to endorse Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson.
The Arizona Republic endorsement said that Clinton, unlike Trump, for all of her mistakes and flaws, and has more experience with foreign policy than Trump does.
And specifically for Arizona -- a state with a significant Latino population -- the newspaper said Trump wouldn't be able to "broker solutions" like Clinton...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/arizona-republic-endorses-hillary-clinton/
Arizona Republic endorses Clinton for president, first time ever backing a Democrat
By Daniella Diaz, CNN
Washington (CNN)The Arizona Republic, the state's largest newspaper, has never endorsed a Democrat for president -- until now.
In an op-ed published to its website Tuesday, the editorial board backed Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump for president.
"The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified," the editorial board wrote.
In the op-ed, the newspaper's editorial board breaks down why they believe that Clinton is more qualified than Trump -- specifically that the Democratic nominee has better temperament and experience, has a record of public service, and has withstood "decades of scrutiny."
The Arizona Republican joins other major papers with conservative editorial boards in endorsing Clinton or declining to endorse Trump. The Cincinnati Enquirer and Dallas Morning News are two other notable examples, with the Enquirer endorsing a Democrat for the first time in 100 years. The New Hampshire Union Leader, for the first time in 100 years, did not back Republican nominee Trump, opting instead to endorse Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson.
The Arizona Republic endorsement said that Clinton, unlike Trump, for all of her mistakes and flaws, and has more experience with foreign policy than Trump does.
And specifically for Arizona -- a state with a significant Latino population -- the newspaper said Trump wouldn't be able to "broker solutions" like Clinton...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/arizona-republic-endorses-hillary-clinton/
Clinton's 'Florida freak out' is all about turnout and race
"...For all the talk about how demographic trends and the growth of minority populations are all moving in favor of Democrats in national elections, the fact is that Hillary Clinton desperately needs unusually high minority voter turnouts to win the White House. This is not something unique to Clinton. Almost 10 months ago, David Wasserman at 538 crunched the numbers and realized that even a relatively small dropoff in African-American voter turnout would mean any Democrat running for president would lose Florida....
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/28/clin...is-all-about-turnout-and-race-commentary.html
"...For all the talk about how demographic trends and the growth of minority populations are all moving in favor of Democrats in national elections, the fact is that Hillary Clinton desperately needs unusually high minority voter turnouts to win the White House. This is not something unique to Clinton. Almost 10 months ago, David Wasserman at 538 crunched the numbers and realized that even a relatively small dropoff in African-American voter turnout would mean any Democrat running for president would lose Florida....
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/28/clin...is-all-about-turnout-and-race-commentary.html
For people that carry such huge weight in US politics like Latinos and African Americans, what a bunch of poor saps they are - they are left behind by the current two-establishment-parties, entrenching the generational advantages of the initial US immigrants that have brain washed these minorities that they are represented by these establishment parties, and perpetuating the advantages of tribes that been here generations and therefore have a massive advantage economically over them as a result of pass-me-down economics parent to child over at least 100 years and more accurately since the Industrial Revolution.
God forbid latinos and african americans voted en-masse third party. It would be the Sound Heard Around the World in shock waves.
God forbid latinos and african americans voted en-masse third party. It would be the Sound Heard Around the World in shock waves.
Last edited:
I don't see anything in her ear and even if there was an earbud in there I wouldn't care. So what if they have Debbie Wasserman-Schultz backstage screaming directions into a microphone. It ain't gonna matter.
There is nothing in the debate rules that prohibits communications devices and some evidence exist that it has been used by others (GWB). Believe me, anyone backstage talking to her is just as dumb as the rest of them. It simply doesn't matter.
There is nothing in the debate rules that prohibits communications devices and some evidence exist that it has been used by others (GWB). Believe me, anyone backstage talking to her is just as dumb as the rest of them. It simply doesn't matter.