USA Today abandons no-endorsement policy to declare Trump unfit for office - Polidicks

[url]http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/09/29/dont-vote-for-donald-trump-editorial-board-editorials-debates/91295020/[/url] [quote]In the 34-year history of USA TODAY, the Editorial Board has never taken sides in the presidential race. Instead, we’ve expressed opinions about the major issues and haven’t presumed to tell our readers, who have a variety of priorities and values, which choice is best for them. Because every presidential race is different, we revisit our no-endorsement policy every four years. We’ve never seen reason to alter our approach. Until now. This year, the choice isn’t between two capable major party nominees who happen to have significant ideological differences. This year, one of the candidates — Republican nominee Donald Trump — is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency. From the day he declared his candidacy 15 months ago through this week’s first presidential debate, Trump has demonstrated repeatedly that he lacks the temperament, knowledge, steadiness and honesty that America needs from its presidents.[/quote] I know newspaper endorsements don't matter as much as they used to, but this election is really throwing up some historic ones

So that puts Trump at... what, -1 newspaper endorsements? [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/opinion/why-donald-trump-should-not-be-president.html"]([del]At least -2[/del], actually.)[/URL] edit: -3 actually I can't wait for the next debate.

Can't wait for a Hillary presidency. You guys might not think it, but she'd be the most liberal president in decades. At least since Jimmy Carter, if not even further back

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;51129499]So that puts Trump at... what, -1 newspaper endorsements? [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/opinion/why-donald-trump-should-not-be-president.html"](At least -2, actually.)[/URL] I can't wait for the next debate.[/QUOTE] The Washington Post also undorsed Trump like a month ago :v: It is actually possible that the number of papers issuing a "why Trump cannot be president" article will be higher than the number of papers that endorse him

It's going to be fairly interesting what happens during the next election after all this bollocks is over.

[QUOTE=Highwind017;51129562]It's going to be fairly interesting what happens during the next election after all this bollocks is over.[/QUOTE] I hope you all don't think this is just going to magick it's way out of our politics. Trump may be a ringleader, but he's gotten this far built upon the decay and foul atmosphere of our nearly broken system. If anyone thinks that our problems are going to whisk away because we avoid [I]this[/I] particular proto-fascist, they are sorely mistaken.

[QUOTE=luverofJ!93;51129634]I hope you all don't think this is just going to magick it's way out of our politics. Trump may be a ringleader, but he's gotten this far built upon the decay and foul atmosphere of our nearly broken system. If anyone thinks that our problems are going to whisk away because we avoid [I]this[/I] particular proto-fascist, they are sorely mistaken.[/QUOTE] If anything it just means the next proto-fascist candidate will be better at maintaining plausible deniability while blowing the dog whistles. Survival of the fittest and all.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;51129516]Can't wait for a Hillary presidency. You guys might not think it, but she'd be the most liberal president in decades. At least since Jimmy Carter, if not even further back[/QUOTE] Would also be the first time 2 consecutive presidents have been elected democrats since like 200 years or so.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;51129516]Can't wait for a Hillary presidency. You guys might not think it, but she'd be the most liberal president in decades. At least since Jimmy Carter, if not even further back[/QUOTE] Eugh, you're actually looking forward to one of them winning?

[QUOTE=Megadave;51129676]Would also be the first time 2 consecutive presidents have been elected democrats since like 200 years or so.[/QUOTE] Does 2008 and 2012 not count now?

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51129723]Eugh, you're actually looking forward to one of them winning?[/QUOTE] Because her policies actually look really good for Americans, and because most elected presidents try really hard to keep their platform promises? Yes. Past a certain point, as much as one may hate Hillary because of what she's done and because of her nature, one must ultimately act like an adult, and make the decision that ensures the best future for the country.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51129728]Does 2008 and 2012 not count now?[/QUOTE] He said 2 consecutive presidents, not 2 consecutive elections

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51129723]Eugh, you're actually looking forward to one of them winning?[/QUOTE] I don't know whether I believe it, but I've seen arguments that Clinton's experience means she will be better than Obama at wangling Congress into passing progressive stuff/passing any bills at all. We'll have to see, but that would be something to look forward to

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;51129745]He said 2 consecutive presidents, not 2 consecutive elections[/QUOTE] Technically, if a president is elected twice in a row, it's considered one presidency. Meaning that only one man has ever been president twice: Grover Cleveland.

[QUOTE=Megadave;51129676]Would also be the first time 2 consecutive presidents have been elected democrats since like 200 years or so.[/QUOTE] Uhh, LBJ was elected for a full term though after Kennedy's term was over?

[QUOTE=Levelog;51129857]Uhh, LBJ was elected for a full term though after Kennedy's term was over?[/QUOTE] He wasn't elected the first time, though.

[QUOTE=Paramud;51132146]He wasn't elected the first time, though.[/QUOTE] yeah JFK's term ended prematurely for some reason I forget. who knows

I mean as much of a bad choice that trump is, writing an article bragging about abandoning your principles isnt impressive either

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51129728]Does 2008 and 2012 not count now?[/QUOTE] Clinton was more liberal than Obama back then too. I think Clinton will be a pretty damn fine president tbh, even if her personality isn't the most exciting.

[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;51132261]I mean as much of a bad choice that trump is, writing an article bragging about abandoning your principles isnt impressive either[/QUOTE] Trump pushed them there

[QUOTE=Paramud;51132146]He wasn't elected the first time, though.[/QUOTE] I guess if you want to split hairs, but two different presidents in a row were elected democrats.

I don't really think it's endorsement as much as it seems to be "we don't like this guy that a lot of people also don't like"

[QUOTE=lonesome;51134275]I don't really think it's endorsement as much as it seems to be "we don't like this guy that a lot of people also don't like"[/QUOTE] An unendorsement then? As in, 'vote for anyone BUT THIS PERSON.'

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51134288]An unendorsement then? As in, 'vote for anyone BUT THIS PERSON.'[/QUOTE] Yeah... I think an opinion is pretty un-groundbreaking when other GOP candidates are saying bad things about the GOP candidate. Rubio called him a con artist, for god sakes

[QUOTE=lonesome;51134346]Yeah... I think an opinion is pretty un-groundbreaking when other GOP candidates are saying bad things about the GOP candidate. Rubio called him a con artist, for god sakes[/QUOTE] Rubio's public stance on Trump is [url=http://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/16/politics/marco-rubio-donald-trump-con-artist-support/]literally[/url] that he's a con artist who must be elected

I want Trump to win so 2020 will be Trump vs Kanye

[QUOTE=Badballer;51134405]I want Trump to win so 2020 will be Trump vs Kanye[/QUOTE] a true battle of wits

Why not Obama again?

[QUOTE=hakimhakim;51139992]Why not Obama again?[/QUOTE] Please no, he's a walking disappointment.

[QUOTE=CroGamer002;51140127]Please no, he's a walking disappointment.[/QUOTE] Damn Obama even disappoints Croatians I guess