“The Media is totally dishonest” said about 1000 different times in 100 different ways.
People are surprised papers aren’t endorsing Trump.
HA
It doesn’t surprise me at all because he’s complete shit.
It also doesn’t’ surprise me that left-leaning newspapers are endorsing Clinton even though she is also complete shit.
What is surprising, and what people should take note of, is the number of newspapers that are traditionally conservative endorsing someone other than the Republican candidate. You think it’s because they’re all dishonest. I think it’s because they’re actually principled unlike a significant majority of the electorate.
I don’t expect you to see it because you’re blind to Trump’s faults, though.
3 Likes
The below statement is from Wiki. It also mentions it in the article. Not sure how the paper leans now but I don’t think it’s completely accurate saying the SDUT ended their conservative endorsement seeing how the paper has a new owner…
On May 7, 2015, Tribune Publishing announced that it had reached a deal to acquire the San Diego Union-Tribune and its associated properties for $85 million, ending the paper’s 146 years of private ownership. Following the completion of the acquisition, the Union-Tribune and the Los Angeles Times became part of a new operating entity known as the California News Group, led by current Times publisher and CEO Timothy E. Ryan.
Ya, I saw that. I don’t buy the idea that this is the root cause of the change.
No worries, no thunder stolen. We’re witnessing something pretty amazing with these turnabout endorsements.
1 Like
Well after doing more digging, I see that Timothy Ryan has held high positions with at least(all the research I cared to do) 2 liberal leaning newspapers, based on the support of democratic candidates in the past. The Baltimore Sun and Philadelphia Inquirer. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of these “conservative” newspapers who have endorsed Clinton have gone through this same process of being bought out. I don’t care if anybody hates Donald Trump, as he is an awful candidate but to actually go out of your way to support Clinton seems beyond ridiculous for a so called conservative.
Why would a major party become more like a third party and not more like the other major party? Remember the “Guess the Price” game on The Price is Right? Why would the major party not just guess $.01 over the other major party? It knows the third parties have gone over with their guesses.
It isn’t going out of your way, especially since Trump isn’t a conservative and never has been, but more importantly, Trump’s special and dangerous brand of incompetence has moved this beyond conservatism versus liberalism. In other words, ideological preferences are taking a back seat to the need to pass the test of competence, and more and more conservative voters are acting, you know, conservatively by assessing and deciding on who the safer choice is.
3 Likes
You don’t even think people who are going to vote for Trump take him seriously so it’s not surprising any anti-trump endorsement is automatically a “principled decision”
Your reading comprehension skills are terrible.
3 Likes
Yeah right I’m sure…
Like I said to @treco, I’m not saying it’s not possible, but I find it unlikely. At least, in this case, there’s a recent change in ownership. That’s not true for the other papers.
Numerous people will vote for Trump and Clinton solely because they’re registered Republicans or Democrats.
Numerous people will vote for Trump simply because they hate Hillary Clinton and vice versa.
Therefore, you can vote for Hillary/Trump without taking them seriously.
1 Like
That is completely going out of your way. No one says you have to back someone just because you’re a paper.
You’re absolutely correct in saying Trump isn’t a conservative and he damages the name but instead of actively helping the most corrupt politician in our modern era, just don’t endorse Trump! Everyone has gone around and around on here on who is more dangerous and to me, we’re splitting hairs but I have yet to see anyone who considers themselves a conservative back Hillary. I don’t get how you can claim to be a conservative and back someone who is against everything you stand for when Gary Johnson is sitting there looking like Jesus himself compared to these two. Just my two cents.
1 Like
Two reasons
- What Dr P already said. When you look at it on the state level there is no “both of the candidates have a chance to win”. Some of the swing states are the exception here so I can see voting for the less of two evils there but for a majority of the country that is not the case.
- How do you pick the lesser of two evils and at what point does it matter? Voting preference is a spectrum when your opinion falls too much in the middle of the line why MUST you make a choice? For some the lesser of two evils is just two evils or a minuscule difference in two evils. The real evil is the future under their leadership which you can’t predict. The person you hate less may end up being worse than predicted.
2 Likes
Agreed, often you hear the phrase, “you choose the devil you know versus the devil you don’t.” That may be the case here.
These people go out of their way to vote, often taking off work and waiting up to a couple of hours in line…
They take the party seriously but not the presidential nominee ? You know I would buy this if they stayed home and didn’t bother to vote but otherwise this doesn’t make sense.
If you don’t take the candidate seriously, you stay home.
Supposedly Wikileaks has a huge announcement regarding Clinton that they will be unveiling tomorrow.
Could be very interesting or nothing at all.
Apparently he cancelled it due to security concerns…
Or someone else releases it on his behalf.