as you can see here. Warning — there is an autoplay video with the editor explaining why.
Here’s the first paragraph of the editorial:
Today this newspaper does something it has never done in its 143-year history: endorse someone other than the Republican candidate in a presidential contest.
While several times (in days of FDR) it made no endorsement, it had never before today endorsed a non-Republican nominee.
We abandon that long and estimable tradition this year for one reason: Donald J. Trump.
The 2016 nominee offered by the Republican Party rubs hard against the editorial board’s values as conservatives and Americans. Donald Trump is unprincipled, unstable and quite possibly dangerous. He can not be president.
While they acknowledge a lot that is impressive about Clinton and agree she had the appropriate temperament, as might be expected from a right-leaning newspaper, they won’t go there —
But character matters. Her career-long struggles with honesty and ethics and calculating, self-serving approach to politics trouble us deeply.
They say this about Johnson:
But this is an endorsement of conscience, reflecting our confidence that Johnson would be a competent and capable president and an honorable one.
which seems a little ironic given his performance last night with Chris Matthews, with yet another “Aleppo moment.”
What is less important, however, than their weak tea rationalization of supporting Johnson is their strong arguments for not supporting Trump.
For starters, Trump is not a conservative. From his protectionist position on trade to his penchant for buying votes with high-price new social programs to his soft spot for hiking taxes, Trump does not meet any true conservative standards.
Except, of course, of those who wrongly equate conservatism with racism, sexism and xenophobia. Trump has attracted support from too many of those who represent the worst of human nature.
And of course there is much more. In this case including his bullying performance in Monday’s debate, which by implication seems to be the final straw for the editorial board.
Here are a few other snips:
We have seen no hint that Trump has a guiding set of principles.
But the most worrisome thing about Trump is that he is willing to stir the populace by stoking their fears of sinister forces at work from within and without to tear down their traditions, values and families. He has found profit in dividing Americans from each other, and from the rest of the world.
His sort of populism has led to some of history’s great tragedies.
Under Trump, America would stand alone in the world. Our
The editorial tries to argue that a vote for Johnson is not a wasted vote, not very successfully in my opinion. In a sense, it might almost remind you of Ted Cruz's remarks at the Republican convention:
Our contention is that an endorsement based on conscience is never wasted.
I do not know what influence this endorsement — or rather non-endorsement of Trump — will have. It will certainly give a rationale for some better off Michigan Republicans not to support Trump, either financially or with their votes. I do not think Michigan was in play: non of the predictors has Clinton’s chances of carrying the state at less than 70%, and several make it likely Democratic.
But it continues a pattern noted last night by Rachel Maddow — so far NO major daily newspaper in the country has endorsed Trump. We now have several endorsing Johnson.