Republicans and Newspapers Are Rejecting Donald Trump to an Unprecedented DegreeOctober 16, 2016
-but Not the National Enquirer
It is fitting that the National Enquirer is one of the few actual newspaper endorsements for Trump. For more on newspaper endorsements, see below.
and the Official Newspaper of the Ku Klux Klan
One of the most unprecedented qualities of the 2016 Presidential Election, and there are many, is that so many prominent Republican Party leaders, past and present, and influential conservatives have rejected their party’s own presidential nominee, Donald Trump. Of the last 7 presidential nominees, only one, Bob Dole, has said that they are supporting Donald Trump. The others, like Mitt Romney, have vocally opposed Donald Trump, and continue to do so, or, like George W. Bush, have simply refused to endorse him or comment publicly on him. Neither Romney, Bush, John McCain, or George H.W. Bush attended the Republican National Convention. The sitting governor of Ohio and former 2016 GOP presidential candidate, John Kasich, also did not attend the convention, even though it was held in Cleveland. Below is a partial list of Republicans who have rejected Trump with some of their reasons for doing so, as well as links to articles or summaries of their public statements about Trump.
Some of the notable names from this list.
- Mitt Romney, 2012 GOP nominee, former Massachusetts governor
- Ohio Governor, John Kasich
- Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk
- Maine Sen. Susan Collins
- Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse
- South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham
- Former Fla. Sen. Mel Martinez
- Former Minn. Sen. Norm Coleman
- Former Texas Rep. Ron Paul
- Mass. Gov. Charlie Baker
- Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan
- Mich. Rep. Justin Amash
- Utah Rep. Mia Love
- Nevada Sen. Joe Heck
- Ariz. Sen. John McCain
- New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte
- W. Va. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito
- Ohio Sen. Rob Portman
- Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski
- Eliot Cohen, counselor of the Department of State during President George W. Bush’s administration
- Former Fla. Gov. Jeb Bush,
- Former Okla. Rep. J.C. Watts
- Former Penn. Gov. Tom Ridge
- Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense for George W. Bush
- Utah Gov. Gary Herbert
- Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley
- Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval
- Frmr Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty
- Frmr California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
- Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard
- Jonah Goldberg, senior editor at National Review
- Stuart Stevens, top strategist, Romney 2012
- Mona Charen, senior fellow at Ethics and Public Policy Center
- George Will, Washington Post columnist and Fox News commentator
- Glenn Beck, host of The Glenn Beck Program and founder of TheBlaze
- Erick Erickson, conservative commentator, former editor of RedState, founder of The Resurgent
- Steve Deace, conservative commentator and radio talk show host
- Brian Bartlett, GOP communications strategist
- Jay Caruso, contributing editor at RedState
- Linda Chavez, conservative columnist
- Former Sec. of State Colin Powell
- New York Rep. Richard Hanna
- Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of state under George W. Bush
- Former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman
- Mark Salter, former aide and speechwriter for Sen. John McCain
- Robert Kagan, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution
- David Ross Meyers, former White House staffer under George W. Bush
- Former Va. Sen. John Warner
“I will not vote for a nominee who has behaved in a manner that reflects so poorly on our country. Our country deserves better.”
“Not only did he seem at the debate to lose his temper, but to get up at 3:30 a.m. and reach for your smartphone is to me a hysterical reaction. If you’re president, the button you reach for is not the Twitter button; it’s the nuclear button,” Chertoff told Bloomberg.
“At the political level, Trump sees quite a few powerful “others” in the American electoral process: a corrupt media, international banks, unrestricted immigrants, a variety of globalists, free-traders and (at least some) Muslims. It’s a list Putin could second or, in some cases, jail or worse.
Sounding simultaneously populist and a little bit the conspiratorial Marxist, Trump has claimed that these unseen forces could rig the U.S. election. It’s a theme that Putin is happy to echo. Indeed, it’s a theme that his intelligence services are happy to actively propagate.
And in that case, the American presidential candidate routinely comes to the defense of his Russian soul mate. In the face of a high-confidence judgment of the U.S. intelligence community that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee and then weaponized embarrassing emails to sow confusion here, the man who would be president has declared: “Our country has no idea,” “I don’t think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC. . . . It could also be lots of other people” and “They always blame Russia.”
“Donald Trump’s unfitness for public office has become ever more apparent, we urge our fellow Republicans not to vote for this man whose disgraceful candidacy is indefensible. This is no longer about our party; it’s now about America. We may differ on how we will cast our ballots in November but none of us will vote for Donald Trump.”
“At some point, you have to look in the mirror and recognize that you cannot possibly justify support for Trump to your children — especially your daughters,” said David Humphreys, a Missouri business executive who contributed more than $2.5 million to Republicans from the 2012 campaign cycle through this spring and opposed Mr. Trump’s bid from the outset.
Bruce Kovner, a New York investor and philanthropist who with his wife has given $2.7 million to Republicans over the same period, was just as blunt. “He is a dangerous demagogue completely unsuited to the responsibilities of a United States president,” Mr. Kovner wrote in an email, referring to Mr. Trump.
“But Donald Trump’s behavior this week, concluding with the disclosure of his demeaning comments about women and his boasts about sexual assaults, make it impossible to continue to offer even conditional support for his candidacy.”
“Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire was the first Republican senator facing a competitive re-election to say she would no longer back Mr. Trump, announcing in a statement that she would write in Mr. Pence for president instead.
“I’m a mom and an American first, and I cannot and will not support a candidate for president who brags about degrading and assaulting women.”
“I’m concerned about his attitude toward minorities,” he said. “His statements against Mexicans I find repulsive; the same of his statements toward Muslims and his ridicule of women. I want to have a president that I can be proud of.”
“One of the candidates — Donald J. Trump — is entirely unqualified to serve as President and Commander-in-Chief. He is ignorant of the complex nature of the challenges facing our country, from Russia to China to ISIS to nuclear proliferation to refugees to drugs, but he has expressed no interest in being educated. Indeed he has recently demonstrated he entirely misunderstands and disrespects the role of the very officials who could educate him: the senior career officers of our intelligence services and of our military services (whom he has characterized as “rubble”).”
“I wanted my grandkids to see that I simply couldn’t ignore what Mr. Trump was saying and doing, which revealed a character and temperament unfit for the leader of the free world.” Romney continued: “I know that some people are offended that someone who lost and is the former nominee continues to speak, but that’s how I can sleep at night.” (May 27, 2016)
“Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, the former lieutenant governor of Maryland and daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy, posted the news Monday on Facebook. Alongside a photo of her posing with Bush, she wrote, “The President told me he’s voting for Hillary!!”
“I mean, unbelievable. I don’t know how women can vote for someone who said what he said about Megyn Kelly,” she said. “And we knew what he meant too!”
“I was damn near puking during the debates,” Steele said, adding that Trump has “captured that racist underbelly, that frustration, that angry underbelly of American life and gave voice to that.” Here’s another sign of the times: Steele is the sixth former RNC chair to say that he’s opposing Trump.
“Ultimately, I could not abide the hateful rhetoric of Donald Trump and his complete lack of principles and conservative philosophy. I didn’t make this decision lightly,” she told CNN. She said if Florida looks close, she will vote for Hillary Clinton in order to defeat Trump.
“But gun control isn’t the only reason why Pressler is ready to join “Republicans for Clinton” — he’s also concerned about Trump’s rhetoric on Muslims.
“This election is starting to sound like the German elections in [the late 1920s],” Pressler said. “This is a very dangerous national conversation we’re slipping into.”
“I won’t vote for Donald Trump.
I won’t vote for Donald Trump because of who he isn’t.
He isn’t a Republican. He isn’t a conservative. He isn’t a truth teller.
I also won’t vote for Donald Trump because of who he is.
A bigot. A misogynist. A fraud. A bully.”
“Miller added that Trump has “never done anything for the public good.”
“He’s 70 years old, he’s never done one thing,” he said, claiming the GOP presidential nominee has never given money to charity or done anything to “advance an issue.”
“He’s a billionaire. He gives no money to charity. A billionaire. All of us give more money to charity than he does. I’m not anywhere near a billionaire,” Miller said.”
“Brooks said globalization, the influx of immigrants and feminism “has been really good” for America. “We had a lot of good things over the years that were really good for America,” he said. “I think globalization has been really good for America. I think the influx of immigrants has been really good for America. Feminism has been really good for America.”
Brooks said he is not sharing who is voting for, leaving it up to the viewer to surmise who he’ll pull the lever for. “I can’t say who I’m going to vote for, but one person is clearly disqualified for that job,” Brooks said at the end of the segment. “And I can’t mention his name.”
Newspaper Endorsements for Hillary Clinton and AGAINST Donald Trump
This is not just a typical “liberal media bias”. Obama only received 95 endorsements in 2012 from the approximately 300 papers listed above. Mitt Romney received 87 endorsements from these papers. This year, 225 different newspapers papers, have endorsed Hillary Clinton this year. Trump has received only 8 endorsements, with 6 other newspapers writing editorials specifically opposing him. This reflects something fundamentally different than we have ever seen before.
Many of these newspapers are traditionally conservative newspapers from Republican dominated states. It is highly unusual that they would endorse a Democrat and many papers have specifically pointed out that they are rejecting Donald Trump more than they endorsing Hillary Clinton.
“We are impressed by many of the qualities of the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, even as we are exasperated by others, but we are mainly concerned with the Republican Party’s nominee, Donald J. Trump, who might be the most ostentatiously unqualified major-party candidate in the 227-year history of the American presidency.”
“There is only one serious candidate on the presidential ballot in November. We recommend Hillary Clinton.
We don’t come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation’s highest office since before World War II — if you’re counting, that’s more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections.”
This paper has not endorsed a Democrat for president in its 148-year history. But we endorse Clinton. She’s the safe choice for the U.S. and for the world, for Democrats and Republicans alike.”
“Since The Arizona Republic began publication in 1890, we have never endorsed a Democrat over a Republican for president. Never. This reflects a deep philosophical appreciation for conservative ideals and Republican principles.
This year is different.
The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified.”
“Because every presidential race is different, we revisit our no-endorsement policy every four years. We’ve never seen a 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.”
“Her election alone is what stands between the American nation and the reign of the most unstable, proudly uninformed, psychologically unfit president ever to enter the White House.”
“We acknowledge upfront that one major reason to support Hillary is that RepublicanDonald Trump is manifestly unqualified to be president of the United States. In a related editorial, we explain why the Donald Trump/Mike Pence slate would be a terrible choice.
“Trump is a clear and present danger to our country. He has no history of governance that should engender any confidence from voters. Trump has no foreign policy experience, and the fact that he doesn’t recognize it – instead insisting that, “I know more about ISIS than the generals do” – is even more troubling.”
“These are unsettling times, even if they’re not the dark, dystopian end times that Trump lays out. They require a steady hand. That’s not Donald Trump.”
“Heaven help America were, unthinkably, Clinton to fail. She is all that stands between the United States of America and never-before-seen proof that the Founding Fathers weren’t all that they’ve been cracked up to be.”
“For us, the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is not pleasant, but it isn’t difficult. Republican candidate Donald Trump is unfit to be president of the United States. Democrat Hillary Clinton, despite her flaws, is well-equipped for the job.
The Dispatch traditionally has endorsed Republican presidential candidates, but Trump does not espouse or support traditional Republican values, such as fiscal prudence, limited government and free trade, not to mention civility and decency. We are disappointed that so many Republican leaders have accommodated a narcissistic, morally bankrupt candidate who is so clearly out of step with those values.”
“Mrs. Clinton is a seriously flawed candidate. Many voters don’t trust her, and with good reason. Her careless use of a private email server while secretary of state, and her stubborn reluctance to admit wrongdoing, are troubling. Her claim during last weekend’s debate to be emulating Abraham Lincoln when saying one thing in public and another in private was absurd.
She is reflexively defensive and habitually evasive. For Hillary Clinton, transparency always feels like a last resort.
But Mrs. Clinton’s failings can’t compare, in scale or in number, to Republican nominee Donald Trump’s.
Mr. Trump has proved himself wholly unsuited to be president. He has spent this campaign denigrating women, Muslims, Mexicans, refugees, disabled people, the parents of a soldier who died in Iraq and essentially anyone who questioned him. He has suggested that an African-American protester at one of his rallies should be “roughed up,” made gross generalizations suggesting that all black people live in poor, violent neighborhoods, expressed support for racial profiling by police. And he threatened in the last debate to jail his political rival if elected.”
“The last two Republican presidential nominees — Mitt Romney and John McCain — say they won’t vote for him. The last two Republican presidents — George W. and George H. W. Bush — refused to attend his nominating convention. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a revered statesman and four-star general for Republican administrations, slammed Trump as “a national disgrace” and “international pariah.”
Trump has repeatedly shown a disdain for our nation’s allies and alliances and an affection for its enemies.
“From puerile feuding, to “birtherism,” to bigotry, Trump’s candidacy draws out the ugly side of America. He seems incapable of accurately discussing any issue, choosing instead to pull the pin on verbal grenades, many of which blow up in his face. His claim that the election is rigged undermines the very task that thousands of candidates in local, state and national elections have undertaken in earnest.
Trump touts his business acumen, but he’s left behind a string of failures, along with unpaid contractors and workers. Governing is not a series of deals backstopped by bankruptcy laws. Trump isn’t any better when it comes to transparency, refusing to release tax returns that might contradict his boasting.”
“This is not an endorsement taken lightly, nor is it an easy one to make, as Hillary Clinton does not represent the fiscal conservatism, free-market mind-set and desire to keep restraints on government overreach that this newspaper usually supports.
Sadly, neither does Trump, as evidenced by his enthusiastic support of eminent domain; his insistence that an impractical, multibillion-dollar wall (which also would mean taking private property owners’ land) would be a good investment; his admiration of tyrants, attacks on free speech and instinct to use brash threats as a military strategy; and his pledge that if elected he would jail his opponent, something that has no place in American politics.
“Continuing irrational, vulgar, bullying behavior from Trump has confirmed what many of us long suspected: Trump is in no way fit to lead our great nation. Among innumerable examples: His mockery of a disabled journalist, his bragging about sexually assaulting women, his racist tirade against the judge presiding in the Trump University fraud case, his chummy praise for Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. In the second presidential debate Trump said he would have a special prosecutor investigate Clinton and put her in jail. Imprisoning one’s political opponent is right out of the Putin playbook.”
“Her opponent, Donald Trump, has shown himself not to measure up to the job. He has an astonishing lack of knowledge about the world and about how government works. Worse, he shows no curiosity to learn. His stunning refusal Wednesday night to say he will accept the results of the election undermines one of the hallmarks of our democracy. And he has no peer in his ability to spout untruths. If that weren’t enough, his temperament disqualifies him. He wants to be president like it’s a trophy to be won, and he would have others do the actual work. That is not leadership.”
Still, the decision to endorse Clinton was easy considering the superior qualifications she has in comparison with her opponent. It comes down to this: A Donald Trump presidency is dangerous.
As promised, the Republican candidate has broken all the rules of politics – but also any sense of decorum and civility along the way. The despicable things he’s said about women and minorities, not to mention the sexual assault allegations, reveal character we would not value in anyone, let alone the leader of a nation that prides itself on freedom and equality.
But Trump — the man is nothing short of a racist, misogynist demagogue with no respect for the rule of law. The foibles of the two candidates aren’t even in the same galaxy. Clinton bends the rules with lawyerly imprecision slathered in hubris and entitlement. Trump stomps on the Constitution one amendment at a time.
“Beyond this, however, in the areas in which we at FP specialize, he has repeatedly demonstrated his ignorance of the most basic facts of international affairs, let alone the nuances so crucial to the responsibilities of diplomacy inherent in the U.S. president’s daily responsibilities. Trump has not onlypromoted the leadership of a tyrant and menace like Vladimir Putin, but he has welcomed Russian meddling in the current U.S. election. He has alternatively forgiven then defended Russia’s invasion of Crimea and employed advisors with close ties to the Russian president and his cronies. Trump has spoken so cavalierly about the use of nuclear weapons, including a repeated willingness to use them against terrorists, that it has become clear he understands little if anything about America’s nuclear policies — not to mention the moral, legal, and human consequences of such actions. He has embraced the use of torture and the violation of international law against it. He has suggested he would ignoreAmerica’s treaty obligations and would only conditionally support allies in need. He has repeatedly insulted Mexico and proposed policies that would inflame and damage one of America’s most vital trading relationships with that country.”
Speak Truth to Trump:
Evangelicals, of all people, should not be silent about Donald Trump’s blatant immorality.
“Enthusiasm for a candidate like Trump gives our neighbors ample reason to doubt that we believe Jesus is Lord. They see that some of us are so self-interested, and so self-protective, that we will ally ourselves with someone who violates all that is sacred to us—in hope, almost certainly a vain hope given his mendacity and record of betrayal, that his rule will save us.”
“Donald J. Trump is the least qualified, most flawed, and most dangerous person ever nominated by a major American political party. He is not the successful businessman he claims to be. He is not the political savior he claims to be.
He is a con man and a liar. He is interested only in promoting his brand name and furthering a megalomaniacal drive to power. His promise to “make America great again” is sheer hucksterism – the empty slogan of a demagogue who this year turned American politics into his latest reality TV show.”
“When Trump beats up on Clinton for her misuse of a private email server as secretary of state—an egregious mistake that the head of the FBI called “extremely careless”—we hear him. But when Trump goes on to ask Russian hackers to continue their apparent assaults on an American election by finding more of Clinton’s emails, even as a wan joke, he takes the side of the arsonists while attacking his opponent for a fire code violation. When he says the press is corrupt and the electoral system is rigged, he’s not acting like someone who wants to lead. He’s acting like someone who demands to be followed.”
“Americans have long prided themselves on their ability to see the world for what it is, as opposed to what someone says it is or what most people happen to believe. In one of the most powerful lines in American literature, Huck Finn says: “It warn’t so. I tried it.” A respect for evidence is not just a part of the national character. It goes to the heart of the country’s particular brand of democratic government. When the founding fathers, including Benjamin Franklin, scientist and inventor, wrote arguably the most important line in the Declaration of Independence—“We hold these truths to be self-evident”—they were asserting the fledgling nation’s grounding in the primacy of reason based on evidence.
Scientific American is not in the business of endorsing political candidates. But we do take a stand for science—the most reliable path to objective knowledge the world has seen—and the Enlightenment values that gave rise to it. For more than 170 years we have documented, for better and for worse, the rise of science and technology and their impact on the nation and the world. We have strived to assert in our reporting, writing and editing the principle that decision making in the sphere of public policy should accept the conclusions that evidence, gathered in the spirit and with the methods of science, tells us to be true.”