Dallas Morning News Shocks Republicans

[metis]

The paper's endorsement of Hillary, which is the first time they've endorsed a Dem since 1964:

The Dallas Morning News has not endorsed a Democrat for president since before World War II. Nearly 20 elections have come and gone since then and the paper has stuck with the Republican nominee in every one of them, its editorial board notes, saying the party more closely shares its values of free markets and strong national defense.

This election, it is going in another direction. The Texas paper has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

Donald “Trump's values are hostile to conservatism,” the editorial board wrote. “He plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny — to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control.”

Texas has long been a stronghold for Republicans, and it is a must-win state for Trump. Most polls show him leading there – but not as comfortably as Republicans have in the past, suggesting Democrats are gaining ground in their years-long push to at least turn the state purple... -- http://www.latimes.com/la-na-trailg...news-breaks-75-year-1473249063-htmlstory.html

Notice underline parts.

OK, Trump supporters, where is the DMN wrong?

 

[Tumah]

Are there people that actually actively support Trump? I thought it was just a question of which of the two evils someone thinks is marginally better.

 

[sun rise]

Are there people that actually actively support Trump? I thought it was just a question of which of the two evils someone thinks is marginally better.

Hillary Clinton is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000% better than evil Donald Trump.

 

[metis]

Hillary Clinton is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000% better than evil Donald Trump.

You can say that again, and I'm far from being enthusiastic about Hillary. I take Sander's position of "anyone but Trump".

 

[metis]

Are there people that actually actively support Trump? I thought it was just a question of which of the two evils someone thinks is marginally better.

Yep, at about 40% of the registered voters at this point are at the least leaning in his direction. If he wins, I'm gonna seek political asylum in Canada, and I have never in my 71 years ever felt this way about anyone who has gotten the nomination from either the Democrats or the Republicans.

 

[YmirGF]

Yep, at about 40% of the registered voters at this point are at the least leaning in his direction. If he wins, I'm gonna seek political asylum in Canada, and I have never in my 71 years ever felt this way about anyone who has gotten the nomination from either the Democrats or the Republicans.

That reminds me when I was a young socialist and Reagan was elected. I thought the world was ending. It took me some time to get used to the idea that Armageddon was not upon us.

That said, in regards to the OP, OK, we get it, not all Conservatives are comfortable with the Donald. This is still news? Frankly, given the polarity of recent years, I think opinion pieces like this are to be expected. They are going to feel a bit odd when he becomes POTUS though even without their vaunted blessings.

 

[metis]

That reminds me when I was a young socialist and Reagan was elected. I thought the world was ending. It took me some time to get used to the idea that Armageddon was not upon us.

But in Trump's case, I'm not so sure about this. Compared to Trump, Reagan was a complete genius.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If Asad, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and Putin were to collectively envision their hope for a U.S. President, they would be hard put to come up with a wet dream more ideal than Trump.

 

[columbus]

Yep, at about 40% of the registered voters at this point are at the least leaning in his direction. If he wins, I'm gonna seek political asylum in Canada, and I have never in my 71 years ever felt this way about anyone who has gotten the nomination from either the Democrats or the Republicans.

I don't stress about this that much.
If Trump won, Congress and the SCOTUS and the Department of Defense and Wall Street would build a wall around Trump. He would be the most thoroughly obstructed president in history.
Tom
ETA. I'm more concerned about the possibility of Trump being removed from office, leaving US with President Mike "RFRA" Pence.

 

[ShivaFan]

FOX from morning until the late afternoon is 24x7 attack on Trump. Why? They have a bunch of toadies for the Republican establishment Jeb Bush ilk Chamber of Commerce cheap labor pro-amnesty agenda, so Trump has had a target on his back by them ever since he said he would build a wall. The DMN is exactly the same, an arm of the cheap labor amnesty Republican establishment. Both would rather have Hillary who will let in 40 million more illegal and criminal aliens and also is part of the crony capitalist 1% percenters such as Google, Facebook et all to displace the jobs of Americans with cheap labor foreigners and offshore labor, these 1% percenters all support Hillary.

No one who is a real Texan cares about the DMN which I read in the morning sometimes in a hotel (given out free at the door) when on business trips in Texas and found it a leftist rag. So nevermind them, here is the news.

One of the hacked Clinton email's from the Wikileaks archive, Huma Abedin the wife of the pervert Anthony Weiner asked Hillary, “Did u take your earpiece or do I need to get it?” ...

Then I read just now on Infowars regarding last night's forum in which Trump was a huge winner, so much so that the far left is now attacking one of their own Matt Lauer who hosted the thing, suddenly now Lauer is a "sexist" and a plant for Trump just because Trump did great and Hillary didn't.

But nevermind that, everyone wants to know about that earpiece she was wearing.

Per Infowars and many sources, "NYPD sources involved with the NBC forum’s security detail confirm Clinton was wearing an ‘inductive earpiece,” the same technology employed by almost all lead Broadway actors to receive forgotten lines and stealth off-stage cues from directors. The flesh-colored earbud is easily concealed. There are no wires running directly to the ear like you see with the units employed by Secret Service protection detail personnel", and Hollywood James Woods who knows about these devices and watched the forums says she is wearing an ear device as well, to get instructions as to what to say if she forgets her lines. Or instructions to get her through her medical issues.

I know, no one, not the NYPD or anybody else is allowed to dare talk about the ear device. Good luck with that.

By the way, the far left has been putting up some "statues" of Trump depicted with a huge fat sagging stomach when looking at the real Trump he is clearly fit as the God Apollo, so this is fine by me as so many's reaction to the statues is "but Trump isn't a fat pig, Hillary is. These people think we don't see the obvious?"...

I mean, look at her from last night - she is the size of a cow.

Look at her classic obese posture when trying to sit in a chair, from her rear across to her huge tummy, huge fatso. Compare with Trump.

Anyway, I see this morning that Hillary's "huge lead" in Ohio has disappeared to only 1 point, and from this Monday the latest Reuters-Ipsos polling shows Republican Donald Trump up or tied with Hillary Clinton in several blue states.

** Iowa – Trump 44% – Clinton 41%
** Maine – Trump 42% – Clinton 42%
** Michigan – Trump 42% – Clinton 41%
** New Hampshire – Trump 45% – Clinton 44%
** Ohio – Trump 46% – Clinton 43%
** Wisconsin – Trump 38% – Clinton 38%

 

[metis]

Sorry if the DMN wasn't politically-correct enough for you, especially since they hadn't endorsed a Democrat for President since FDR. Ya, I'm sure they're just RINO's.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If he wins, I'm gonna seek political asylum in Canada, and I have never in my 71 years ever felt this way about anyone who has gotten the nomination from either the Democrats or the Republicans.

ETA. I'm more concerned about the possibility of Trump being removed from office, leaving US with President Mike "RFRA" Pence.

You know someone ****ed up bad when people are voting against them as VP. I've talked to many people who jumped on the Hillary ship after Trump picked Pence.

 

[ShivaFan]

Some don't understand what this election is being driven by. It is laughable in one way to watch the Hillary supporters call DMN some sort of Republican stalwart - this paper is an arm of the Jeb Bush wing of the Republican and Democratic Party establishment and some neo-cons who (1) are all simply part of the agenda of cheap labor for their benefactors and thus they support Hillary along with the 1 percenters who are supporting Hillary and who want to totally displace American workers and who want to displace democracy itself with unelected "departments" and faceless globalists, and (2) are the sickos along with Hillary and McCain who want to go to war with Russia and Hillary has some paranoid fixations about that.

This nonsense about DMN not supporting a Democrat crap is laughable, they have consistently been doing so during the entire Obama regime and represent the globalists and their play for pay types such as Hillary and it is blatant and they are the Chamber of Commerce crowd, they represent the establishment, period. Texans hate that "newspaper". Hotels in Texas that use cheap labor put that rag at the door of the hotel guests to help with distribution.

You need to understand this election. It isn't "Democratic" verse "Republican" (establishment), it is the rise of the anti-establishment and this DMN is not "Republican" it is establishment.

Trump is going to win.

 

[columbus]

Some don't understand what this election is being driven by.

This is the most accurate analysis I have seen you post on the subject.
Kudos!
Tom

 

[Acim]

The paper's endorsement of Hillary, which is the first time they've endorsed a Dem since 1964:

The Dallas Morning News has not endorsed a Democrat for president since before World War II. Nearly 20 elections have come and gone since then and the paper has stuck with the Republican nominee in every one of them, its editorial board notes, saying the party more closely shares its values of free markets and strong national defense.

This election, it is going in another direction. The Texas paper has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

Donald “Trump's values are hostile to conservatism,” the editorial board wrote. “He plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny — to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control.”

Texas has long been a stronghold for Republicans, and it is a must-win state for Trump. Most polls show him leading there – but not as comfortably as Republicans have in the past, suggesting Democrats are gaining ground in their years-long push to at least turn the state purple... -- http://www.latimes.com/la-na-trailg...news-breaks-75-year-1473249063-htmlstory.html

Notice underline parts.

OK, Trump supporters, where is the DMN wrong?

The primary place DMN is wrong is that they are now endorsing Democratic appointees to the SC.

With regards to the underline part, I'd have to see it in context of editorial, for just saying 'hostile to conservatism' doesn't explain anything. And doesn't explain why they'd endorse Hillary, as if she isn't hostile toward conservatism. The 'he plays on fear' part is hyperbole. Again, if endorsing Clinton, I'd love to see how they back that up, and the context they use to arrive at one conclusion (Trump brings out the worst in all of us) while avoiding the other one (that Clinton magically doesn't). Clinton clearly shifts on fundamental issues.

The lack of preparedness is one I can agree with, but I really don't think most US president's have been prepared for the job, starting with Washington. The language of 'absence of preparedness' is more hyperbole. But I imagine if going to endorse opposition, you'd have to paint as bad of a picture as humanly possible to justify why you are going out on the limb you are out on.

 

[columbus]

With regards to the underline part, I'd have to see it in context of editorial, for just saying 'hostile to conservatism' doesn't explain anything.

If you would like to see this put into a Conservative Christian Republican context I recommend:
Redstate.com

Tom

 

[Acim]

If you would like to see this put into a Conservative Christian Republican context I recommend:
Redstate.com

Tom

I'm not sure I understand what you are linking me to. Can you find an article on redstate.com that argues for Trump being hostile toward conservatism? If yes, link me to that.

 

[columbus]

I'm not sure I understand what you are linking me to. Can you find an article on redstate.com that argues for Trump being hostile toward conservatism? If yes, link me to that.

Redstate and Drudge are my two main sources of information about what is happening in the conservative world. I recommend them both highly, especially to people who think that conservative people are stupid or something.

Drudge is a big supporter of Trump. Redstate is squarely in the #nevertrump camp. I learn a lot by comparing the opinions and links from the two websites.
Tom

 

[Parchment]

the editorial board wrote. “He plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny”

Sounds like the same simplistic garbage that has been thrown at him since the beginning.

 

[metis]

Also for those of you moving to Canada. Actually, I am about to retire, and can afford to move their, but I predict many of you cannot since Canada doesn't want you, they want productive members and not welfare cases.

I may retire in Canada, it is a great place to live, less taxes on corporations than the US, a lot of right-wing Hindus like myself, and is not polluted by the hordes of illiterates yet coming over the southern US-Mexico border who have junk cars everywhere, Ford F150 gas sucking junk, who dump their used motor oil right into the rain drain gutters, who want to cut down all the trees to make cheap housing for their 25 kids et all.

You will need the money to "leave the US" and "move to Canada". I suspect most of you cannot, but I can. Please stay out of Canada or you are going to destroy it. Like the idiots moving from NY to Florida are destroying Florida and by the way causing pollution as well. Stay out of Canada you Chicago and New York you know whats.

Your pathetically bigoted statements not withstanding, I am retired, plus we almost moved to Canada in 1970 to the point of looking for a house. I have an income coming in through my pension and Social Security, so I'm sorry to counter your pathetic judgementalism.

For you to stereotype "hordes of illiterates yet coming over the southern US-Mexican border" the way you have, to your bigoted and irrational statement about how we here reading this are supposedly going to "destroy it", you have no credibility whatsoever as far as I'm concerned.

Since Canada is a mere 20 minute drive from my house in the L.P., I'm there a lot, let me tell ya (at least once a month), but of course you "think" that you know so much more than any of us here. Trust me on this, but I know you won't, your bigotry would make you stand out like a sore thumb there. After all, if you did your homework for once, you would find out that they are more liberal than the average American, plus have more socialistic programs. But of course I'm sure you could tell them a thing or two on how to run their country.