Conservative newspapers are abandoning the Republican Party in this election. The GOP candidate, Donald Trump, scares them -- just as he scares most Americans. The latest to shun Trump and endorse Hillary Clinton is the Omaha World-Herald -- a newspaper that hasn't endorsed a Democrat for president since Franklin Roosevelt in 1932 (84 years). Here is what their editorial board has written:
There is little question that the presidential election of 2016 is perhaps the most unusual in our lifetimes. Both of the major-party candidates, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump, have unheard-of negative approval ratings, with more than half the country viewing both of them unfavorably. Many votes will be cast this year AGAINST a candidate, rather than FOR a candidate. The stakes are high. The United States has a debt — let’s call it outstanding loans — totaling nearly $20 trillion. The annual deficit totals an estimated $590 billion, which increases the national debt total each year. The Middle East is a powder keg, threatening the stability of the world in general. Obamacare is a disappointment at best, a disaster at worst. Multiple Supreme Court appointments are likely to take place during the new president’s term. Racial tensions are spilling over into actions in some communities across the country. With that much on the line, the prudent vote would go toward the least risky candidate for president. Put another way, the candidate who would have the best chance to implement changes by working with Congress, foreign and domestic leaders and military leaders under normal circumstances as well as during a crisis. That candidate is Hillary Rodham Clinton. This endorsement comes after careful consideration and with some trepidation. Secretary Clinton, if elected, will need to gain the trust of a significant portion of Americans who are concerned about her private email server and attendant deleted emails, her handling of the Benghazi crisis and her longstanding quest for a single-payer health care system in the United States. With that said, Clinton’s legislative experience and decades of political involvement — as first lady of Arkansas, first lady of the United States, U.S. senator from New York, secretary of state and two-time presidential candidate — make her the better prepared of the two major candidates for the office of president of the United States. The risk of a Donald Trump presidency is simply too great. His alienation of so many groups — women, the disabled, Muslim-Americans, former prisoners of war, the family of a Muslim soldier killed in action, Mexican nationals and Mexican-Americans — is too divisive. Trump shows a lack of statesmanship that is fundamental to serving in the Oval Office. Trump has repeatedly shown a disdain for our nation’s allies and alliances and an affection for its enemies. He has revealed a lack of command over key issues, such as the nation’s nuclear triad, Russian aggression and the significance of NATO alliances, paired with a propensity for unrealistic hyperbole, such as his promise to end all crime and violence in the country, or to build a wall on the U.S. border with Mexico and have the Mexican government pay for it, with no pragmatic path to achieve such aims. His claim that he would have Iranian gunboats “shot out of the water” for taunting a U.S. Navy ship shows a reckless response that could trigger yet another Middle East war. A man who lashes out impulsively when attacked should not be entrusted to command the world’s most powerful military. These issues, coupled with his statements regarding women, including the taped comments about grabbing women’s genitals and forcing kisses on them, simply make it too difficult to inspire confidence in him as president and commander-in-chief. This year’s presidential election has been the country’s most polarizing race in decades. If Secretary Clinton is elected, Americans will need her to be a uniting president, working from the center, and not advancing an agenda that will further alienate moderates and conservatives.
