On Friday, the Houston Chronicle, which last endorsed Mitt Romney, shocked many by making an early public endorsement of Hillary Clinton for President.
The Houston Chronicle opened with a very definitive standpoint, identifying Hillary as the candidate with years of experience in public service, and Trump as someone completely lacking of qualifications and having “paper-thin, bumper-sticker proposals” that would pose a danger to the nation and the world. The editorial also noted that they would not normally make an endorsement this early in the race, but Trump’s nomination forced their hand,
“An election between the Democrat Clinton and, let’s say, the Republican Jeb Bush or John Kasich or Marco Rubio, even the hyper-ideological Ted Cruz, would spark a much-needed debate about the role of government and the nation’s future, about each candidate’s experience and abilities. But those Republican hopefuls have been vanquished. To choose the candidate who defeated them – fairly and decisively, we should point out – is to repudiate the most basic notions of competence and capability.
Any one of Trump’s less-than-sterling qualities – his erratic temperament, his dodgy business practices, his racism, his Putin-like strongman inclinations and faux-populist demagoguery, his contempt for the rule of law, his ignorance – is enough to be disqualifying. His convention-speech comment, “I alone can fix it,” should make every American shudder. He is, we believe, a danger to the Republic.”
The Chronicle noted Clinton’s self-professed shortcomings, like not having the verbal abilities of Obama or the charm of her husband, but also said that voters’ opinions of Hillary as a person rather than a politician are irrelevant. Apart from her experience over Trump’s, the editors also praised Clinton’s stances on immigration reform, health care, energy, and foreign affairs. In the end, the Chronicle noted that we need a president with a steady hand and a hopeful future for the nation, neither of which describe Trump.