The Editorialists Have Spoken; Will Voters Listen?

The Atlantic magazine has made only two presidential endorsements in its 159-year history: one for Abraham Lincoln in 1860 and one for Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.

The third comes Wednesday afternoon, when the magazine posted an editorial endorsing Hillary Clinton for president and dismissing Donald J. Trump as “the most ostentatiously unqualified major-party candidate in the 227-year history of the American presidency.” For good measure, it calls him “a demagogue, a xenophobe, a sexist, a know-nothing and a liar.”

Follow by Email
Visit Us
Read More

2 thoughts on “The Editorialists Have Spoken; Will Voters Listen?

  • October 6, 2016 at 9:47 am

    it would be the ultimate rebuke of newspaper’s tired franchise if voters ignore editors and publishers pleadings that Trump is an Super Callous Fragile Racist Extra Braggadocios liar.

    If that is the outcome of this election, it might not be because their sage advise was not true, but because Trump is the epitome of what so many politicians have been for a long time. The difference is that Trump displays his bellicose arrogance directly to adoring throngs, while previous iterations of the narcissistic politician have maintained a firewall that hides the strong-man persona that commands party loyalty behind a polished facade displayed to voters.

    We have seen shadows of the hubris in public appearances for decades. With Bush it was expressed as “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” With Clinton, it was a bold-faced, finger-wagging lie that “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”

    The trail does not go cold there. It’s been this way for a long time. Here’s why. These people represent us. They are not all of who we are, but they reflect the dominant traits of our culture. Newspapers have tended to put some polish on this belligerence, balance it with some of our more appealing traits and call it all good — as long as public narrative is generally filtered through the print-franchise gate. The gate remains, but the fences on either side of the gate have collapsed and few people these days consider that old gate to be anything more than a symbolic, archaic monument.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *