“The Arizona Republic” is a daily newspaper that is published in Phoenix. Even since its inception in 1890, when it was called “The Arizona Republican,” it has never endorsed a Democratic candidate for President over a Republican.
Until now.
On September 27, the day after the first Presidential debate, the editorial board of “The Arizona Republic” endorsed Hillary Clinton instead of Donald Trump. The board explained their rational in a long editorial that begins with a reference to their prior history of always supporting Republican candidates:
“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.
“That’s why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.”
The editorial board of “The Arizona Republic” flatly dismissed Trump’s proposed immigration policies as unworkable – and briefly described their state’s own painful experiences with draconic immigration laws. In 2010, the state legislature passed a “show me your papers” law that allowed police officers to detain people they suspected of being undocumented immigrants. The law both disgusted the international community and did nothing to solve the problems associated with undocumented and unregulated immigration.
The mass deportations that Trump favors would rip apart families and they would be logistically difficult. Secretary Clinton also wants to reform immigration policies, but she would allow immigrants to work towards citizenship. She would also avoid policies that divide families.
Clinton is the vastly superior candidate in terms of foreign policy. She has years of experience in dealing with other countries. “Clinton has argued America’s case before friendly and unfriendly foreign leaders with tenacity, diplomacy and skill. She earned respect by knowing the issues, the history and the facts.”
“She is intimately familiar with the challenges we face in our relations with Russia, China, the Middle East, North Korea and elsewhere. She’ll stand by our friends and she’s not afraid to confront our enemies.”
By contrast, Trump has a bad case of foot-in-mouth disease. He has grossly insulted the citizens of Mexico by describing them as “criminals and rapists.” Mexico is both Arizona’s neighbor and an important trading partner of the United States. Its citizens should therefore be treated with a modicum of respect. Trump does not understand that; just hours after visiting the President of Mexico in an attempt to shore up his diplomatic credentials, he delivered an insulting speech about Mexican immigrants in Phoenix.
The editorial board of “The Arizona Republic” finds Trump’s temperament extremely worrying. In addition to insulting Mexicans, he has also made derogatory remarks about women, disabled people, Muslims and POWs. While everybody makes the occasional tactless or insensitive remark, there is nothing “occasional” about Trump’s comments. He always has something nasty to say about somebody. Trump’s comments are “evidence of deep character flaws. They are part of a pattern.”
Part of that pattern is Trump’s inability to control himself – and the President of the United States controls our nuclear arsenal. Trump’s penchant for outrageous statements could actually jeopardize our national security. For example, he once invited Russia to hack into Clinton’s e-mails.
Finally, Clinton has the advantage of being a known quantity. She has been in public service for decades and is known as a model of competence, tact and professionalism. Her policies and beliefs are well-known and well-documented. People can, for instance, predict what type of people she would nominate to the Supreme Court.
Trump does not have that background. There is therefore no guarantee he would nominate “solid conservatives” to the Supreme Court. While Clinton can be trusted to select skilled justices with extensive experience and background, there is no knowing who Trump would pick. For all of these reasons, “The Arizona Republic” considers Clinton to be the more capable and trustworthy candidate and has accordingly endorsed her.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/09/27/hillary-clinton-endorsement/91198668/