Houston Chronicle – July 29
“The Chronicle editorial page does not typically endorse early in an election cycle…These are unsettling times, even if they’re not the dark, dystopian end times that Trump lays out. They require a steady hand. That’s not Donald Trump.”
Dallas Morning News – Sept. 7
“We recommend Hillary Clinton. We don’t come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation’s highest office since before World War II — if you’re counting, that’s more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections.” They concluded their position with, “Whatever you do, however, resist the siren song of a dangerous demagogue. By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump.”
Cincinnati Enquirer – Sept. 23
“The Enquirer has supported Republicans for president for almost a century – a tradition this editorial board doesn’t take lightly…[There] is only one choice when we elect a president in November: Hillary Clinton.”
Arizona Republic – Sept. 27
“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.”
USA Today – Sept. 30
“In the 34-year history of USA TODAY, the Editorial Board has never taken sides in the presidential race…This year, one of the candidates — Republican nominee Donald Trump — is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency.”
San Diego Union Tribune – Sept. 30
“This paper has not endorsed a Democrat for president in its 148-year history. But we endorse Clinton. She’s the safe choice for the U.S. and for the world, for Democrats and Republicans alike.”
The Atlantic — Oct. 5
“We are impressed by many of the qualities of the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, even as we are exasperated by others, but we are mainly concerned with the Republican Party’s nominee, Donald J. Trump, who might be the most ostentatiously unqualified major-party candidate in the 227-year history of the American presidency.”
