Over the past couple of weeks, several small town Oklahoma newspapers like The Enid News-Eagle, Stillwater News Press and Hooker Review have bucked tradition and endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. The endorsements are half-hearted and seem to focus more on the awful choices we have for president, but they are endorsements, and considering the blood-red political leanings of most small town voters in Oklahoma, brave ones at that.
The Oklahoman also released its endorsement for president on Sunday. They followed the Tulsa World's lead and took the easy way out:
On Nov. 8, good of the country must come first
For many years, we have argued conservative policies generate the greatest good for the largest share of people with the least disruption. We have supported free trade, a functional immigration system, low taxes, light regulation, free speech, the sanctity of life, a strong military, and private-sector solutions over heavy-handed government intervention.
Yes, conservative policies are great! They generate the greatest good for the largest share of people! That's exactly why Oklahoma, the most conservative state in the country, is the envy of the nation, and has a such a large budget surplus, high-quality educational system and a thriving, growing, diversified economy. The next time you see your Oklahoman delivery driver tossing behind-schedule newspapers in your neighborhood at 9:00am, give him a "high-five" for helping make Oklahoma great again!
Here's some more...
Like many Americans with a similar worldview, we find this presidential election terribly disheartening. What choice can voters make that will fulfill our collective duty to protect the country? Our conclusion: Vote to preserve Republican control of Congress, regardless of which presidential candidate wins.
One nominee, Republican Donald Trump, is the wildest of wild cards. The other, Democrat Hillary Clinton, is a serially dishonest political lifer. In different ways, both would promote policies that harm this nation. Whether Trump or Clinton wins, conservative control of Congress is needed as a bulwark against their misguided policies.
Yet his flaws don't somehow make Clinton an acceptable alternative. She shares many of Trump's worst defects and pairs them with an agenda that will harm economic growth and leave the United States weaker in world affairs.
I agree with The Oklahoman on one thing. We do have a couple of terribly disheartening choices for president. That being said, are the Republicans running for congress in Oklahoma that much different than Trump? I know he's not up for reelection, but I'm pretty sure Jim Inhofe still represents Oklahoma in the US Senate. He and Trump both seem to have chemical imbalances in their brains that make them think, say and do some pretty stupid things, but The Oklahoman still endorses and praises Jim Inhofe. Why not Trump?
Trump has broken with conservatives on several issues, most notably trade. On other issues his current positions are more orthodox, although the caveat is that any Trump stance appears subject to change. And, he's prone to repeated crude and offensive behavior. He's a flawed candidate, to put it mildly.
Ohhh, trade. He says so much stupid shit that I sometimes forget Trump rallies against key elements of the GOP platform. I guess when the GOP establishment used religion, race-inspired fear and "values" to convert uneducated, working class, white Democratic voters to the Republican party (a.k.a. Southern Strategy), they forgot that some of those voters either A) have Democratic leanings when it comes to wealth inequality, the economy and trade, or B) are too stupid to care about policy, and therefore case their votes based upon hate-fueled emotions. It's like the GOP has lost control of the monster they helped create.
Speaking of that monster and the people who vote for him, The Oklahoman made sure Trump supporters wouldn't be too upset with the paper's non-endorsement endorsement. After one paragraph criticizing Trump in the nicest way possible, The Oklahoman turned the editorial into a classic Hillary Clinton hit piece that's been published in the paper about 500 times since the early 1990s.
Yet his flaws don't somehow make Clinton an acceptable alternative. She shares many of Trump's worst defects and pairs them with an agenda that will harm economic growth and leave the United States weaker in world affairs.
Clinton would combine the worst policy instincts of the Obama administration with constant ethical controversies. She wants to aggressively raise taxes, which will reduce private-sector employment and lower wages for virtually everyone.
On trade, Clinton is no better than Trump. Having once called the Trans-Pacific Partnership the “gold standard,” she now opposes that same trade agreement — a transparently political flip-flop.
On energy, Clinton calls climate change “the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face as a nation and a world.” To rank this above economic growth and national security demonstrates an appalling lack of seriousness. She supports regulations that would eliminate much oil and gas drilling. This should concern not only energy-producing states like Oklahoma, but all citizens because energy independence — the United States is well on its way — is a national security linchpin.
Clinton's tenure as secretary of state is notable for its lack of accomplishment. The Russian “reset” she championed is a miserable failure. The Middle East is in greater chaos than ever with repercussions that threaten U.S. security. Her handling of the Benghazi attack was abysmal.
As for temperament, Clinton's disparagement of fellow Americans is particularly revealing. Trump supporters are “deplorables” and even “irredeemable,” while Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' Democratic supporters are “children of the great recession living in their parents' basement.” Leaked emails detailing conversations between Clinton and staffers, and snippets of her behind-the-scenes speeches to various groups, expose Clinton's true feelings about issues.
Clinton's “extremely careless” — the FBI director's words — handling of classified information as secretary of state threatened national security and likely endangered lives. People who have done far less have spent time behind bars. (The decision by several top aides to plead the Fifth, despite immunity from prosecution, also is telling.) Donors to the Clinton Family Foundation received special treatment from then-Secretary Clinton, a flagrant conflict of interest that raises red flags about her judgment. And that ethics problem will persist since Clinton plans to maintain the foundation if she wins the White House.
That's hysterical. Trump, the most controversial and disliked presidential candidate in history, gets one vague paragraph that glosses over all the incredible things he's done to be a "flawed candidate," and Hillary Clinton, the second most controversial and disliked presidential candidate in history, gets seven paragraphs that review her mistakes, controversies and policies in amazing Fox News-inspired detail. What a fair and balanced non-endorsement, huh?
Many Americans, disappointed in both nominees, may be tempted to stay home on Election Day. Instead, they need to vote. Failure to weigh in on House and Senate races would be potentially disastrous.
In this distressing election year, voters need to put protecting the United States first, above all other concerns. Maintaining GOP control of Congress would go a long way toward doing that.
Our advice: By all means vote on Nov. 8, then pray for this country.
Yeah, pray for this country... because that's a practical solution to the issues, problems and presidential candidates we're facing.
Actually, I have a better idea. It's one that The Oklahoman is both too proud, too paranoid and too cowardly to endorse. Vote for anyone but Trump, a.k.a the monster they are too scared to endorse for President.
