Join the Conversation
Send your thoughts to Letters to the Editor. Learn more
Some important Republicans are beginning to line up around the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. Conservative commentator George Will has officially left the Republican Party because of the campaign of Donald Trump. National Security Advisor under George H. W. Bush, Brent Scowcroft is an example of a Republican coming out in support of Hillary Clinton.
Two editorials by prominent Republicans provide some detail about what is driving these long-standing Republican operatives. The first editorial is by Hank Paulson who was secretary of the Treasury during the 2008 financial meltdown under President George W. Bush.
Paulson calls Trump a phony who distorts the facts to support his positions. He sees him as skillful, primarily in taking care of himself at the expense of his partners and stakeholders. He denies he has debt and exaggerates his wealth. His strengths are in the area of marketing and self-promotion, which lack relevance in leading this country.
Paulson feels what is needed in our country today is bipartisan leadership and basic civility. He sees little in Trump to suggest he is capable of either. Trump policies, he declares, would "destroy, not save, U.S. jobs."
Paulson concludes his column by saying, "I'll be voting for Hillary Clinton with the hope she can bring Americans together to do the things necessary to strengthen out economy our environment and our place in the world."
The second editorial comes from Mark Salter, who was John McCain's former chief of staff and a senior advisor to the McCain campaign for president. He uses pretty strong language to explain his position on the Trump candidacy. He calls Trump an ignoramus, saying he lacks basic knowledge and has no faith in his own advisors. He calls him a charlatan who cheats investors -- and his own customers.
Salter goes on to say Trump "possesses the emotional maturity of a 6-year-old." He views the presidency as a vehicle to punish those he dislikes for whatever reason. Salter opines that Trump "doesn't appeal to a single honorable quality or instinct in our society."
Salter also sees Trump as a fearmonger who would likely endanger the security of the United States. He notes that Trump has called for the "killing of families of jihadists, stealing resources from other nations, torturing prisoners, and ending long standing alliances. ..."
Salter concludes by stating that "whatever Hilary Clinton's faults, she's not ignorant, or hateful, or a nut. She acts like an adult, and understands the responsibilities of an American president. That might not be a ringing endorsement, but in 2016, the year of Trump's campaign, it's more than enough."
Finally let me suggest a reading of an op-ed piece in the Baltimore Sun. Clifton Yin was a delegate to the 2008 Republican National Convention and continues to regret voting for Sarah Palin to be their vice presidential candidate. He is encouraging delegates to the upcoming convention not to vote for Donald Trump for a variety of reasons that suggest Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States.
Some will say that the Republican I cite are precisely the elites the rank-and-file Republicans are hostile to, and the reason they have chosen Donald Trump as their standard bearer. I understand there is a yearning for something different, but does this difference many are looking for need to involve ignorance, self-promotion, instability, bigotry, and other unseemly presidential qualities?