Newspaper endorsement of Trump is really more of a rejection of Clinton

The Sheldon Adelson Review-Journal heralded on its front page today the paper’s editorial endorsement of Donald Trump, the first “major” newspaper in the country to do so, though it was less of an endorsement and more of a slam against Hillary Clinton.

The editorial went on at length about Clinton’s weaknesses and dishonesty and money grabbing and uberliberal stances.

“She’ll cuddle up to the ways and perks of Washington like she would to a cozy old blanket,” the editorial advises, going on and on about how her Supreme Court nominees would gut five of the 10 Bill of Rights.

While endorsing Trump, the paper felt compelled to spell out his many failings.

“Yes, Mr. Trump’s impulsiveness and overheated rhetoric alienate many voters. He has trouble dealing with critics and would be wise to discover the power of humility,” the editorial concedes.

It concludes:

But neither candidate will ever be called to the dais to accept an award for moral probity and character. …

Mr. Trump represents neither the danger his critics claim nor the magic elixir many of his supporters crave. But he promises to be a source of disruption and discomfort to the privileged, back-scratching political elites for whom the nation’s strength and solvency have become subservient to power’s pursuit and preservation.

Donald Trump for president.

A rather luke warm endorsement. It could have used one more line at the end: “Whatever.”

On the same page the paper has a column by Charles Krauthammer that concludes thusly:

I didn’t need the Wiki files to oppose Hillary Clinton. As a conservative, I have long disagreed with her worldview and the policies that flow from it. As for character, I have watched her long enough to find her deeply flawed, to the point of unfitness. But for those heretofore unpersuaded, the recent disclosures should close the case.

A case so strong that, against any of a dozen possible GOP candidates, voting for her opponent would be a no-brainer. Against Donald Trump, however, it’s a dilemma. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton. But, as I’ve explained in these columns, I could never vote for Donald Trump.

The content up to the ending is not too dissimilar. Krauthammer is more convincing than SARJ, pronounced sarge, when he calls Trump a dangerous narcissist who “lives in a cocoon of solipsism where the world outside himself has value — indeed exists — only insofar as it sustains and inflates him.”