By Jack Kim:
North Korea has backed presumptive U.S. Republican nominee Donald Trump, with a propaganda website praising him as "a prescient presidential candidate" who can liberate Americans living under daily fear of nuclear attack by the North.
A column carried on Tuesday by DPRK Today, one of the reclusive and dynastic state's mouthpieces, described Trump as a "wise politician" and the right choice for U.S. voters in the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election.
* * *
DPRK Today also said Trump's suggestion that the United States should pull its troops from South Korea until Seoul pays more was the way to achieve Korean unification.
"It turns out that Trump is not the rough-talking, screwy, ignorant candidate they say he is, but is actually a wise politician and a prescient presidential candidate," said the column, written by a China-based Korean scholar identified as Han Yong Muk.
The Full Story (June 2, 2016)
Showing posts with label endorsement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label endorsement. Show all posts
Sunday, November 6, 2016
Friday, November 4, 2016
Washington Post: Libertarian Party VP Nominee Bill Weld Basically Just Endorsed Hillary Clinton
By Aaron Blake:
MADDOW: I posited just a moment ago before the commercial break that what you and Gary Johnson are really aiming at this year is that 5 percent threshold, to try to get some federal matching funds, to try to get some ballot access, and all those other things. Basically so the Libertarians might be viable in the future. Is that fair?
WELD: I think you can — I think in the real world that’s probably correct. That would give federal matching funds. It would mean no more ballot access woes. You know we thought for the longest time we might have a chance to run the table because we’re such nice guys and centrist party, etcetera, but not getting into the debates really sort of foreclosed that option. So now it’s really the 5 percent, you’re right.
MADDOW: And when you—in the real world when you think about pursing that 5 percent option, for people who are in states where it’s really close, for people who are in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, these states where the presidential race really might be decided among the two candidates who actually have a shot at it. Do you think that people in those states should vote for you?
WELD: Well, we are making our case that we’re fiscally responsible and socially inclusive and welcoming. And we think we’ve got on the merits the best ticket of the three parties, if you will, and so, you know, we’d like to get there. Having said that, as I think you’re aware, I see a big difference between the Republican candidate and the Democratic candidate. And I’ve been at some pains to say that I fear for the country if Mr. Trump should be elected. I think it’s a candidacy without any parallel that I can recall. It’s content-free and very much given to stirring up ambient resentment and even hatred. And I think it would be a threat to the conduct of our foreign policy and our position in the world at large.
MADDOW: When you say fear for the country do you mean — is that hyperbole or do you mean it literally? Do you think it would actually be a threat to us as a country if elected?
WELD: Well I think it would be a threat to our polity as Tom Brokaw has been saying over the past couple of days. You know we’re getting to the point where we’re impinging on democratic institutions in this country and I think, you know, it takes a certain-- not a suspension of disbelief -- but willingness to go along with other people to get the ship estate going forward. I’m not sure that happens in a Trump presidency, frankly.
The Full Story (November 2, 2016)
MADDOW: I posited just a moment ago before the commercial break that what you and Gary Johnson are really aiming at this year is that 5 percent threshold, to try to get some federal matching funds, to try to get some ballot access, and all those other things. Basically so the Libertarians might be viable in the future. Is that fair?
WELD: I think you can — I think in the real world that’s probably correct. That would give federal matching funds. It would mean no more ballot access woes. You know we thought for the longest time we might have a chance to run the table because we’re such nice guys and centrist party, etcetera, but not getting into the debates really sort of foreclosed that option. So now it’s really the 5 percent, you’re right.
MADDOW: And when you—in the real world when you think about pursing that 5 percent option, for people who are in states where it’s really close, for people who are in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, these states where the presidential race really might be decided among the two candidates who actually have a shot at it. Do you think that people in those states should vote for you?
WELD: Well, we are making our case that we’re fiscally responsible and socially inclusive and welcoming. And we think we’ve got on the merits the best ticket of the three parties, if you will, and so, you know, we’d like to get there. Having said that, as I think you’re aware, I see a big difference between the Republican candidate and the Democratic candidate. And I’ve been at some pains to say that I fear for the country if Mr. Trump should be elected. I think it’s a candidacy without any parallel that I can recall. It’s content-free and very much given to stirring up ambient resentment and even hatred. And I think it would be a threat to the conduct of our foreign policy and our position in the world at large.
MADDOW: When you say fear for the country do you mean — is that hyperbole or do you mean it literally? Do you think it would actually be a threat to us as a country if elected?
WELD: Well I think it would be a threat to our polity as Tom Brokaw has been saying over the past couple of days. You know we’re getting to the point where we’re impinging on democratic institutions in this country and I think, you know, it takes a certain-- not a suspension of disbelief -- but willingness to go along with other people to get the ship estate going forward. I’m not sure that happens in a Trump presidency, frankly.
The Full Story (November 2, 2016)
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Huffington Post: This Former Presidential Candidate Says He Doesn’t Trust Donald Trump With His Life
By Sam Stein:
Bill Bradley, the soft-spoken former New Jersey senator, presidential candidate and New York Knicks basketball great, has come off the political sideline in recent days to warn the country about the threat he believes Trump poses.
* * *
Bradley isn’t mincing words, or messages. The prospect of a President Trump having access to the nuclear codes troubles him in profound ways, he said.
“If Mitt Romney had won, If John McCain had won, I’d feel quite comfortable. I’d trust my life to them. They’re solid citizens,” Bradley said in an interview, referencing the GOP nominees in the two most recent elections. “This guy is in a class of his own.”
Asked point blank if he’d trust Trump with his life, Bradley replied: “I certainly do not”
Bradley is not known for rhetorical flourishes. Nor is he hyper-partisan. Since his 2000 presidential campaign, he’s been an infrequent presence in presidential politics. But he said he was compelled to explore and launch a super PAC a few months ago as he watched the 2016 campaign, which he said had made him “sick in my stomach, quite frankly.”
The Full Story (October 26, 2016)
Bill Bradley, the soft-spoken former New Jersey senator, presidential candidate and New York Knicks basketball great, has come off the political sideline in recent days to warn the country about the threat he believes Trump poses.
* * *
Bradley isn’t mincing words, or messages. The prospect of a President Trump having access to the nuclear codes troubles him in profound ways, he said.
“If Mitt Romney had won, If John McCain had won, I’d feel quite comfortable. I’d trust my life to them. They’re solid citizens,” Bradley said in an interview, referencing the GOP nominees in the two most recent elections. “This guy is in a class of his own.”
Asked point blank if he’d trust Trump with his life, Bradley replied: “I certainly do not”
Bradley is not known for rhetorical flourishes. Nor is he hyper-partisan. Since his 2000 presidential campaign, he’s been an infrequent presence in presidential politics. But he said he was compelled to explore and launch a super PAC a few months ago as he watched the 2016 campaign, which he said had made him “sick in my stomach, quite frankly.”
The Full Story (October 26, 2016)
Thursday, October 20, 2016
Think Progress: Group of Nearly 80 Evangelical Leaders Publish Letter Condemning Trump
A diverse group of evangelical Christians unveiled a letter on Thursday condemning Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his candidacy, arguing his campaign “affirms racist elements in white culture.”
The letter, which was signed more nearly 80 prominent evangelical leaders, thinkers, authors, and pastors, decries Trump’s attacks on women, Muslims, immigrants, refugees, the disabled, saying such vitriol is an affront to the Christian faith. It also highlights how his campaign has energized white nationalists, such as when he was endorsed by prominent leaders of the Ku Klux Klan.
“We cannot ignore this bigotry, set it aside, just focus on other issues, or forget the things Mr. Trump has consistently said and done,” the letter reads. “No matter what other issues we also care about, we have to make it publicly clear that Mr. Trump’s racial and religious bigotry and treatment of women is morally unacceptable to us as evangelical Christians, as we attempt to model Jesus’ command to ‘love your neighbors as yourself.’”
The Full Story (October 6, 2016)
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Bloomberg: Clinton's Former Prosecutor Endorses Her for President
By Eli Lake:
Twenty years ago, Michael Chertoff was near the top of the Clintons’ enemy list. He was the lead Republican counsel on the Senate Whitewater Committee, one of the first of many congressional investigations into Hillary Clinton.
Clinton later cast the only vote in the Senate against him when he was nominated in 2001 to head the Justice Department’s criminal division. She was also the lone no vote against Chertoff in 2003, when he was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the third circuit.
All of this, though, was before the Republican Party nominated Donald Trump as its presidential candidate. This has shaken the party of Reagan. Chertoff, a lifelong Republican, will now be voting for the Democrat in November.
Over the weekend, Chertoff -- the former secretary of Homeland Security -- told me his decision came down to national security. “I realized we spent a huge amount of time in the ’90s on issues that were much less important than what was brewing in terms of terrorism,” he said. For Chertoff, Clinton “has good judgment and a strategic vision how to deal with the threats that face us.”
The Full Story (October 3, 2016)
Twenty years ago, Michael Chertoff was near the top of the Clintons’ enemy list. He was the lead Republican counsel on the Senate Whitewater Committee, one of the first of many congressional investigations into Hillary Clinton.
Clinton later cast the only vote in the Senate against him when he was nominated in 2001 to head the Justice Department’s criminal division. She was also the lone no vote against Chertoff in 2003, when he was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the third circuit.
All of this, though, was before the Republican Party nominated Donald Trump as its presidential candidate. This has shaken the party of Reagan. Chertoff, a lifelong Republican, will now be voting for the Democrat in November.
Over the weekend, Chertoff -- the former secretary of Homeland Security -- told me his decision came down to national security. “I realized we spent a huge amount of time in the ’90s on issues that were much less important than what was brewing in terms of terrorism,” he said. For Chertoff, Clinton “has good judgment and a strategic vision how to deal with the threats that face us.”
The Full Story (October 3, 2016)
Monday, October 17, 2016
Politico: Bush National Security Adviser Endorses Clinton
By Rebecca Morin:
"We now have a person at the top of the Republican ticket who I believe is dangerous, doesn't understand the complex world we live in, doesn't care to, and is without any moral or international philosophy," Gregg said in a statement.
"I’ve met Hillary Clinton a number of times and followed her career in public service. I'm impressed with her knowledge and experience. She would make an extremely good president."
[Donald P.] Gregg, 88, served as [George H.W.] Bush's national security adviser for six years and was part of the Reagan administration for eight years. He was ambassador to South Korea from 1989 to 1993.
Bush is also voting for Clinton, according to Kathleen Hartington Kennedy Townsend, the former Maryland lieutenant governor and daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy.
Bush's national security adviser during his presidency, Brent Scowcroft, endorsed the former secretary of state as well, as have a number of other national security figures from both Bush administrations.
"We now have a person at the top of the Republican ticket who I believe is dangerous, doesn't understand the complex world we live in, doesn't care to, and is without any moral or international philosophy," Gregg said in a statement.
"I’ve met Hillary Clinton a number of times and followed her career in public service. I'm impressed with her knowledge and experience. She would make an extremely good president."
[Donald P.] Gregg, 88, served as [George H.W.] Bush's national security adviser for six years and was part of the Reagan administration for eight years. He was ambassador to South Korea from 1989 to 1993.
Bush is also voting for Clinton, according to Kathleen Hartington Kennedy Townsend, the former Maryland lieutenant governor and daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy.
Bush's national security adviser during his presidency, Brent Scowcroft, endorsed the former secretary of state as well, as have a number of other national security figures from both Bush administrations.
Thursday, October 13, 2016
Washington Post: 75 Retired Senior Diplomats Sign Letter Opposing Trump for President
A group of 75 retired career Foreign Service officers, including ambassadors and senior State Department officials under Republican and Democratic presidents over nearly a half-century, has signed an open letter calling Donald Trump “entirely unqualified to serve as President and Commander-in-Chief.”
The diplomats said “none of us” will vote for Trump. While they said not all of them agreed with every decision made by Hillary Clinton, they said they all supported her candidacy.
“Because the stakes in this election are so high,” the letter said, “this is the first time many of us have publicly endorsed a candidate for President.”
The letter is the latest in an unprecedented number of joint public statements signed by retired high-level government officials and military officers this election cycle. Most have focused on national security, and most have been against Trump.
The most prominent exception was a letter early this month signed by 88 retired generals and other military officials who endorsed Trump as a “long overdue course correction in our national security posture.”
Last spring, more than 100 Republican national security experts signed a petition, even before Trump won the GOP nomination, saying they would never work for a Trump administration. Last month, 50 more Republicans, including former top aides and Cabinet members for the George W. Bush administration, signed a letter saying Trump would be “the most reckless president in American history” and that none of them would vote for him.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Washington Post: GOP Senator Susan Collins - Why I Cannot Support Trump
I am also deeply concerned that Mr. Trump’s lack of self-restraint and his barrage of ill-informed comments would make an already perilous world even more so. It is reckless for a presidential candidate to publicly raise doubts about honoring treaty commitments with our allies. Mr. Trump’s tendency to lash out when challenged further escalates the possibility of disputes spinning dangerously out of control.
I had hoped that we would see a “new” Donald Trump as a general-election candidate — one who would focus on jobs and the economy, tone down his rhetoric, develop more thoughtful policies and, yes, apologize for ill-tempered rants. But the unpleasant reality that I have had to accept is that there will be no “new” Donald Trump, just the same candidate who will slash and burn and trample anything and anyone he perceives as being in his way or an easy scapegoat. Regrettably, his essential character appears to be fixed, and he seems incapable of change or growth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)