The Financial Times published an editorial on Monday supporting one candidate, despite acknowledging that candidate’s flaws. The same editorial board that published an endorsement of President Barack Obama in both 2008 and 2012 just endorsed his Democratic successor, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
The Financial Times also published a sharply worded admonishment of her opponent, Republican nominee Donald Trump, citing his close support of Russian President Vladimir Putin, his divisive rhetoric, and his thin-skinned temperament. The Financial Times also called Donald Trump flat-out “mean.”
Citing a number of shaky international institutions, such as the European Union and the Brexit vote, the instability of the Middle East, and the recent aggression of Russia into Syria and Ukraine, The Financial Times wrote in their endorsement of the Democrat:
‘This is a moment for the renewal of American leadership. One candidate has the credentials. Mrs. Clinton has served as first lady, senator for New York and US secretary of state…
‘Mr. Trump casts himself in the role of a western strongman to stand alongside the likes of Mr. Putin.’
They also cited Trump’s recent threat to question the result of the election amidst accusations that it is being rigged against him.
‘Mr. Trump has demonstrated contempt towards American democracy itself.’
Although they referred to Sec. Clinton as “flawed,” the 128-year-old business and finance periodical wrote most critically of her rival, amateur politician, Donald Trump.
‘Mr. Trump has a thin skin and a questionable temperament. For all his many years as a reality TV host, he is simply not ready for prime time.’
Clinton’s flaws, as acknowledged by the paper, include the lack of inspiration of her campaign. The paper also states that the Trump campaign (as well as that of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders) struck a nerve with American voters that reflects growing cynicism regarding U.S. politics.
If elected, Hillary Clinton must work out how to heal the divisiveness which has characterised the 2016 election https://t.co/4zemLLl6E3
— Financial Times (@FT) October 31, 2016
The Financial Times also blamed the media for the rise of Donald Trump, whom they deem completely unsuitable for office:
‘Populism has staged a revival, supported by a media which have become more polarized than ever. In the search for higher ratings, too many have been happy to strike a Faustian bargain with Mr. Trump.’
The editors had some sound advice for a possible Madame President couched within the endorsement: to rethink the TPP, to heal the divisiveness, to deal with the immigration issue, and revitalize the American infrastructure. They also note the importance of this election in 2016: aside from the possible first female president of the U.S., the U.S. political system has been in question with the rise of populist and unqualified candidates.
‘The 2016 election, more than any in recent memory, is a test for the legitimacy of the US political system, with profound implications for the liberal world order.’
However, The Financial Times makes its opinion quite clear, finishing their endorsement of Clinton by stating:
‘She is manifestly more competent than Mr. Trump whose braggadocio, divisiveness and meanness are on daily display. Despite her faults, Mrs. Clinton is eminently qualified to be the first woman elected to the White House.’
Featured image via Getty Images