To the surprise of no one, The Washington Post editorial board came out swinging against real estate mogul Donald Trump the morning after he formally accepted the Republican nomination, declaring him to be a "unique threat to American democracy."
The Post blasted Trump as "uniquely unqualified" for the office of the presidency due to his lack of experience and running a "campaign of snarl and sneer, not substance."
"The lack of experience might be overcome if Mr. Trump saw it as a handicap worth overcoming," the editors write. "But he displays no curiosity, reads no books and appears to believe he needs no advice. In fact, what makes Mr. Trump so unusual is his combination of extreme neediness and unbridled arrogance. He is desperate for affirmation but contemptuous of other views."
The editorial board provides a laundry list of Trump's numerous flip-flops on policy and lies he has spread throughout his candidacy, including his claim that he was always opposed to the Iraq War (he wasn't) and how he has turned into a "hardline opponent" of abortion, amnesty and gun control despite previous support for these policies for years.
Instead of offering substance, Trump offers nothing but "prejudices and gut feelings, most of them erroneous":
Allies are taking advantage of the United States. Immigrants are committing crimes and stealing jobs. Muslims hate America. In fact, Japan and South Korea are major contributors to an alliance that has preserved a peace of enormous benefit to Americans. Immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans and take jobs that no one else will. Muslims are the primary victims of Islamist terrorism, and Muslim Americans, including thousands who have served in the military, are as patriotic as anyone else.
The Post expresses horror at Trump's isolationist foreign policy, citing his desire to disband NATO and being friendly to anti-American dictators. The most scary aspect of him, the board writes, is his "contempt for the Constitution," which seems likely to lead to abuses of executive authority.
"He doesn’t seem to care about its limitations on executive power," the editorial states. "He has threatened that those who criticize him will suffer when he is president. He has vowed to torture suspected terrorists and bomb their innocent relatives, no matter the illegality of either act. He has vowed to constrict the independent press. He went after a judge whose rulings angered him, exacerbating his contempt for the independence of the judiciary by insisting that the judge should be disqualified because of his Mexican heritage. Mr. Trump has encouraged and celebrated violence at his rallies."
The editors then point to Trump's penchant for conspiracy theories before concluding their editorial by underscoring the dangers of a Trump presidency.
"We have criticized the presumptive Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, in the past and will do so again when warranted," the editors write. "But we do not believe that she (or the Libertarian and Green party candidates, for that matter) represents a threat to the Constitution. Mr. Trump is a unique and present danger."
The editorial does bring up a lot of valid criticisms, but the problem is that it's hard to take the Post seriously on their concern over Trump's indifference to the Constitution and weak foreign policy given that they endorsed President Barack Obama for re-election four years ago, and like Trump, Obama also looks at the Constitution with disdain and sides with anti-American dictators. Obama and Trump are cut from the same authoritarian cloth, but the Post seems to have no problem with Obama's authoritarianism simply because he's a Democrat.