GOP Mega-Donor: Republicans Must Support Trump
Las Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, one of the most prominent GOP donors of the last decade, wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post this week encouraging Republicans and donors to support Donald Trump. Adelson, who spent nearly $100 million supporting Republican presidential candidates in 2012, said it was time for conservatives to put aside whatever insignificant differences they have with the party’s presumptive nominee.
“The alternative to Trump being sworn in as the nation’s 45th president is frightening,” Adelson wrote. “If Republicans do not come together in support of Trump, Obama will essentially be granted something the Constitution does not allow — a third term in the name of Hillary Clinton.”
As exciting as it has been to watch the unprecedented rise of Trump over the last year, it’s even more exciting to see the impotent NeverTrump movement wither away. Adelson was never a part of that movement, but he could have easily joined the list of prominent Republican donors who are choosing to sit on the sidelines this year. Instead, Adelson – like most of the GOP’s congressional leadership – is beginning to understand that attacking the party’s nominee no longer makes any sense.
“You may not like Trump’s style or what he says on Twitter, but this country needs strong executive leadership more today than at almost any point in its history,” wrote Adelson. “The world is less secure than ever, and our allies have lost confidence in our ability to lead. The economy is not growing the way it should. The middle class is finding it harder and harder to get by.”
To those still threatening to stay home in November, Adelson warns: “The stakes are too high for an outcome that will have a damaging impact on our country.”
It’s hard to believe that the same Republicans who have spent the last eight years (ineffectively) fighting Obama would suddenly throw away a golden opportunity to take back the White House, but that’s exactly what’s happening in some circles. Those circles appear to be diminishing, but they aren’t quite gone. And one of their biggest arguments (Trump can’t win) is no longer relevant. Any other criticisms – valid or not – have to be put in the proper perspective. Namely: How would President Hillary Clinton be preferable?
The Republican Party has been forced, by the voters, to nominate a man they never wanted in the club. It may be a bitter pill for the establishment to swallow, but swallow it they must. The only other pill on the menu is cyanide.