The choice is not hard. The campaign has provided daily evidence that Mr Trump would be a terrible president. He has exploited America’s simmering racial tensions (see article). His experience, temperament and character make him horribly unsuited to being the head of state.[snip]
This presidential election matters more than most because of the sheer recklessness [electing Trump] of that scheme. It draws upon the belief that the complexity of Washington is smoke and mirrors designed to bamboozle the ordinary citizen; and that the more you know, the less you can be trusted. To hope that any good can come from Mr Trump’s wrecking job reflects a narcissistic belief that compromise in politics is a dirty word and a foolhardy confidence that, after a spell of chaos and demolition, you can magically unite the nation and fix what is wrong.
Though I didn't vote for him, the discomfiture of the elites about the election results has been a wholly unexpected pleasure.
In its post-mortem the Economist displays a glimmer of self-awareness:
ordinary Americans...repudiate the media—including this newspaper—for being patronising, partisan and as out of touch and elitist as the politicians....The election of Mr Trump is a rebuff to all liberals, including this newspaper.However, they still expect Donald Trump to fail:
We are deeply sceptical that he will make a good president—because of his policies, his temperament and the demands of political office.Baby steps. Baby steps.