The article itself is actually very generous to Clinton, as it primarily questions Trump's policies, features a ridiculing picture of him, and praises Clinton's policy documents (focusing, actually, on the number of pages rather than their clarity, consistency or purposes). They also snub Trump for questioning whether the hacks of the DNC were supported by the government of Russia.

In doing so this article falls prey to much of what plagues the media during the election cycle. Broadly aligned against particular candidates and willing to take widely biased and selective approaches toward writing and editing about them, they fail to say much of anything substantive at all.

For instance this article can't come up with what a good policy might look like, any particular appraisal of either candidate's policies (it merely cites pages and makes an issue of known Clinton's backdoor policies).

The article mentions that both candidates consider Snowden a traitor, with Trump explicitly using the word and Clinton calling for Snowden to be extradited to the United States under investigation for violating the Espionage Act.

Reading between the lines the article emphasizes that Silicon Valley doesn't understand or trust the policies from either candidate, but appears to have a stronger majority support for Clinton due to issues not related to either campaign promises or policy directions.

EDIT: People below in the thread take issue with the term "libelous" so I replaced it with "ridiculing".