Deidre in GA Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 As far as i could google, the LA Times has not endorsed any presidential candidate since Richard Nixon and, like the Chicago Tribune, has never endorsed a Democrat. Barack Obama for president It is inherent in the American character to aspire to greatness, so it can be disorienting when the nation stumbles or loses confidence in bedrock principles or institutions. That's where the United States is as it prepares to select a new president: We have seen the government take a stake in venerable private financial houses; we have witnessed eight years of executive branch power grabs and erosion of civil liberties; we are still recovering from a murderous attack by terrorists on our own soil and still struggling with how best to prevent a recurrence. We need a leader who demonstrates thoughtful calm and grace under pressure, one not prone to volatile gesture or capricious pronouncement. We need a leader well-grounded in the intellectual and legal foundations of American freedom. Yet we ask that the same person also possess the spark and passion to inspire the best within us: creativity, generosity and a fierce defense of justice and liberty. The Times without hesitation endorses Barack Obama for president. Full text here. btw, i post these articles as i stumble across them because there are undecided voters on this forum who may benefit from reading well reasoned and written articles about the choice at hand whether or not they ultimately agree with that choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Yes, Obama's definitely winning the endorsement race, if that means anything to anyone. He won our paper's endorsement yesterday (The Washington Post), though that came as no surprise around here. But I think that the two endorsements that you've posted here, The Trib and the LA Times, are the most surprising and impressive yet. Thanks for keeping us abreast of developments, Deidre! :001_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelda Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Wow. Now I'm changing my vote! The MSM supports Obama...who knew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Wow. Now I'm changing my vote! The MSM supports Obama...who knew? No need to be snippy, Miss Z--McCain has his endorsements, too. I'm sure. Somewhere. Doesn't he? :001_huh: :D (Kidding.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelda Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 No need to be snippy, Miss Z--McCain has his endorsements, too. I'm sure. Somewhere. Doesn't he? :001_huh: :D (Kidding.) Apparently not! I've just read that Drudge endorsed Obama! :w00t: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deidre in GA Posted October 18, 2008 Author Share Posted October 18, 2008 No need to be snippy, Miss Z--McCain has his endorsements, too. I'm sure. Somewhere. Doesn't he? :001_huh: :D (Kidding.) i saw somewhere that Obama has 51 endorsements; McCain has 16. that 16 includes the New York Post. i'm a former New Yorker. A NY Post endorsement is nothing to be particularly proud of... oh, btw, what's "MSM"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelda Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 i saw somewhere that Obama has 51 endorsements; McCain has 16. that 16 includes the New York Post. i'm a former New Yorker. A NY Post endorsement is nothing to be particularly proud of... oh, btw, what's "MSM"? Sounds like a great thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soph the vet Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 i saw somewhere that Obama has 51 endorsements; McCain has 16. that 16 includes the New York Post. i'm a former New Yorker. A NY Post endorsement is nothing to be particularly proud of... oh, btw, what's "MSM"? Hey, I used to be proud of the fact I read the New York Post!:D MSM is either methylsulfamethionine or mainstreammedia....take your pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelda Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 MSM is either methylsulfamethionine or mainstreammedia....take your pick. Oooh...I pick that first one! Sounds delicious! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Apparently not! I've just read that Drudge endorsed Obama! :w00t: Soph got me with that one, too, the stinker. :glare: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erica in PA Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 I find it interesting is that so many of these endorsements are based almost solely on Obama's personality traits, rather than on any experience or accomplishments. I agree that he's a thoughtful, calm, intelligent person, but I disagree that that is enough to qualify a person to be President of the United States. Erica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melinda in VT Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 I find it interesting is that so many of these endorsements are based almost solely on Obama's personality traits, rather than on any experience or accomplishments. I agree that he's a thoughtful, calm, intelligent person, but I disagree that that is enough to qualify a person to be President of the United States. Erica Really trying to tread gently here . . . I am voting for Obama in November, but I, too, wish he had more experience. (After going back and forth by the minute, I voted for Hillary in the primary due in large part to the experience issue.) However. If my choice is between a thoughtful, calm, intelligent person who is inexperienced and an intelligent, experienced person who is not thoughtful or calm, I will go with thoughtful and calm. Experience can be gained more easily than someone's temperament can be changed. (I realize that views on the thoughtfulness and calmness of a candidate can and do vary from person to person. This is just my opinion. <insert other disclaimers here>) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelda Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 Really trying to tread gently here . . . I am voting for Obama in November, but I, too, wish he had more experience. (After going back and forth by the minute, I voted for Hillary in the primary due in large part to the experience issue.) However. If my choice is between a thoughtful, calm, intelligent person who is inexperienced and an intelligent, experienced person who is not thoughtful or calm, I will go with thoughtful and calm. Experience can be gained more easily than someone's temperament can be changed. (I realize that views on the thoughtfulness and calmness of a candidate can and do vary from person to person. This is just my opinion. <insert other disclaimers here>) I appreciate your position, but as a person who has been accused of being fiery I'd hate to see that personality type eliminated from consideration in high ranking positions. Some of the finest and most effective leaders have had some sauciness as part of their make-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erica in PA Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 I understand what you're saying. And I appreciate that though you prefer Obama to McCain because of temperament, you are acknowledging Obama's lack of experience as well. To me, that is recognizing that neither candidate is perfect, and we need to choose which we think will be better. For me, I also would rather have a candidate who is both, but.. when faced with someone who has a personality that I prefer, versus someone with a proven decades-long record of serving our country, I think it's a much safer course to go with the one with the proven record. It honestly makes me nervous reading these endorsements, because it highlights all the more to me how very little Obama has ever accomplished for our country-- when even those who strongly support him and are publically endorsing him, don't have anything in his past to point to, to suggest that he will be a good president. Erica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deidre in GA Posted October 19, 2008 Author Share Posted October 19, 2008 Really trying to tread gently here . . . I am voting for Obama in November, but I, too, wish he had more experience. (After going back and forth by the minute, I voted for Hillary in the primary due in large part to the experience issue.) However. If my choice is between a thoughtful, calm, intelligent person who is inexperienced and an intelligent, experienced person who is not thoughtful or calm, I will go with thoughtful and calm. Experience can be gained more easily than someone's temperament can be changed. i also supported Hillary in the primaries and still believe she was the candidate with more experience. i made my peace with Obama's nomination weeks ago when i chose to support the platform of the Democratic Party which means voting for Obama. I want to see the policies put forth by my party put into action; experience or no, i do not want the policies of the Republican party continued. in his desperate desire to be president, McCain is a very changed man as many of the endorsements for Obama have noted. it's sad, actually. reaching for his fading dream does have him thrashing about erractically and making poor decisions. this is not a person i want leading this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovemyboys Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 I appreciate your position, but as a person who has been accused of being fiery I'd hate to see that personality type eliminated from consideration in high ranking positions. Some of the finest and most effective leaders have had some sauciness as part of their make-up. Zelda, we like your sauciness! I think I'll take a passionate person who works well with folks in both parties and has a lot of experience, especially experience under pressure. On-the-job-training in the White House, with a serious learning curve, doesn't make me very comfortable. And I like the idea of a president who hasn't been getting lots of "pork" to be in charge in this economic climate, particularly if the Congress has both houses with Democratic majorities. One person, one vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts