Kerry "continuing raid" on former Bush supporting papers.

[gcomeau]

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000683265

"Senator John Kerry continued his raid on newspapers that backed President George W. Bush in 2000, grabbing six new "flip-flops," as well as The Washington Post. However, Bush got a real prize in Ohio, the Columbus Dispatch."

...

"This means he has picked up 17 Bush papers from 2000, while losing only two Gore papers to Bush."

The Dispatch was a long shot traditional Republican endorser anyway, and they were REALLY half-hearted in their endorsement of the shrub... so screw 'em. I'll go to sleep happy tonight...

-Grant

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

1. I haven't READ a bush endorsement

that was enthusiastic.

The Dallas Morning News endorsed him by listing everything he's done wrong and then MAKING EXCUSES for ALL OF IT.

The Ft. Worth Star-Telegram got even kookier and out of touch with reality: they listed all of his failures, then said they are endorsing the bush THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE GETTING IN 2000!!!!

OMG! The Star-Telegram wants to go into a TIME WARP to endorse the guy!!!!!

And from people I know VERY inside that paper, the editorial board wanted SO badly to go with Kerry. Know why they didn't? Afraid of losing advertising support. Yep. Bling-bling. Pathetic.

Can someone point out a bush newspaper endorsement that isn't half-hearted, sad and pathetic?

[Skittles]

3. dear GOD, that FTW endorsement

all the Bush endorsements are extreme examples of struggling whoredom but FTW went beyond the pale.

[Doohickie]

30. As dumb as it sounded

I'm betting the FW Star-Telegram (my hometown newspaper) editors were instructed by the senior editorial staff to endorse Bush, but the supporting editors just couldn't bring themselves to do it. So they dressed up a Kerry endorsement as if it were one for Bush. I suspect those who wrote the article justified it to the big-wigs by saying rejuvinating the W of yore would be the best way to appeal to people.... while trying to hold back the snickers.

[faithnotgreed]

5. uh. hello columbus dispatch, fw s-t, you could just not endorse either

if youre going to write copy that doesnt even make sense. that example you cited from the star-telegram sounds just as bad as the pitiful endorsement by the dispatch. did you read that gem? it went something like this: uh, bush hasnt made any decisions that have been good for the country, but he should...

arent newspapers supposed to make sense?

is there a jon stewart of the newspaper world or does he have to monitor all you people?

[Kurovski]

17. That would be The Onion

They just haven't been on 60 minutes yet.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. The Bush endorsements are really lame.

The Kerry endorsements describe Bush's presidency as pretty much a horrible disaster. The papers who endorse Bush seem to be grasping desperately for excuses to do so, and their reasoning is pathetic. They are like, "Well, we thought he'd do better, so we'd like him to be re-elected so he has a chance to do what we said he'd do four years ago." What is wrong with these freaks?

[muchacho]

20. yep

and I still wrote them a letter telling them they're crazy.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

23. Denver Post endorsement...endorsing him yet stating he needs to be

more moderate in his second term...As If! Unencumbered by needing to justify his reelection, he will be even more of Neocon, RW nut job!
Sounds like there are a lot of caveats attached to these endorsements. MKJ

[indigobusiness]

28. Actually, that's pretty funny.

How could anyone take that as a serious endorsement?

Sounds tongue-in-cheek.

Cheeky monkeys.

[chicagojoe]

2. bushboy only got ONE Chicago paper. Dead meat.

[RafterMan]

4. From 43% of the endorsements in 2000

to 54% in 2004.

Surely that reflects *something* in the electorate. How far off was the predicted spread in the polls in 2000?

[faithnotgreed]

6. reading that editorial, i wouldnt exactly call the dispatch a "real prize"

for bush. it was just sad.

[shelley806]

8. I'll sleep happier tonight too!

Thank you for the post. I'd read about the Dispatch, and heard that the Cleveland Plain Dealer endorsement by 5 to 2 in favor of Kerry was overridden by the publisher. Several of us sent e-mails in protest. Your news is good. I've not read the Houston Chronicle, but I'm sure it's a weak endorsement of Bush as well; they did not endorse DeLay, and Dad says Morrisson had a good chance.

[ananda]

13. Houston Chronicle has endorsed Kerry.

Actually, Houston proper is rather liberal. It's the suburbs and exurbs that have fallen victim to the corporatocratic propaganda.

Last week the Houston Chronicle officially endorsed Kerry. I voted early on Friday, and I was so pleased to get to vote for Kerry-Edwards AND a Democratic opponent to John Culberson.

I'm not in DeLay's district, but I have contributed to Morrison's campaign. I wish Morrison the best, but I'm afraid that Sugarland is infected with SARSII (Smirking American Rahrah Syndrome) and DeLay's particular virus of hate.

Sue

[catrose]

18. Yay Houston Boo Austin

The Austin American-Statesman came out in favor of Bush today (also in 2000). There was a demonstration on the South Congress bridge. I don't think there's a more liberal Texas town than Austin--I didn't know anybody who voted for Bush in 2000--but you can't prove it by the paper. I've subscribed to the Iconoclast.

[lostnfound]

22. Wrong -- the Chronicle endorsed * yesterday

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/2862496

Re-elect Bush
Because of national security imperatives, the Chronicle editorial board endorses President Bush for a second term.
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle

Four years ago the Houston Chronicle was pleased to endorse Texas Gov. George W. Bush for the presidency of the United States. That endorsement drew upon Bush's successful governorship that sought and found pragmatic, bipartisan solutions to pressing problems.

Since then, the most devastating terrorist attack on the United States, eclipsing even Pearl Harbor, has placed new imperatives on the voters' choice of the nation's chief executive. Despite the Chronicle editorial board's disagreements with some of the president's policies, both foreign and domestic, the Chronicle believes today's criteria, combined with Bush's long record as chief executive of Texas and the United States, again recommend President Bush to lead the nation. The Chronicle endorses his candidacy for re-election to a second term.

<snip>
The Chronicle believes Bush, if granted a second term and freed of the need to appeal to the extreme factions of his party, will regain his bipartisan effectiveness at solving problems. That is not an idle hope but rests on the experience of an earlier Texan who occupied the White House, Lyndon B. Johnson. As long as he was a U.S. representative and senator elected by Texans, he never strayed far from the conventional wisdom of his constituents. In the White House, Johnson remained true to his populist roots but, freed from the common prejudice of that era, became one of the nation's foremost champions of civil rights and opportunity for all.

In his final debate with Kerry, Bush recalled a Western artist who preferred to live on the east side of the mountain so he could view the promising start of each day rather than its close. That is the forward-looking spirit in which the Chronicle again gives its presidential endorsement to George W. Bush.

[DemFromMem]

9. Aside from Denver Post, what other paper switched to Bush?

[gcomeau]

10. York Daily Record in Pennsylvania

And boy, were they ever excited about their choice:

http://ydr.com/story/elect-edit/45473

Just reading it you can almost feel their shame at what they're writing.

And the same day this little gem appeared in the paper from one of the members of their editorial board:

http://ydr.com/story/reader/45474

-Grant

[DemFromMem]

11. Hardly anything to brag about

Kerry's got a couple of dozen to switch to him including some biggies. I hope the mainstream media makes the endorsement switches a story in and of itself, but that's probably wishful thinking.

[wiswrong]

12. Don't get overconfident

Don't lose any energy with these positive endorsements - fewer Americans read the paper today than ever before, and broadcast media is still conservative biased.

Keep going -- door to door, phone to phone... it is the one-on-one answering people's questions that gets people convinced. Every vote counts!

[CrispyQ]

19. I'm cancelling my Denver Post sub tomorrow --

...along with a LTTE to explain why. It was a very tepid endorsement with two of their editorial writers endorsement for Kerry on the opposite page.

The endorsing editorial was total puke. They suggested what W had to do to succeed in his second term. WTF? Do you people really think this guy is going to listen to what you think he should do? Their message is basically, he fucked it up so we should give him a chance to fix it. AS IF.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~8382~2484208,00.html

snip...
In making this endorsement, we don't see that American politics need to be so polarized. Just for the record, we consider both Bush and Kerry qualified to be president, and we don't think the world will come to an end if voters turn to the Democrat.

Bush has labored erratically since his 2001 inauguration, and his first-term performance seems to have cheered and angered Coloradans in equal numbers. But decisiveness is a crucial characteristic in the showdown with the nation's elusive enemies. We believe he meets the test, and we aren't sure about John Kerry. So the president has our endorsement for a second term, even as we call on him to steer a more moderate course that is in keeping with his campaign appearances, but not his first-term performance.

snip...
Our support for Bush is tempered by unease over the poor choices and results of his first term. To succeed in his second-term, Bush must begin by taking responsibility for U.S. failures in Iraq, admit his mistakes and adjust U.S. strategy. Big time, as his running mate might say.

snip...
But respect for his leadership was sharply diminished by U.S. missteps in Iraq and evidence that the president had ignored frequent warnings of Osama bin Laden's murderous ambition. Even so, there is opportunity for Bush to make adjustments that will validate the sacrifices of coalition forces and Iraqis themselves.

and this part will really make you sick -- snip...
We believe George W. Bush is up to the challenge.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

24. LOL, I posted before I saw your post...we had identical reactions..

including "As If"...I'm very disappointed with the DP and RMN..Maybe I'll just read Westword from now on. MKJ

[central scrutinizer]

14. this was written by a journalist?

"Senator John Kerry continued his raid on newspapers that backed President George W. Bush"

How the fuck do you raid a newspaper editorial? I realize that it is a metaphor, but the headline should read something like, "newspapers that backed Bushco in 2000 are considering both candidates and finding the incumbent to be undeserving of continued support." Did Kerry "raid" the newspapers by having better plans, being more believable, in short, being more presidential?

[sonicx]

15. i like the headline. short and to the point.

[loyalsister]

16. Here's one Kerry pulled

Kerry for president Bush finally loses it

<snip>

"For quite a few months I reluctantly believed uninterrupted leadership in the ongoing war on terror trumped all else in deciding who should be the next president of the United States.

It was a fragile conclusion. On most other grounds I could not support George W. Bush, and after a commendable initial showing of resolve, he certainly has not conducted the war in a thoroughly exemplary manner. In many ways he’s been one of our worst presidents. Even so, his opponent, John Kerry, was plodding along, not encouraging much support for his own candidacy.

However, day by day, the prospect of a Kerry presidency is more encouraging. It’s time to remove Bush from the White House, and Kerry emerges as a reasonable alternative. Earlier, I wrote I probably would hold my nose and vote for Bush. Today I breathe freely, quite at ease with removing this incumbent and installing another leader who deserves more confidence."

<snip>

Most important, it’s time to moderate an oppressive leadership that threatens our national philosophy. I do not think such a puny figure as George W. Bush - or any other temporary president - can destroy our vital nature. But Bush and his ilk are harming it. They would harm it even more. It’s time for the American people to say enough. It’s time for new leadership.

Let us get back on track by throwing out George W. Bush and electing John F. Kerry."

http://www.columbiatribune.com/2004/Oct/20041017Comm001.asp

[lostnfound]

21. 122 papers for Kerry; 50-something for *; 33 supported * in 00 won't in 04

according to DemocracyNow! just now.

[lostnfound]

26. Correction: 122 Kerry; 69 Shrub; 33 supported Shrub in 00 but won't in 04

From DemocracyNow!

[misterpants]

25. Dispatch

Don't let the Republicans spin the Dispatch endorsement into a big win. The Dispatch is an extremely conservative paper. It reflects the conservative politics of the Wolfe family, and they haven't endorsed a democrat since Woodrow Wilson.

A 'real prize'? Please.

[bigpathpaul]

27. Assembled endorsements. Gift for all us hard-working DUers. See attached.

I took all the current endorsements and assembled them into a BigPath "NOV.2" page. The one below is reduced. Download the full-size PDF or JPEG from http://bigpath.net/politics/NOV2/NOV2.html



http://www.bigpath.net

[HuskiesHowls]

29. Here's a very interesting endorsement for Kerry

Here is a link to the endorsement of Kerry by the editors of The American Conservative:
http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover1.html
I find it interesting that even THEY can't endorse *!!

[Kukesa]

31. Wow! Good flyer, bpp. n/t