by Damozel | Though Reuters/Zogby has Obama slipping to a three-point lead---though I expect to see this widen again over the next couple of weeks---another historically Republican-tilting publication has jumped across the fence to join Obama.
After carefully observing the Democratic and Republican nominees in drawn-out primary struggles as well as in the general campaign, including three debates, the Chronicle strongly believes that the ticket of Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden offers the best choice to lead the United States on a new course into the second decade of the 21st century.
They say pretty much the same thing as other conservative publications that have come out for Obama, though I think they actually do a better job of making the case. Here's the bottom-line portion of the editorial---but the rest is well worth reading if you're in the "swing voter" or persuadable category.
Rarely in our country's history has the electorate gone to the polls to choose a new president in such challenging times with more at stake for the nation....The incoming administration must immediately focus and engage on so many fronts. The tasks at hand will require stamina, creativity and leadership abilities to replace partisan gridlock with a national consensus on what is best for the American people. The new leadership team must have the intellect and temperament to tackle complex issues with equally sophisticated solutions. The current go-it-alone mentality in the White House on foreign policy must give way to an effort to work in concert with our allies while engaging our enemies at the negotiating table as well as on the battlefield. (Houston Chronicle; more)
If you're interested in total endorsements or additional Sunday endorsements, check out Editor and Publisher.
As chronicled by E&P in recent days [an] overwhelming trend from big city newspapers in editorial endorsements has favored Barack Obama with several papers that backed George W. Bush in 2004 switching over to the Democrat this year. But few expected that would happen deep in the heart of Texas.
Now it has, with the Houston Chronicle and Austin American Statesman coming out for Obama today. But John McCain picked up one key endorsement today, gaining the Columbus Dispatch in swing state Ohio, as well as another reliably GOP paper, the San Diego Union Tribune.
The Austin and Houston moves, however, bring to at least 18 the number of papers that have made the switch. The Dallas Morning News and San Antonio Express-News did stick with the GOP candidate but he has lost papers all over the country, from the Chicago Tribune to the San Bernardino Sun, Denver Post, and New York Daily News.
Only one paper that we know of have switched from Kerry to McCain. That is the Daily Press of Newport News, Va. The Plain Dealer in Cleveland, which sat out the 2004 campaign, came out for Obama today.
Other switches from Bush to Obama include The Stockton (Ca.) Record, Pasadena (Ca.) Star-News, Naples (Fla.) Daily-News, and Canton (Ohio) Repository.
In our complete daily tally, Obama now leads McCain by 93-28.
The Kansas City Star has now jumped on the bandwagon. I don't know their political orientation, but judging by the comments, I infer that they lean Democrat.
At any rate, they provide a handy bulleted list of reasons to choose Obama if you're a swing voter.
Years of Washington blunders have left the United States struggling both at home and abroad. Both presidential candidates promise change, but Barack Obama is most likely to deliver:
•A stronger economy: Obama is best suited to lead the drive to reinvigorate the economy, repair gaps in financial regulations, make tax policies more equitable and provide help for Americans in need.
•A safer world: Obama realizes the need to shift more military resources from Iraq to Afghanistan, home of the 9/11 terrorists. He is also committed to closing dangerous gaps in homeland security.
•A healthier America: Obama believes access to health care is a right. He would make coverage more affordable to more citizens and stop insurers from penalizing people for getting sick.
•A new energy outlook: Obama wants to boost renewable energy and encourage more efficient vehicles, buildings and appliances. He doesn’t back excessive offshore oil drilling or a rush to build nuclear plants.
•U.S. leadership abroad: An Obama presidency offers hope for the U.S. to rebuild frayed alliances and gain respect in places like Germany (seen in photo). VP nominee Joe Biden brings strong foreign-policy credentials.
•A safeguard for liberties: Obama wants judges who won’t favor the strong at the expense of the weak. He offers hope for a Supreme Court that would reject excessive executive power and protect precious freedoms.
Both publications mention Palin's clear lack of qualifications as a good reason NOT to vote for McCain----a common theme emerging among Republicans who endorse Obama. Part of it has to be because of how stupid you look arguing that Palin is an acceptable choice for VP.
Note how they all feel the need to comment on Palin's inadequacy as a viable candidate in making the choice for Obama. No surprise there; it was a key and obvious McCain error in judgment to pick such a spectacularly unvetted and unqualified individual for VP. She's done so badly, in fact, that her future political career is very much in doubt....
If conservatives can't come to grips with what a poor choice Palin has turned out to be – anti-intellectual, uncurious, know nothing, unqualified and unserious – they will never understand why they are about to be out of power, let alone how to get back from out of the intellectual wilderness Palin is leading them into. (DemFromCT)
Why did McCain do it? Why? I'd be upset no matter what by the thought of four years of Republican misfeasance but I wouldn't be sh*t-scared of more egregious malfeasance, which is what I am whenever I contemplate Palin as Veep to a somewhat elderly Prez.
Edsall at The HuffPost has more on what he calls "the Palin plunge."
As it stands, Palin's polling numbers are daunting: with the unfolding economic crisis, her favorable to unfavorable ratings have switched from a positive 40-30, according to a September 12-16 New York Times survey, to a negative 32-41 in an October 10-13 survey.
Palin is, additionally, costing McCain newspaper endorsements. Editor and Publisher calculated that as of Oct 18, Barack Obama led McCain 58-16 in the competition for the backing of newspapers. Many of the endorsements cited Palin as a factor in their rejection of McCain. The Salt Lake Tribune, which supported George W. Bush in 2004, commented that "out of nowhere, and without proper vetting, the impetuous McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. She quickly proved grievously under-equipped to step into the presidency should McCain, at 72 and with a history of health problems, die in office. More than any single factor, McCain's bad judgment in choosing the inarticulate, insular and ethically challenged Palin disqualifies him for the presidency." The Kansas City Star, in turn, described Palin as "unqualified."
Brookings Senior Fellow Thomas Mann told the Huffington Post that initially, Palin both built conservative enthusiasm for McCain and drew widespread interest among voters who had not been closely following the race. But those benefits soon evanesced.
Because you can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, etc.
RECENT BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS
Former Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell Endorses Obama
If Elected, Would Obama Appoint a Bipartisan Cabinet?
The McCain Campaign: "Real Americans, Represent!"
Obama Questions Justice Dept.'s Objectivity in Going After ACORN Again
Comments