A great ad on what women can really expect from Romney/Ryan. h/t Ed. Open Thread below...
Once upon a time, it was thought that newspaper endorsements of candidates from dog-catcher to president had considerable impact on voter behavior. The conventional wisdom for quite some time, however, has been that while they might once had strong influence in the days when newspapers were the main way people got their political and other news, that is no longer the case. Endorsements just don't matter, it's widely believed.
Most people's main source of news has been television for a couple of decades, with the Internet is rapidly gaining on television, and printed newspapers becoming an ever-more dwindling third source. There is an age differential in this that should be no surprise to anyone. Younger Americans read newspapers far less than their parents and grandparents, and they tend to follow politics less as well.
People do still turn to newspapers for local news and political coverage. But the Annenberg Public Policy Center found in 2008 that newspaper endorsements of presidential candidates don't have much impact in changing people's minds. An earlier Annenberg survey showed that many people didn't even know who their newspaper had endorsed. Large percentages of people who claimed they did know got it wrong. Of those who got it right, one percent(!!!) said the endorsement played a "great deal" and 10 percent said it played "somewhat" of a role in their voting decision. In 2004, the Pew Research Center for People & the Press found similar results.
While many surviving newspapers continue the endorsement tradition, some have bailed. For instance, the Knoxville News Sentinel, which backed John McCain editorially in 2008, has stopped endorsing candidates. Journalist and lawyer Larry Atkins recently wrote that newspapers should stick with endorsing candidates for local contests only.
One contrarian on the subject is Greg Mitchell, editor of the now-defunct newspaper trade journal Editor & Publisher, and now the author of a media, politics and culture column at The Nation. In his years at E&P, he tracked newspaper endorsements. In fact, as he recently wrote, two days before Election Day 2004, he correctly predicted who would win 14 out of 15 "toss-up" states based purely on the newspaper endorsements in those states. In 2008, he got 12 out of 13 right. Of course, correlation is not causation, but that is still an impressive record.
With an assistant, Mitchell again is tracking endorsements this year. Unlike the American President Project, which is tracking just the top 100 U.S. dailies based on circulation, Mitchell is casting a wider net. As of Friday morning, he had tallied 18 newspapers, small and large. I've added 26 more to his list. A ? indicates the newspaper endorsed the candidate of the opposite party in 2008; a ° indicates no endorsement in 2008:
Cherokee Tribune (Georgia)
Oak Daily Tribune (Michigan) ?
The Pueblo Chieftain (Colorado)
Longmont Times-Call (Colorado)
Colorado Springs Gazette (Colorado) °
Omaha World Herald (Nebraska)
Las Vegas Review-Journal (Nevada)
The Dallas Morning News (Texas)
The Seattle Times (Washington)
Wheeling News-Register (West Virginia)
The Intelligencer of Wheeling (West Virginia)
The Journal of Martinsburg (West Virginia)
Weirton Daily Times (West Virginia)
Parkersburg News and Sentinel (West Virginia)
The Inter-Mountain in Elkins (West Virginia)
The Bismarck Tribune (North Dakota)
North County Times (California)
The Columbian (Washington) ?
The New York Observer (New York) ?
The Tennessean (Nashville) ?
The Orlando Sentinel (Florida) ?
The Philadelphia Inquirer (Pennsylvania)
The Winston-Salem Journal (North Carolina) ?
The Flint Journal (Michigan)
Muskegon Chronicle (Michigan)
The Sacramento Bee (California)
San Francisco Examiner (California) ?
The Herald (Washington)
The Charleston Gazette (West Virginia)
St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri)
The Tampa Bay Times (Florida)
The Denver Post (Colorado)
Daily Camera (Colorado)
Aurora Sentinel (Colorado)
The Capital Times (Wisconsin)
Salt Lake Tribune (Utah)
Daily Astorian (Oregon)
Las Cruces Sun-News (New Mexico)
Lincoln Journal Star (Nebraska) ?
Montclair Times (New Jersey)
Arkansas Times (Arkansas)
Saint Joseph Telegraph (Missouri) °
Although it also endorsed Obama in 2008, because the Tribune is in the heart of Mormon country, its rationale is worth reading. It endorsed Obama in 2008 as well, but supported George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004. The editors say they thought they knew Romney from his Olympics work and his background but now cannot support him because of
his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party?s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party?s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"What about your local newspaper? Has it endorsed? If so, who? And if not, who do you think it will endorse? This coming Sunday will see major action on this front.
Blast from the Past. At Daily Kos on this date in 2006?How Do We Get Out Of Iraq?
We know now that invading Iraq was the wrong decision, but that doesn't vindicate the antiwar crowd.We now know that myriad criticisms of the Bush Administration by the left were totally accurate and proven correct (which, by the way, makes conservatives completely incorrect in virtually every assessment of Iraq from the get-go). But as many on the left have observed, conservatives think they own the word "right" and only they can use it. The Left cannot be permitted to be right, only the Right can be right (or some such nonsense).
I suppose ?Obamacare? does cover pre-existing conditions, but I?m afraid Romney?s type of stoo-pid could be terminal (certainly for his presidential prospects, though we need to make sure of that ? here)?
?and with stuff like this, no wonder Willard Mitt has ?Romnesia? (funny)?
?and what of Willard Mitt?s ?youthful ward?? Check this out (and this - typical)?
?and shifting the tone again, I give you this from Robert Redford (yet another important reason to vote for President Obama)?
?and 50 years ago, we were smack dab in the middle, basically, of the Cuban Missile Crisis, which lasted from about October 16th to the 28th ? I thought Chris Matthews had some really good stuff on that on the following episode of ?Real Time? (now watch those bastards at HBO find a way to block this video like they always do)?
?and happy birthday to Karl Wallinger of World Party.
Read The Full Article:
Susan Rice's description of the attack was exactly what the US intelligence community believed to be true.
Mitt Romney's desperate henchmen just keep on making things worse.When you're so desperate to win an election that you see the murder of four Americans as a political opportunity to be exploited, things like this happen:
House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) compromised the identities of several Libyans working with the U.S. government and placed their lives in danger when he released reams of State Department communications Friday, according to Obama administration officials. [...]This isn't just irresponsible on Issa's part?it's reprehensible. And Republican leadership?including Mitt Romney?who have encouraged the politicization of this attack are every bit as guilty as Issa.
One of the cables released by Issa names a woman human rights activist who was leading a campaign against violence and was detained in Benghazi. She expressed fear for her safety to U.S. officials and criticized the Libyan government. [...] Another cable names a Benghazi port manager who is working with the United States on an infrastructure project. [...] One cable names a local militia commander dishing dirt on the inner workings of the Libyan Interior Ministry. Another cable names a militia commander who claims to control a senior official of the Libyan armed forces.
Sign up to help get Democratic voters to the polls in swing states with Workers' Voice, the largest independent Democratic voter turnout operation in the country. You can participate no matter where you live.
Got a favorite number from the '90's?
It’s a common gibe that anyone running for President has to be a bit mental to want the job in the first place, much less suffer the indignities involved in pursuing it. Which may be why I find it odd when the candidates start diagnosing one[...]
Read The Full Article:
There is more confirmation that voters believe President Obama did a better job in the second debate than Mitt Romney. In addition to the instant flash polls from the night of the debate showing Obama won, Gallup is out with a new poll taken during the[...]
Read The Full Article:
Click here to view this media
After Mitt Romney's son, Tagg, said recently said that he wanted to punch President Barack Obama for insulting his dad, MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell on Thursday invited the younger Romney to "take a swing at me."
Following Tuesday's second 2012 presidential debate, Tagg Romney explained how he wished he could to react when he felt like the president was calling his dad "a liar."
"Well ? jump out of your seat and you want to rush down to the debate stage and take a swing at him," he told radio host Bill Lumaye. ?But you know you can?t do that because, well, first there is a lot of Secret Service between you and him but also because this is the nature of the process, they?re going to do everything they can do to make my dad into someone he is not.?
On Thursday, Ann Romney pointed out that her husband and five sons had not served their country by joining the military because they found "different ways of serving" by going on religious missions in France, England, Australia and Chile as part of their obligation to the Mormon church.
"Serving in war is not against the Romney family religion, but it is against the Romney family tradition of safely and always pursuing self interest," O'Donnell charged during his Thursday show, noting that the Romney men had refused "to serve in the military while championing every war that comes along and urging us to another one in Iran right now."
"The flawlessly consistent, intergenerational combat cowardice of Romney men makes today's threat of physical violence from a Romney man all the more surprising," the MSNBC host added, referring to Tagg Romney's desire to deck the president.
O'Donnell then looked into the camera and spoke directly to "Taggart":
When I hear you talking about taking a swing and taking punches, why do I get the feeling that you've never actually taken a punch? Or thrown a punch? I didn't have that luxury in the part of Boston that I grew up in. But in your rich, suburban Boston life, with your father filling a $100 million trust fund for you, I don't know, I just get the feeling that things were kind of different for you.
Now, I know you've got a lot -- a lot to be pissed off at these days, starting with the name Taggart, which you got every right to be wicked pissed off at for every day for the 42 years of your life. So, let me try to help you deal with all this aggression you're feeling right now.
You're mad at President Obama for calling your father a liar? Well, let's get something straight, he didn't call your father a liar, I did. The president just said that what your father said isn't true. I've been saying all year that your father is a liar, I've repeatedly said that your father lies and is trying to lie his way into the White House.
You want to take a swing at someone for calling your old man a liar? Take a swing at me. Come on, come on. And don't worry, there won't be any Secret Service involved. Just us. And I'll make it easy for you, I'll come to you. Anytime, anywhere."
"Go ahead, Taggart, take your best shot," O'Donnell concluded.
For any animal lover, this video is really touching.