I'm not sure I've ever completely understood the newspaper endorsement of presidential candidates game. It seems strange to me that these endorsements, from normally staid, middle-of-the-road papers which attempt to be nominally apolitical, are important and, furthermore, eagerly awaited.
The current tally of newspapers has some real oddities, I think. Chicago Tribune and Harford Courant for Dubya? The Trib must have a lot of suburban readers? Connecticut needs to support the Shrub for what reason exactly? Another promised Seawolf sub? Hadn't heard about that. Rich voters? Darned if I know.
Another surprise is the Idaho Statesman endoresement of Kerry. To be true, a lukewarm endorsement, but I can understand that. This is in a state which is likely to go Bushie by perhaps as much as 20 percentage points.
Speaking of the Chicago Tribune, they have an excellent article on the Turkish state control of Islam within the country. A fascinating read on how a fundamentally undemocratic agency helps maintain the secular, and indeed democratic, aspects of Turkish society.
And the New Yorker broke with tradition and made an endorsement of Kerry, or more accurately, an anti-endorsement of the current regime.
Posted by duver001 at October 25, 2004 04:32 PMThe Pacific Northwest Inlander (Eastern Washington / Northern Idaho) strongly endorses Kerry. The print version of the article writes "Why Kerry Is Right," "Why Bush is Wrong." You can read "Why Kerry Is Right" here.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 25, 2004 11:36 PM