Obama Sweeps Newspaper Endorsements

Even in this era of "new media," the oldest media matters -- in fact, it may matter more than ever.

In Pennsylvania, a state where most of the political machinery statewide and in the critical vote-generating center of Philadelphia is geared up to provide Hillary Clinton with a Democratic presidential primary win on Tuesday, the state's largest newspapers are urging voters to consider Barack Obama.

As in other primary and caucus states, the senator from Illinois has gained the lion's share of newspaper endorsements. That's important because newspaper editorial pages have long maintained a love affair with Arizona Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee. The strong editorial support for Obama in the race for the nomination provides one more indication that he will be able to compete with McCain in ways that Clinton cannot.

In Pennsylvania, newspaper endorsements have favored Obama in such a lopsided manner that the senator's campaign is making them a centerpiece of its final push for primary votes.

"There's a reason every major newspaper's endorsed Barack Obama," begins a new television advertisement that is running statewide. "'He knows how to bring people together, he's ready' -- says the (Philadelphia) Inquirer. The (Pittsburgh) Post Gazette calls Hillary Clinton's attacks the 'cynical responses of old politics.' She'd 'further the deep divisiveness' in our country. The (Harrisburg) Patriot-News says 'Barack Obama offers real change in the White House.' 'He isn't tied to lobbyists and special interests' He'll 'listen to and represent all Americans,' says the (Allentown) Morning Call."

It's no wonder that, as the mastheads of the state's best-known publications flash on the screen, the candidate cheerfully announces, "I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message."

While Richard Mellon Scaife's extremely right-wing Pittsburgh Tribune-Review is urging Democrats to back Clinton, most of the rest of the newspaper rack favors Obama.

In addition to the Inquirer and the Post-Gazette, the dominant dailies, respectively, in the populous eastern and western regions of the state, Obama also has the endorsement of the scrappy Philadelphia Daily News and key papers across the state. In addition to the Morning Call and the Patriot News, the Wilkes-Barre Citizen's Voice is for the Illinois senator. The Bucks County Courier in suburban Philadelphia says that, "While the Courier Times Editorial Board usually sits out primary elections, we're motivated to get involved this year and offer an endorsement... Barack Obama inspires like no other candidate; indeed, like no other individual on the national stage. He has mobilized new voters and young people in general to get involved in the political process for the first time. And his themes of hope and change, which ring so authentic, have likewise invigorated many who otherwise might have sat out the election."

The Times-Tribune -- which serves the hometown of Clinton's late father, Hugh Rodham -- has emerged as perhaps the state's most passionately pro-Obama newspaper. After Obama said he "had detected bitterness among small-town voters in the Midwest and Pennsylvania, due to the loss of good jobs and resulting poor economic conditions that had made them bitter and caused them to rally around issues concerning guns and religion," the newspaper noted, "Mrs. Clinton and her minions say this is elitism on the part of Mr. Obama -- you know, elitism by the candidate raised by a single mother and his grandparents who excelled at prestigious universities to which he had gained admission on merit. Elitism by the guy who entered politics through the door of social service and civic activism in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Chicago."

In fact, the Scranton paper's response to the whole controversy over Obama's "bitter" comment has been far more pointed -- and far smarter -- than most national news coverage of the dust up.

"Many of the small-town voters to whom he referred are angry that the manufacturing jobs to which they used to have access no longer are available. Many of them are worried because, largely due to the preceding circumstance, they don't have health insurance. Those who do have health insurance are dismayed because the premiums erode more and more of their income. They're angry at the gas pump as they see the dollar meter race ahead as the gallon meter crawls. They're angry at the supermarket as food prices inexorably climb. They're angrier still as the nation borrows hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars for a war that does not have any clear direction, much less a clear end in sight. They're upset because many of their college-age students will have even more trouble financing their education amid the credit crisis. Many of those voters don't have enough income to save anything for retirement beyond what they expect from Social Security, which itself is approaching a crisis," declares a Times-Tribune editorial.

"As amazing as it may seem, Mr. Obama seems to have concluded that things like that can lead to bitterness. His mistake, of course, was saying so. The rules call for him to see only what's right, everywhere he goes, while fixing what's wrong. What candidates are supposed to do, and what they too often do, is declare the genius of the local folk and then go to Harrisburg and Washington to wield the power of the government in favor of narrow interests that work contrary to the interests of those local folk. Sure, my tax bill will result in your job going to Malaysia, but check out my patriotic lapel pin."

Comments (42)

1. Naw....still say Her Majesty wins it by 5-7%. Though my bet with HSUB is "atleast more than 2%".

   Of course, happy to be proven wrong and watch the Final Stage of FRANK, HELEN, and the Gang's psychopathology!

   Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 10:03am

2. None of the papers endorsing Obama are holding him to account for a raft of civil liberties omissions. From Monique Davis to the Jena 6, none of the candidates rate. Add in the blow off of Science Debate2008, and what you get is shallow indeed. True, Obama does get the highest ACLU rating of the three, but the "competition" is so paltry that the score is meaningless. They have so many chances. From the Dallas DA running down false convictions to the efforts of Walter Cronkite, George Schultz and others in Drug Policy Alliance, Obama can easily back individual rights in his campaign. His silence is deafening.

   Posted by bagehot at 04/21/2008 @ 10:45am

3. The medium is still the message. And print, whether here on the internet or on paper on the doorstep, is still more suitable to analysis than TV "news" sound-bites. Lineal thinking, while not all it was cracked up to be in the Age of Reason, still beats most of what TV does when analyzing politics.

   I especially appreciated your including more than just the headlines. Republishing the long quote from the Scranton Times-Tribune was a real service to readers. For all I've heard about bitter-bones and Scranton over the past week, this is the first time I read this. It goes beyond mere emotion -- "He said bitter? Aargh!" -- and gives reasons for saying that Obama's real sin was breaking the rule of fake optimism, which in turn is based on the rule of the Omnipotent Candidate. And the last line sums it all. Thanks.

   Posted by JanKees at 04/21/2008 @ 11:09am

4. The newspaper editors love McCain because he is the Republican most like Democrats.----Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 10:22am

   Interesting admission, if not totally accurate. (given folks like Chuck Hagel)

   Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 11:12am

5. So the Obama gets the printed press and the netroots, while McCain gets the TV stations. Less people get their news by reading, and the YouTube bias is largely to the "youth vote", a given anyway. Yup, I'd say McCain is still sitting pretty with TV on his side.

   Posted by MATTMAN at 04/21/2008 @ 11:53am

6. Oops. Not "the Obama", just Obama.

   Posted by MATTMAN at 04/21/2008 @ 11:55am

7. When have anyone in your neighborhood of freindships say to you," I have read the editorial page in my newspaper of choice and they back candidate X, and by God, then so am I" ?

   spoken like someone who hasn't really thought through the process of endorsements......

   when more and more heads back one candidate or another, it pressures the fence-sitters into doing the same thing.....it's that simple.

   there are only two choices, you know.

   Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 12:16pm

8. allow me to present an analogy: you're out in the desert with 15 people. everyone gets lost.

   so one guy says, "i know the way, follow me. who's with me?" 14 people stand behind him, the remaining person has a choice.

   Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 12:18pm

9. Posted by DARLADOON 04/21/2008 @ 12:16pm

   I appreciate your optimism, but I won't hold my breath until these endorsements sway the opinions of The Networks.

   Posted by MATTMAN at 04/21/2008 @ 12:18pm

10. one of the reasons i always goto anti-war protests...or any protest for that matter, is to increase the 'head count'.

    same reason why newspapers do it. more heads behind obama makes it look like obama will win....

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 12:20pm

11. Posted by DARLADOON 04/21/2008 @ 12:18pm

    Is the "one guy"..."Jack Shepherd" or "John Locke"?

    Or maybe that's the wrong "Lost"?

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 12:33pm

12. Didn't Jesus say, "Follow me"?....and he is being written out of our national life....:)----Posted by JOMAMMA 04/21/2008 @ 12:31pm

    WHERE was Jesus "written IN" our "national life", JOHN?

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 12:33pm

13. jomamma, you can't honestly say that newspaper endorsements don't matter. if you were running for office, wouldn't you delight in more and more endorsements?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 12:48pm

14. The newspaper endorsements certainly matter to some people, and contrary to what Maasch said, they are the thinking people (i.e. the kind of people who read.) But this voting bloc, just like the youth YouTube crowd, is already a given for Obama in the general. Now, does the sum of these two media types either qualitatively or quantitatively exceed the sphere of influence of TV? I wonder what Simon Cowell would say?

    Posted by MATTMAN at 04/21/2008 @ 12:55pm

15. Older voters read papers still. And they vote at higher rates than young voters. And my guess is they are less likely to be swept away by Obama, having seen hopeful rhetoric come to nothing before. So I think these could matter, though it depends how the editorials justify their decision.

    Posted by Poppolphil at 04/21/2008 @ 1:05pm

16. I know many who read and want nothing to do with anything on the left

    obama is on "the left"? why?

    can any reasonable person tell me how obama is a "leftist"?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 1:07pm

17. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/21/2008 @ 1:03pm

    Well, I tend to go by the U.S. Constitution and all the mentions of "God" (and/or "Jesus) in that.

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 2:34pm

18. That is the kind of glowing endorsement the newspapers who supposedly print truth about a candidate should be reporting

    hysterical! not only did the newspapers "report" this , but it became so mindlessly repeated for weeks and weeks until, finally, obama was asked about ayers from stephanopolous.

    and, mccain, he's not an elitist at all......nah. he's Salt of the Earth, a real Man of the People....

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 2:34pm

19. Posted by RIO BRAVO 04/21/2008 @ 1:11pm

    Hey Cotton....got any quotes from McCain on...global warming or campaign finance reform....or immigration BEFORE the Republicans primaries started?

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 2:35pm

20. mccain is the biggest liar currently working in DC. every single time he opens his mouth, he says something false, contradictory or just plain stupid.

    and rio bravo, if you wanna talk about endorsements, what about pastor hagee's endorsement of mccain?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 2:36pm

21. can any reasonable person tell me how obama is a "leftist"?

    Posted by DARLADOON 04/21/2008 @ 1:07pm

    he's left handed.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/21/2008 @ 2:48pm

22. Why is it important to create the impression Obama will win?

    hmmm......gee, you stumped me. i have no idea why obama supporters would want to create the impression that their candidate has the most support. i just can't figure that one out.....

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 3:04pm

23. "A point of fact.... No one really reads the paper anymore, of that number, who read the editorial page, and of that number who vote BECAUSE of an opinion of the editors?

    None?

    Me neither."

    Now that is elitest.

    Posted by ron cypert at 04/21/2008 @ 3:04pm

24. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/21/2008 @ 1:03pm

    I don't think schools have a problem with Christians saying prayers to themselves. However the argument isn't about saying a prayer to yourself it's leading class prayers or teaching Christianity only. I am down for world religion classes in school however it can not focus exclusively or even more heavily on one religion over another. It needs to give equal time and equal weight to all religions.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 3:24pm

25. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 3:02pm

    Didn't Bush do cocaine? I guess that makes him left too?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 3:28pm

26. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 3:32pm

    I guess since he never admitted it even though it was documented repeatedly that means it didn't happen. How about that whole drunk driving incident too?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 3:38pm

27. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 3:46pm

    My point is your saying Obama is to the left because he committed a crime when he was younger. Does that make Bush apart of the left because he has also committed crimes?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 4:00pm

28. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 3:46pm

    And the reason I react the way I do is because I am so sick of this right vs. left bullshit. I hear it all the time from LV and Happ about how we are inferior to them. Rio talking about how we are all Communist. So when ever I see stupidity in the form of saying we must all be ________ (fill in the blank) because we are considered left I get sick of it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 4:04pm

29. How was it "documented"? Because Al Franken said so?

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 3:46pm

    I don't read Al Franken but you can probably look up the police record of his arrest for felony possession.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 4:05pm

30. CCCOM...the hypocrisy is going to be rampant.

    Folks, like MBB, who had NO concern for Bush's "mis-spent youth" and lightly brushed it aside....will suddenly "re-learn" how to use their "strong moral values and character traits" radar to lock in on Obama.

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 4:28pm

31. Posted by MASK 04/21/2008 @ 4:28p

    That's how it always is. MBB, Happy, LVL, MC they can all disregard anything when it comes to support of their candidate but the second it's a Democrat doing the SAME EXACT THING they freak out. Remember when Clinton was up in front of them for having smoked marijuana. Then when it was bush doing coke they were ok with it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 4:45pm

32. the guy voted the most liberal member of congress...is really a conservative plant.

    Posted by JOMAMMA 04/21/2008 @ 4:54pm

    Watch out. Frank will see that and come up with his next crackpot theory.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 5:05pm

33. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 5:35pm

    He is being a politician he has to appeal to church-goers and weed smokers, that's a hard thing to juggle my friend.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 5:39pm

34. I will bite..the guy voted the most liberal member of congress...is really a conservative plant

    bush pulled everyone further and further right, so obama's votes are really quite centrist.

    case in point: iraq. he was RIGHT (no pun intended), or CORRECT, about iraq, and yet the pro-war position is right wing, incorrect.

    see my point? obama wasn't necessarily a "leftie" by voting against the war; he was actually quite conservative in his vote, whereas bush was radical.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/21/2008 @ 5:48pm

35. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 5:44pm

    You name me one politician who is always honest and I will show you a miracle.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 5:57pm

36. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/21/2008 @ 5:42pm

    Darin, what SPECIFICS did Bush come up with about his youth that he repudiated?

    Or was it a lot of vagueries, so that guys like you could still raise doubts about it?

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 8:14pm

37. If one is elected President get ready for more dunderheaded extremism that will sink the nation like the titanic!!!!!!!!----Posted by RIO BRAVO 04/21/2008 @ 7:41pm

    I'm sorry, Cotton.....that post is 8 years too late!

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 8:15pm

38. We all know that these days with the near equal split in party preference, most elections are determined by the undecided voter. With their infinite capacity for resisting information,sadly, most of these people are either serving on juries or trying to decide which discount store sells high fructose corn syrup in bulk.

    Posted by Sorelish at 04/21/2008 @ 8:21pm

39. Wow, people actually think America could supply it's self with enough oil to keep the country running for any length of time. No way do we have the reserves necessary to supply us with the nearly 8 million barrels we consume daily.

    At any rate, CCOMFO is right, liberal, and left are different. The left cares about human rights, still having a working economy in 23 years when global demand for energy is guaranteed to exceed global production, slowing down global warming, international labor/union rights, people having access to healthcare, etc. The left could be described as the ideology that cares about humans over corporations or government.

    Liberal is used to describe the democratic party, which pays lip service to these ideals with one side of their face, and betrays them with the other. They do this by fumding the humanitarian crisis which is being called the global war on terror, promoting none solutions to global warming like corn ethanol, clean coal, and nuclear power, and in general kao toing to corporate special interests.

    Posted by shadow master at 04/21/2008 @ 8:25pm

40. All right ladies & gents, its time to get real. I'm an Obama man. If he loses the nomination I will vote his opponent, but only if she wins the popular vote. Screw the Mother of Superdelegates bullshit scenario.

    Posted by Sorelish at 04/21/2008 @ 10:23pm

41. Is it possible that all these newspapers will, in the actual election, support McCain, and that they are pushing Obama in the primary because they think he will be easier for McCain to beat?

    Posted by normcp at 04/21/2008 @ 10:31pm

42. Your coverage of yesterday's Pennsylvania primary is most disappointing. No doubt the media has favored Obama--the bias has made a mockery of impartial journalism. What the Pennsylvania primary showed--and your coverage today fails to recognize--is that the people of Pennsylvania and the American people in general are tired of being told by the media what they heard, how they should think, what they should value, and how they should feel. This primary is an example of the power of independent thinking people over the manipulative press.

    Obama owes a tremendous amount to the press--especially the newspapers--shame on you for such biased coverage!

    Posted by lfcanfield at 04/23/2008 @ 11:12am