The Los Angeles Times has become the latest major newspaper to publish its endorsement for one of the presidential candidates of this year's election. The Times, which is among the top five biggest newspapers in the country based on circulation, endorsed President Barack Obama for the second election in a row.
According to the Times, it is the first newspaper in the top 10 to make an endorsement in this year's election. In its endorsement, it wrote:
The nation has been well served by President Obama's steady leadership. He deserves a second term.
His record is by no means perfect. His expansive use of executive power is troubling, as is his continuation of some of the indefensible national security policies of the George W. Bush administration. This page has faulted him for not pushing harder for a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws. Obama swept into office as a transformative figure, but the expectations built up by the long campaign thudded back to earth amid an unexpectedly steep recession and hyperbolic opposition from the right. That the GOP has sought to block his agenda wherever possible is undeniable, but truly great leaders find ways to bring opposing factions together when the times demand it; Obama has not yet been able to do so.
The Times, which until the 2008 election had a history of endorsing Republican candidates, also commented on why Republican challenger Mitt Romney is not a good fit for president.
Republicans have sought to make the presidential election an up-or-down vote on Obama, hoping that voters will hold him accountable for the country's stubbornly high unemployment and sluggish economy. But this election isn't a referendum on one candidate, it's a choice between two. And unfortunately for the GOP, its candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, has demonstrated clearly that he's the wrong choice. He's wrong on the issues, from immigration to tax policy to the use of American power to gay rights and beyond. And his shifting positions and willingness to pander have raised questions about who he is and what he stands for.
The Times' editorial board, which is separate from the newsroom, criticized Romney's frequent position change on issues and his lack of concrete policy plans.
It's hard to analyze the effect of Romney's plans because he's left so many blanks to be filled in after the election. For example, he wants to replace the healthcare and financial regulatory reforms enacted in 2010, but he won't say with what exactly. He's also advocated rolling back the clock on clean energy, overturning Roe v. Wade and leaving women's reproductive rights at the mercy of state legislators and abandoning efforts to help distressed borrowers keep their homes. And he has sounded bellicose on foreign policy, particularly in regard to the complex challenges posed by Iran, Russia and China, with which he appears determined to start a trade war.
The most troubling aspect of Romney's candidacy is that we still don't know what his principles are. Is he the relatively moderate Republican who was governor of Massachusetts, the "severely conservative" one on display in the GOP primaries or the more reasonable-sounding fellow who reappeared at the presidential debates? His modulating positions on his own tax plan, healthcare reform, financial regulation, Medicare, immigration and the national safety net add to the impression that the only thing he really stands for is his own election.
Ultimately, the LA Times' endorsement stated that despite some misgivings about President Obama regarding the economy, the alternative (Mitt Romney) would be far more ineffective.
Voters face a momentous choice in November between two candidates offering sharply different prescriptions for what ails the country. Obama's recalls the successful formula of the 1990s, when the government raised taxes and slowed spending to close the deficit. The alternative offered by Romney would neglect the country's infrastructure and human resources for the sake of yet another tax cut and a larger defense budget than even the Pentagon is seeking. The Times urges voters to reelect Obama.
A poll released by Reason-Rupe on California voters found that 51 percent of California likely voters would vote for President Obama, while 35 percent of likely voters would vote for GOP candidate Mitt Romney. President Obama has led the way in California and can be expected to win the state given the results of past election polls.
- Contribute to this Story:
- Send us a tip
- Send us a photo or video
- Suggest a correction
