Comments on: Endorsements

By: Peter Coles

Peter Coles — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 12:45:44 +0000

As a foreigner it would be inappropriate to give an endorsement to anyone standing for election in another country, but I am simply amazed that this election is even close. On the other hand, I thought the same thing last time. And the time before that…

By: Gary 7

Gary 7 — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 19:47:04 +0000

SPYDER: Thank you for pointing that out. How people can’t seem to get that Colbert is a SATIRIST is beyond me,,,everything he says should be run through a nand circuit. Then his actual meaning will come through.

GAry 7

By: Yvette

Yvette — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:59:21 +0000

Genuine question here- what is the point of a newspaper or celebrity etc endorsing a candidate? Does anyone out there really thing “well Nature/ my senator/ Sean said they like Obama, guess I’ll vote for him too!”

I mean, I obviously enjoy hearing people’s opinions and reflecting on them, I just never understood what an endorsement is really supposed to do.

By: Neil B. ?

Neil B. ? — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 22:50:33 +0000

I saw Caroline Kennedy today endorse (not for the first time) Barack Obama at the Virginia Air and Space Center. It was never a surprise, but still enjoyable to hear her talk. The venue was of course quite appropriate since her dad got the USA rolling on the space program. The real Apollo 12 command module was nearby. (BTW, any opinions here about what kind of shape the Ares etc. program is really in? – of course we can’t trust NASA’s official line …)

Sometimes a “event” serves as a better endorsement or counter-endorsement (disdorsement? ugh) than what someone says about someone else. Well, here is a hilarious punk’d on Sarah Palin, with a phony call from “Nicolas Sarkozy.” Palin seems quite convinced and oblivious all the way through despite many blood-curdling hints:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/USElection/2008/11/01/7275526-cp.html which has some transcript and link to the audio.

By: Fred Silverstein

Fred Silverstein — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 22:15:09 +0000

I would certainly agree with a point made above that academic expertise is not, in itself, a good qualification for the presidency. What sends chills up my spine, however, is not the lack of such expertise in the usual candidates, but the lack of respect for the ability to be a deep thinker (or even a thinker!) by the American public. The (well, one time) popularity of W, and the current popularity of Sarah Palin are conspicuous cases in point. These people don’t even try to pretend to be deep thinkers. They take some pride in that, and it really looks like they get some worship for that.

We spend a lot of time worrying over the quality of education in America, at least for us in that the next generation can value and respect, if not actually do, science. I’m not sure we spend enough time worrying over the anti-intellectualism that is rampant in this country. There is a large contingent of voters in this nation who value smiles and lipstick instead of ideas. How did our system of education lead to the evolution of such a contingent? Whatever did we do wrong?

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 17:54:16 +0000

3 Quarks Daily notes that college newspapers are endorsing Obama 63 to 1.

By: tacitus

tacitus — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 15:26:51 +0000

Beacon is probably one of those sad PUMA remnants who are voting for McCain in the hope that Hillary Clinton will run again in 2012. Not even Hillary Clinton would wish another four years of Republican rule on the country at this point, and especially not just so she can be president one day.

By: A Student

A Student — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:24:34 +0000

I think most people have a naive grasp of how an administration is organized. You should never vote for the candidate based on their statements, you should always vote on your understanding of how they will select their appointees.

By: ollie

ollie — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 12:35:34 +0000

Not a single person voted on Obama based on issues over Hillary.

False. One of the reasons I preferred BHO to HRC is the way he approaches a tough issue; BHO understands that people won’t buy into a program unless they have had a hand in creating it.

Don’t get me wrong; had HRC won the D nomination I would have tried my best to help her win the general.

You are right about BHO not being a “messiah” and yes, of course I have doubts about him! I don’t believe in blind faith in anyone and/or anything.

But he is an intellectual; just read his books (which he wrote himself; he employed no ghostwriter). Also, you don’t get hired by the University of Chicago to teach law if you aren’t an intellectual.

By: Beacon

Beacon — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:04:49 +0000

This is probably the first time Sean has expressed any real doubts ever about Obama as president. Wow that only took a year and a half!
I never once heard a peep out of Sean (except the frequent hillary bashing) about POLICIES- Hillary had a better plan on the economy, health care, education etc. You know like Krugman said.
It’s like suddenly we are supposed to vote based on issues. Not a single person voted on Obama based on issues over Hillary. Most people now are not even voting on issues. Issues are absolutely 100% periphery. Obama’s campaign is about one thing Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyDqQW2adPk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4yCwqtuv5Q

Obama is no intellectual. Obama is no messiah and he will assure a republican comeback in a BIG way. Mark my words. Obama SOUNDS like an intellectual but he is FAR from it. He will say and do anything to win. it is as simple as that. and he only cares about one thing- his career. expect him to file papers 143 days after becoming president to become president of the world.