This is the most back-handed 'endorsement' you will ever read - CNN

(CNN)With less than a week to go before the September 14 recall election in California, The Los Angeles Times editorial board went on record with its recommendations in the race.

The bulk of the paper's op-ed was dedicated to why voters should vote "no" on the recall, keeping Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, in office for the remainder of his first term. "Removing Newsom and replacing him with an untested and unprepared alternative who wouldn't represent the values of most Californians would be a disaster," read the editorial.

But that's not the good part of the endorsement. That comes later in the piece when the Times deals with the 40-plus candidates running to replace Newsom in the event a majority of voters choose to recall him. (Worth noting: That prospect looks less and less likely the closer we get to the actual vote.)

"As an editorial board, we have struggled over our recommendation, because we can say with certainty that none of the people hoping to replace Newsom would be an improvement," read the editorial. "Faced with such terrible choices, it's tempting to skip this difficult question altogether and to recommend leaving this part of the ballot blank, as the Democratic Party has urged. Why dignify this reckless power grab by participating in it in any way?"

And they are just getting started! "We're left to conclude that voters who oppose the recall should also vote for a replacement — even if they have to hold their noses to do so," write the members of the editorial board, before making their pick: "That leaves us with the least terrible of all these bad options: former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, a moderate Republican. He is perhaps the most conventional gubernatorial candidate and has the executive experience and mature temperament that other recall candidates lack."

Amazing! I can see the bumper stickers now for Faulconer's campaign: "Vote Faulconer: The least terrible of these bad options."

The case that the Times makes for Faulconer speaks to the incredible weakness of the field to replace Newsom. Among the data points:

* He's pro-vaccine. (Yes, we ALL should be since the three Covid vaccines are 90% or more effective in reducing serious hospitalizations and death from Covid-19).

* He "acknowledges [Joe] Biden's victory." (Since there is zero evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, every single candidate running for anything should acknowledge that Biden won fair and square.)

The Times left out other factors that recommend Faulconer: He is alive, he breathes in oxygen and breathes out carbon dioxide, he lives in California ... and so on and so forth.

And then came the coup de grace of the editorial:

"We fervently oppose the recall of Gavin Newsom, and we do not support Kevin Faulconer for governor. But for those who care about the stability of California, Faulconer is the least bad option in a recall field that ranges from the merely bad to the utterly catastrophic."

So, basically, we don't back Faulconer at all but, if you have to vote for someone, then we guess Faulconer is the best bet even though he's a really bad bet. Iconic stuff there by the LA Times editorial board. Absolutely iconic.

The truth is that this is all likely moot because, as I noted above, polling seems to be moving in Newsom's favor. And if the governor isn't recalled on question 1, then all of the votes cast for question 2 are rendered meaningless.

Still, kudos to the Los Angeles Times for penning one of the most backhanded endorsements I have ever read. Truly special work.

Adblock test (Why?)

"back" - Google News
September 08, 2021 at 11:23PM
https://ift.tt/3zUkAri

This is the most back-handed 'endorsement' you will ever read - CNN
"back" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2QNOfxc
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Bagikan Berita Ini