Mass Bush Defection. The real story on the newspaper endorsements

[gcomeau]

Some interesting facts about the newspaper endorsements you won't hear on CNN.

According to Editor and Publisher's latest list of newspaper endorsements Kerry is leading Bush 48-34 in endorsements and 8.9 million - 4.7 million in circulation. But that's not the real news. The real news is that the newspapers are TURNING on Bush.

Bush had a CLEAR LEAD in endorsements in 2000. So far 39 of the papers that endorsed Bush in 2000 have announced their positions for this year and now that those papers have had 4 years of abush record to base their decisions on 12 of them are NOT repeating their endorsements of Bush, with 3 of them refusing to endorse any candidate and 9 switching and endorsing Kerry AGAINST Bush.

That's 30% of papers that endorsed Bush in 2000 not willing to repeat their endorsement after 4 years of first hand experience with his record.

That's 23% of papers that endorsed Bush in 2000 actively endorsing his OPPONENT this time around.

And then you have the papers supporting him. The Chicago Trib has endorsed every Republican candidate since 1892 so of course they're endorsing Bush, but they're not exactly gung ho about it this year, calling both candidates "good" and chastising Bush on his need to learn some lessons from the last 4 years while really only managing to say that they think Bush will do better in the war on terror as their selling point. The Indianapolis Star, also a habitual supporter of the Republican candidate, is almost as enthusiastic about their Bush endorsement as the Chicago Trib... calling both candidates "unsatisfactory" and proceeding to air a whole laundry list of things Bush has screwed up and needs to fix in the process of "endorsing" him. I actually recommend reading it, it's very informative and is a useful thing to use to point out that even some of the people supporting Bush think he's an incompetent screw-up and are only following the party line:

http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/186935-2809-021.html (Indianapolis Star, Indiana)

And that's from his supporters. I suggest reading what those no longer supporting him had to say in their editorials. A sampling:

Refusing to endorse a candidate:

http://www.tampatrib.com/News/MGBU3UEHF0E.html (Tampa tribune, Florida.)
http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-0/109786050310720.xml (Winston-Salem Journal, North Carolina)

Switched endorsements, now endorsing Kerry:

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/opinion/9939989.htm (Bradenton Herald, Florida)
http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/editorials/article/0,1713,BDC_2489_3258073,00.html (Daily Camera, Colorado)
http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Oct/20041017Comm001.asp (The Columbia Tribune, Missourri)
http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-0/109786050310720.xml (The Muskegon Chronicle, Michigan)
http://www.oregonlive.com/editorials/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1097409458114160.xml (The Oregonian, Oregon)

In the meantime 32 of the papers that endorsed Gore in 2000 have weighed in. 31 of them are endorsing Kerry. One, the York Daily Record in Pennsylvania, is endorsing Bush. And in the process their editorial board split, with one of the members officially dissenting from the decision in a letter to the readers:

http://ydr.com/story/reader/45474/

(His contact info is at the bottom, I suggest copious congratulatory e-mails for the stand he took). The paper's Bush endorsement itself is somewhat half-hearted... with the writers coming across as almost ashamed of themselves for actually doing it:

http://ydr.com/story/elect-edit/45473/

(Their contact info is also there at the "contact us" link at the bottom of the page. Do what is appropriate.)

That's a 3% defection rate so far for the less mathematically inclined. And it wasn't a firmly resolute 3% at that.

The newspaper editorial boards are speaking out about what they've seen from the White House the last four years and they don't like it.

They don't like it at all.

Now we need clue the damn cable media in to this so they can start covering it the way it's actually happening. Or at least so they don't have any excuse for not telling people. We should be hammering this angle guys. The people whose job it is to keep an eye on what Bush has been up to the last 4 years are speaking, and they're not happy people.

Oh, and if anyone needs any further cheering up. Look at the endorsements for both Kerry and Bush in Florida, Ohio, and Pennnsylvania and their circulations in the list at the bottom of the page:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000673610

Kerry:

FLORIDA
St. Petersburg Times (G): 358,502
The Miami Herald (G): 325,032
South Florida Sun-Sentinel (Ft. Lauderdale) (G): 268,927
The Palm Beach Post (G): 181,727
Daytona Beach News-Journal (G): 112,945
Florida Today (Melbourne) (G): 90,877
Bradenton Herald (B): 52,163

OHIO
Dayton Daily News (G): 183,175
Akron Beacon Journal (G): 139,220

PENNSYLVANIA
The Philadelphia Inquirer (G): 387,692
The Philadelphia Daily News (G): 139,983

Bush:

FLORIDA
<chirp... chirp... chirp>

OHIO
The Repository (Canton) (B): 66,014
The Times Reporter (New Philadelphia): 23,956
The Courier (Findlay) (B): 22,319

PENNSYLVANIA
York Daily Record (G): 46,554

-Grant

[Selwynn]

1. How much do newspaper endorsments really matter?

I don't actually know...

[obnoxiousdrunk]

2. I don't think it matters much.

Kind of a moral support. Repugs will spin it saying how librul the media is.

[gcomeau]

5. Let them try to spin it as "Liberal Media". You're missing the point.

They can't do that with the papers that ENDORSED BUSH in 2000. Bush had a significant lead in endorsements in 2000. If they try spinning this as the "Liberal media" shove that down their throats for God's sake.

-Grant

[timezoned]

32. I agree. This actually stands a chance of

waking up the cable mongers to the fact that they've all been trying to impersonate Faux News for so long that they've lost track of how far they've drifted from reality on the ground. Print media hasn't lost ALL credibility yet, even in their tiny demented vain minds. It might some day but at this point many of them still see it as more legit than they are. And print is definitely showing a landslide for Kerry.

[gcomeau]

3. They matter as much as they are MADE to matter.

So hype them and get people paying attention.

-Grant

[earthside]

9. How the campaign uses them ...

... is what counts. My suggestion to the Kerry campaign would be to make an ad using the newspaper endorsements and the Republicans endorsing him (like John Eisenhower) as evidence of growing momentum.

Some undecides just want to go with a winner ... that's where endorsements can help.

[Selwynn]

11. ah that's a good point

[Weembo]

17. Campaign tidbit

I'd like to see these stats spoken on the campaign trail.

[sui generis]

4. great work - thanks!

I hope the readership follows in some fashion or another . . . Pennsylvania is 11:1 on readership and Ohio is almost 3:1 pro Kerry.

[Gaffey Duck]

6. The Show Me news editor called Dumbya a "puny figure"..

I love the word puny. :-)

It's so condescending while at the same time being nuancingly amusing adjective.

Perfect for the Chimp.

[Francine Frensky]

35. Hank Waters is a repub-libertarian -- donthca love when they turn

on their own.

And the name is the Columbia Daily Tribune.

Or maybe there's some duplication here.

[maxsolomon]

7. newspapers don't vote

but it was encouraging to see the seattle times, owned by frank anything-for-the-estate-tax-eradication blethen, say that bush is an effing incompetent.

[gcomeau]

8. Their readers do.

And some of them even pay attention to what they're reading. More of them will pay attention if we raise the profile of what's happening with the endorsements.

-Grant

[obnoxiousdrunk]

10. Don't a majority of

news paper readers vote democrat any way ?

[gcomeau]

18. So?

Even if that's true a majority voting democrat leaves a minority voting either Republican or UNDECIDED.

And every one of those undecided votes counts.

-Grant

[Hell Hath No Fury]

38. No GOP memes please!

We are the Democratic Party with members who are Democrats who vote Democratic.

This "Democrat" Party shit is a RW meme.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

37. No...

a majority of newspaper readers don't vote "democrat" -- they may vote "democratic" , but not "democrat".

[shockingelk]

12. state correction

The Columbia Tribune is Missouri, not Colorado.

[gcomeau]

16. Oops. Fixed it. Thanks.

-Grant

[NewYorkerfromMass]

13. They have 9 defections in fact

we only have the one from York, PA.

[gcomeau]

25. Isn't that what I said?

-Grant

[NewYorkerfromMass]

43. I missed it if you did

I saw the links and it was less than 9. If you wrote it I just missed it.

[troubleinwinter]

14. I do think they matter to some people.

The newspaper comes into their home each day, and some regard their local paper as their 'friend', and will lean towards the endorsement. Means more to the "undecideds", no doubt.

[progdonkey]

15. York Daily Record

I see what you mean about almost being ashamed of themselves. The final paragraphs really exemplify this:

"Mr. Kerry does edge out President Bush on many domestic issues. The president’s environmental policies are a disaster in the making, and we believe the senator would better protect the air and water. Mr. Kerry seems to have a better national health insurance plan.

But sadly, the national security issue trumps all others at this point — and it just doesn’t make sense to switch horses in mid-stream, as the plain-spoken man from Texas might put it.

That said, we hope President Bush will renew his commitment to compassionate conservatism on domestic issues. The war on terrorism should be no excuse to impose a hard-line conservative agenda on such a closely divided citizenry."

The love just leaps from the screen!

[gcomeau]

20. Isn't that just sad?

Their entire position appears to be that Kerry is the superior candidate but they just can't advocate changing presidents because of the "war on terra"

It's disgusting. I hope their readers pick up on it.

-Grant

[Kierkegaard]

42. I like the part about 'plain spoken.'

If you speak moran, maybe.

What I can't understand is why it's not a good idea to 'switch horses in mid-stream,' even when the horse is dead in the water?

[dubyaD40web]

19. The Kansas City Star endorsed Kerry today!

Kerry would bring welcome changes
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/9945187.htm

[roseBudd]

21. anyone notice any trends/breakdowns by ownership?

Knightridder vs. Gannett?

[shivaji]

22. Won't matter...The SCOTUS is the same as in 2000

which killed Gore. And this election is even more likely
to end up in courts and all those roads lead to SCOTUS.

[gcomeau]

24. You know... if you have some burning need to be the anti-optimist.

Do us all a favor and keep it to yourself.

Some of us feel like trying to win, however anyone wants to try stacking the deck against it.

-Grant

[shivaji]

30. Optimism is just fine but only accompanied by a dose of reality?

[npincus]

23. excellent + a kick-a-poo

[chiburb]

26. Great work, many thanks!!! n/t

[Julien Sorel]

27. Great job.

The big media simply will not cover this story. MSNBC.com ran a story on newspaper endorsements a couple of days ago, and the headline was something like, "Newspaper endorsements reflect deeply divided electorate." They almost completely ignored the fact that Kerry had far more endorsements than bush, and that a lot of newspapers that endorsed bush in 2000 endorsed Kerry this time. To get around that fact, and to make sure they were writing a "balanced" story, they pulled a simple trick: they focused on the rhetoric used in the editorials. So they ran quotations from the editorials and ignored Kerry's numerical superiority, and the number of papers that had flipped from Republican to Democrat.

They also used the most scathing anti-Kerry quotations from the bush endorsing papers, while using the mushiest garbage they could find from the pro-Kerry endorsers. It was a job of Republican hackery, pure and simple.

Again, as with the pattern of voter fraud, you'd think someone in the big media would pick up on such a huge shift in newspaper endorsements. I've never seen anything like it before -- very few papers shift their endorsement alignments from election to election; to have this many change should be a story in itself.

[gcomeau]

28. CNN covered it with the headline...

"Bush, Kerry win newspaper endorsements"

Their opening statement was "President Bush and his Democratic challenger, Sen. John Kerry, split the endorsements of several leading newspapers Sunday..."

And then proceeded to list 4 papers that endorsed Bush and 3 that endorsed Kerry.

They also said:

"The papers that endorsed Kerry supported Democrat Al Gore for president in 2000, while those that endorsed Bush on Sunday supported him in 2000."

Which is a flat out lie. You better believe they're getting a scorching e-mail detailing my contempt for the bias that displays and what I think of their journalistic integrity in light of it.

-Grant

[mrdmk]

29. The Air Wave Media has a lot more to gain with Mr. Bush Jr.

in office.

The print media has nothing to gain more or less with Mr. Kerry in office. With print media one does not need the FCC to rule on weather or not they can serve an area. This all depends upon the idea if it financially feasible for the group to serve an area.

What has happened to the print media is that they are being quickly replaced by the Internet for information. The Internet has the news from different sources for comparison, but for the investigative types the history of what has happened in the past. The news media does not present the reader a history lesson of a news story. This a failing of the current print media.

As for the Air Wave Media, They may have a roll back of the gift of the expanded percentage of viewing population if Mr. Kerry is elected to office. The Air Wave Media may also face the fair coverage act that was revoked by Newt Gingrich 1994 bill that did away with it. This is the same act that gave Clear Channel the right away to buy up all of those radio stations. This act did away with the educational programing required by the FCC Act. This repulsion of these liberties to the Air Wave Media about our air waves will be damming to the corporations that own them. Also on the table will be the viewing percentage (39% at this time vs. 35% as in the past) that will limit the number of stations a corporation can own.

Personally, I would like to see Clear Channel to have to give up the number of radio station that it owns by 90%. That is just a personal message.

[Skinner]

31. This is a really interesting analysis.

Thanks for writing it. :thumbsup:

[roseBudd]

33. Because I work for a newspaper I would like to see ownership analysis

Turns out Knight Ridder did a better job leading up to the Iraq War.

[Killarney]

34. Did any paper that endorsed Gore in 2000 change to Bush in 2004?

My guess is no, but I'd be interested to see.

I think this is great data you have and it's a good story that's being untold (endorsements changing from Bush 2000 to Kerry 2004). You should send it to Olbermann and Josh Marshall. They'll cover it.

[gcomeau]

36. It was in there.

One has so far. The York Daily Record in Pennsylvania. Their editorial board split in the process and the link to their endorsement and the dissenting opinion is in the original post.

The endorsement wasn't exactly enthusiastic. A more accurate description would be apologetic.

-Grant

[shelley806]

39. Media is trying to downplay ; "How many of you make a decision to vote

based upon newspapers endorsements?" (CNN), although I didn't realize the extent to which they endorsed *B* in 2000. How wrong they were! I think it does matter. It certainly made me delighted when I read NYT's glowing endorsement of Kerry and serious chastisement of Bush on Sunday.

One news source covered it well yesterday--?Olberman or ?A. Brown,-- including the millions of subscribers rather than just numbers and names of newspapers endorsing each candidate.

Thanks for this post and the links. I've bookmarked it to return to later.

[gcomeau]

41. Let them downplay all they like...

Even if it comes back only 5 or 10% letting the newspapers influence their decisions that's a vital 5 or 10%.

-Grant

[ArkDem]

40. Kerry will WIN the newspaper vote!