View Full Version : 'The Economist' Endorses Obama For President

Solomon Grundy
11-02-2012, 01:22 AM
<span style='font-size: 17pt'>'The Economist' Endorses Obama For President</span>


London-based magazine, The Economist, endorsed President Barack Obama on Thursday. It is the second time the world’s leading economics-focused magazine has endorsed Obama, this time by a narrow margin over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

The Economist’s choice turned to two questions: how good of a president has Obama been, especially on the main issues of the economy and foreign policy? And can America really trust Mitt Romney to do a better job?

<span style="color: #CC0000">The magazine said in a press release today that while Obama’s shortcomings are many, Republican challenger Romney has changed his position too often on policy matter.</span>

Romney has over the last month changed his stance on health care and foreign policy issues in a likely move to placate party right wingers.

The Economist said it would have chosen Romney if he had maintained his positions from the first debate, or promoted himself as the Romney that ran Massachusetts in a bipartisan way. Even then, however, Massachusetts is a solid Democratic state, with very few Republicans in the state Congress on Beacon Hill. There is not a whole lot of partisan bickering in the golden domed State House of Massachusetts.

The problem for the magazine was that there were too many versions of Romney—and, as they have outlined — those versions come with a lot of dangerous ideas, including:

Foreign Policy: On foreign policy matters, Romney seems too ready to bomb Iran and he has vowed to label China a currency manipulator, something the U.S. Treasury Department has said China is not.

Government Spending: Although he would slash red tape on the domestic front, Romney said he wants to start with huge tax cuts yet again and dramatically increase defense spending. With what revenues? Magazine editors said, “He is still in the cloud-cuckoo-land of thinking that America’s finances can be dealt with entirely through spending cuts. Backing business is important, but getting the macroeconomics right matters far more.”

Economy: Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says.


Despite his shortcomings, President Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster and avoided a double dip recession. Obama has made for a more decent foreign policy, the magazine editors said in the press release.

Gone are the days of color coded terror alerts and committing large swaths of U.S. troops to participate in grudge match wars, like Iraq under George W. Bush, for example.

Lastly, and according to The Economist, “this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.”

The full endorsement will be available in the November 3rd issue of the magazine.

Gayle in MD
11-02-2012, 07:28 AM
So ridiculous to blame President Obama, particularly while George Bush is in then Cayman Islands, hob nobbing with the crooks who brught about the crash!

Hey, every major economic news media that isn't a tool of Murdoch, or the Repiglican Grand Oil party, has endorsed the president.

Not one that I know of, has endorsed Romney, in fact, they are laughing at him, all but clown Trump, that is.

Whose endorsement is most valuable? Bloomberg's or Trumps, LMAO!

BTW, very good economic numbers in the news, out this morning!


11-02-2012, 09:15 AM
This critique they offer as to why they cannot recommend voting for Myth is about the same as the Salt Lake City newspaper's editorial-- too many Myths involved, making it nearly impossible to say what he'd do in the end.

The other reason is that the most likely scenario is that he'd bow to the pressure of his party's right, as he did to gain the nomination, as he is apparently a coward when it comes to standing up to his party anytime. (Has he ever done so? Not to my recollection.)