In a difficult call for them, and saying that America could do better than Barack Obama, The Economist has nonetheless endorsed the re-election of "the devil we know" rather than candidate Mitt Romney, whom they do not feel can be known, understood, or predicted--and on whom there are so many frightening political claims to support bad policies by those at the ideological or political margins of the GOP or conservative groups. But the publication gives both credit and criticism even handedly, providing a fair review of the things the President has done well, the things that should have been done, and those that now must be done.
I'm a little surprised by the endorsement, but relieved and pleased by it. There have been tentative signals in a number of articles. But candidate Romney left them with too little to build a principled, consistent and confident case on the key issues of our time--and too little to know who he now is. They had no other choice, not really.
I'm a little surprised by the endorsement, but relieved and pleased by it. There have been tentative signals in a number of articles. But candidate Romney left them with too little to build a principled, consistent and confident case on the key issues of our time--and too little to know who he now is. They had no other choice, not really.
Link to article:
No comments:
Post a Comment