ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

bailey bud
Topic Author
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 08:35 #1 by bailey bud

ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement was created by bailey bud

I'm sure FH noticed - but the ECONOMIST published the most long-winded non-endorsing
endorsement I've ever read.

America could do better than Barack Obama; sadly, Mitt Romney does not fit the bill

Obama supporters should notice the magazine's stinging (and accurate) criticism of the President.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Rick
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 08:39 #2 by Rick

Replied by Rick on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

Sounds like something you would right...no offense.

“We can’t afford four more years of this”

Tim Walz

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Photo-fish
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 08:40 #3 by Photo-fish

Replied by Photo-fish on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

Agreed. Lesser of 2 evils, better the devil you know and all that.

´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`´¯`•...¸><((((º>´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•.´¯`•...¸><((((º>

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

FredHayek
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 08:44 #4 by FredHayek

Replied by FredHayek on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

Sort of like the Denver Post's endorsement. More an Obama is bad, but not as bad as we expect Mitt to be.
The expectations for Reagan weren't very high either.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

The 500 Foundation
Mountain Advisor

02 Nov 2012 08:51 #5 by The 500 Foundation

Replied by The 500 Foundation on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

<a class="postlink-local" href=" 285bound.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=24164 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=6&t=24164

what does intellectual honesty mean anyway?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

bailey bud
Topic Author
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 09:11 #6 by bailey bud

Replied by bailey bud on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

500 I apologize ---- my bad - I didn't notice that earlier post.

Raees linked to Forbes, which reported on the Economist endorsement (I linked to the actual article)

HE --- yes, I'd say that my thinking is very similar to the Magazine.

They're noting to the same issues I've been bugged by for awhile.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

The 500 Foundation
Mountain Advisor

02 Nov 2012 09:21 #7 by The 500 Foundation

Replied by The 500 Foundation on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

No worries on my end BB

I find it a far stretch to call it an endorsement as well
in reality it was more like acceptance by default

People will see into it what they wish to see

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

bailey bud
Topic Author
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 09:35 #8 by bailey bud

Replied by bailey bud on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

hey - I called it a stinging (and accurate) criticism......

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

LOL
Mountain Legend

02 Nov 2012 09:50 #9 by LOL

Replied by LOL on topic ECONOMIST pens a long non-endorsing endorsement

The article made some good points. Except leaving out the fact that evaluating a candidates past record and achievements should outweigh campaign rhetoric and pledges. They are clearly both flip-flopping politicians pandering to the voters.

If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2

Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.