posted on October 11, 2010 03:46:34 PM new
Yesterday, the San Jose Mercury News gave us an enthusiastic endorsement, saying Jerry "offers California exactly what it needs in its next Governor" -- a leader "who can get things done in Sacramento and who brings good ideas, strong principles and a reputation for telling the truth."
Meg's hometown paper didn't mince words about her candidacy, arguing that she "utterly lacks the qualifications to be governor," that she has a "loose relationship with the truth," and that she "can't buy credibility" through her "misleading ads" and "herd of consultants." The San Jose Mercury News got it right -- the contrast in this race couldn't be starker, and "Brown is the right choice for California at this critical time."
Papers all across California--the Los Angeles Times, Sacramento Bee, San Francisco Chronicle, and, now, San Jose Mercury News--have backed Brown.
An important excerpt from Sunday's endorsement:
"It's popular in some circles to say we need an outsider with business experience to run government. We tried that. It didn't work. This is the time for a leader who can work the system and who will act in the best interests of the people of California. Capping his career with a second run for the office he held three decades ago, Brown, at 72, has no ax to grind, no simmering ambition that would lead him to trump the public good with pandering to special interests. He is motivated by his desire to leave a shining legacy after a lifetime of public service."
posted on October 12, 2010 12:46:16 PM new
An older article from the Washington Times. A paper that not many here would read. I found the article quite interesting.
"Mr. Brown wants to be seen as just a regular public employee, trying to hold his own against tycoons at the top of America's wealth disparity. While politically expedient, the image of Jerry Brown as everyman is patently false."
As for the newspaper endorsements, how many people read a newspaper today? Are there any endorsements from the Spanish press? Those are the voters that he needs to reach.
The debate scheduled for tonight, might just make the difference.
posted on October 13, 2010 11:50:35 AM new
LA Times coverage of the final Whitman-Brown debate....
"Whitman and Brown's final debate a contentious one"
"The rivals for California governor continue their attacks on each other and stick to their talking points without offering details on how they would fix the troubled state."
posted on October 13, 2010 02:43:06 PM new
its like nearly every debate ive ever seen, a lot of talking points and hot air - with nobody saying anything of substance.
these are nothing more than boxing matches. watch 'your guy/gal' try and take swings at the opponent.
if anyone is hinging their decision on how people come across in a debate, they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
there's lots of people that are probably good at government, but don't have the face/personality to get a lot of voter support.
it's American Idol, but with less talent and more delusions of grandeur
posted on October 18, 2010 10:11:14 AM new
Oregon sees the same issue as California does in their Governor's race.
We have a previous Democrat Governor in John Kitzhaber and a former Portland Trailblazer basketball player turned Investment Manager, Chris Dudley.
If you go to Dudley's site and see his plan, the first page or two is spent on why Kitzhaber is wrong for Oregon. When you open the voter pamphlet and read Dudley's plan in a 4 or 5 paragraph summary, it doesn't say much. The whole 2nd paragraph actually goes into why Kitzhaber is wrong for Oregon.
As far as I can see, both candidates have their flaws. Dudley had a home built in Washington so he could avoid paying income tax in Oregon. Kitzhaber received a "buddy loan" that other people didn't have an opportunity to get. The company he received the loan from ended up having their president serve on a state board after giving the loan.
Neither represent Oregon well... and it is the same old politics. Exactly what is going on in California.
