Jim Geraghty of the National Review is fond of saying that the media's easily predictable endorsements of Democratic candidates would be more palatable if they began, “We are, by and large, liberals, and thus are inclined to prefer the more liberal option in almost every election.”
And that seems like the only way to explain the following....Here's the Philadelphia Inquirer on embattled New Jersey governor Jon Corzine:
The former Goldman Sachs chief’s unusual background might have suggested he would bring real and needed upheaval to Trenton, but the past four years have not seen that. For a man who rose to the top of Wall Street from humble beginnings on an Illinois farm, Corzine has sometimes seemed timid about shaking up the statehouse.
As such, his administration’s victories have been qualified, its progress halting. On finances, the governor took a principled stand for funding pension obligations, only to have to retreat from it amid the downturn. He budgeted cautiously, but then made exceptions under political and economic pressure. He put forward but abandoned a controversial proposal to retire state debt.
...after which, of course, they endorsed Corzine for a second term. Not because he's good - even the Inquirer is honest enough to admit that - but because he's a liberal. And a liberal failure is more desirable to the Philadelphia Inquirer than a Republican success.
Of course, there may even be a more selfish reason for the P-I to endorse Corzine - after all, his policies has helped make Pennsylvania the #1 destination for disaffected New Jersey (ex)residents..
The New York Times, on Jon Corzine:
Most New Jersey voters find him astonishingly inarticulate, and his credentials as a former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs do not seem as impressive as they did before the financial meltdown in 2008. He has poured lots of his personal wealth into this race, far too much of it for biting — and sometimes juvenile — attacks on Mr. Christie. In his second term, we would like to see him back away from the state’s unions.
...Jon Corzine, who is slightly ahead among likely voters (?), is a decent man with a laudable set of goals for his state.
...and thus he is endorsed. Not because he's good - even the Times is honest enough to admit he's not - but because he's a liberal. And a liberal failure is more desirable to the New York Times than a Republican success. Plus, I'm assuming - although it is nowhere proven - that Chris Christie is not a decent man.
Truth is, Christie still holds on to a slim lead. But with Corzine having dumped over $40 million of his own money into the campaign already to make New Jersey his personal fiefdom, and with new ads on the way touting his dubious endorsements, it's gonna be a tough final mile for Chris Christie...