Free Press endorses the Nerd

**daddeeo** · October-26-10, 08:25 AM

Can you believe the Freep has endorsed Rick the Nerd?
What will it mean for Detroit?
It feels like stab in the back from the hometown paper. I can see the News
going that way but the liberal newspaper shafting one of their own?

**sirrealone** · October-26-10, 08:32 AM

Yeah, because I want a paper that just endorses the Democratic candidate 100% of the time. This whole idea of putting thought into their endorsement and thinking who might be better for Michigan, who needs that kind of nonsense?!?!?

**SWMAP** · October-26-10, 08:33 AM

Detroit Free Press owned now by Gannett Company - not particularly a politically liberal ownership.

**Pam** · October-26-10, 08:34 AM

Can you believe the Freep has endorsed Rick the Nerd?

No, I can not.

I can see the News
going that way but the liberal newspaper shafting one of their own

I guess they aren't the "liberal" paper after all.

bartock · October-26-10, 08:34 AM

I think the Freep did it to look more moderate knowing that Snyder had a huge lead anyway.

**Goose** · October-26-10, 08:44 AM

It's the same as all these spartan grocery store spartans who now fly the green and white flags on their homes... never realized how many state grads i had living in my neighborhood until the football team got to 8-0......

jump on the bandwagon, everyone loves a winner......

Bearinabox · October-26-10, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by bartock

I think the Freep did it to look more moderate knowing that Snyder had a huge lead anyway.

It's funny how avowedly liberal politicians and institutions always want to look more moderate. Conservatives never seem to have that problem.

**iheartthed** · October-26-10, 08:54 AM

Uh, this is not extraordinary. They once endorsed John Engler too.

**Novine** · October-26-10, 09:35 AM

"They once endorsed John Engler too."

When Fieger was running. Whatever knocks one wants to make against Virg Bernero, there's no comparison between the two.

I chalk this endorsement up to Stephen Henderson's naive view of the political world. He thinks that Rick Snyder is going to arrive in Lansing and the lobbyists and special interests and politicians on both sides of the aisle are going to bow at his feet and do whatever he commands. I don't think Henderson has a real understanding of how power is exercised in Lansing and elsewhere. I doubt he's ever worked a political beat before he joined the editorial staff. One can play the "things have to change!" tune but the reality is that even if Snyder goes to Lansing with a mandate of change, there's a lot of people on both sides of the aisle in Lansing who have no interest in his change agenda.

**MCP-001** · October-26-10, 09:38 AM

If you read the Free Press' reader's comments, this "endorsement" was a bone thrown to them because most of them had cited their bias towards anyone with a "-d" after their name on the ballot without any real rationale to support it.

Bernero's gubernatorial ambitions are crashing faster than the Hindenburg.

Want proof?

Forget the polling numbers which show him consistently trailing.

Look at how many people were at Renaissance High when Clinton was in town. Given the press leading up to it, that place should have been packed [[for those of you unfamiliar with this campaign stop, it wasn't anywhere near it).

**sehender1** · October-26-10, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Novine

"They once endorsed John Engler too."

When Fieger was running. Whatever knocks one wants to make against Virg Bernero, there's no comparison between the two.

I chalk this endorsement up to Stephen Henderson's naive view of the political world. He thinks that Rick Snyder is going to arrive in Lansing and the lobbyists and special interests and politicians on both sides of the aisle are going to bow at his feet and do whatever he commands. I don't think Henderson has a real understanding of how power is exercised in Lansing and elsewhere. I doubt he's ever worked a political beat before he joined the editorial staff. One can play the "things have to change!" tune but the reality is that even if Snyder goes to Lansing with a mandate of change, there's a lot of people on both sides of the aisle in Lansing who have no interest in his change agenda.

Well, since you're calling me out here, I figured I'd answer..
I won't argue with you about whether I'm "naive." That's your call, I suppose.
But here are some facts:
Before this job, I covered the U.S. Supreme Court for five terms for Knight Ridder's 30 newspapers..
Before that, I was deputy editorial page editor at the Baltimore Sun, where I handled two mayoral elections and a gubernatorial, plus countless city council, state legislative and congressional endorsements.
Before that, I worked on the Freep edit board, where, again, we handled mayoral, gubernatorial, legislative and congressional endorsements. [[for the record, we endorsed Engler TWICE, in 98 and 94... 94 was because the Democratic candidate, Howard Wolpe, was vehemently opposed to Proposal A.)
Before that, I was on the editorial board in Lexington, Ky., where we handled [[same story) legislative, congressional, mayoral, city council and gubernatorial elections..

I agree with you that Snyder's greatest challenge will be the great investment in the status quo in Lansing - by lobbyists, legislators, etc. In fact, the endorsement editorial addressed that at length.
And no, I don't think it'll be easy for Snyder to overcome it; indeed, if he fails, it will be because he's a "man without a country" in Lansing.

But I've gotten to know both Virg and Rick pretty well over the campaign, as is always the case. And my best judgment right now says to me that Snyder, with his independence, with a toughness that I think everyone underestimates, is the best guy for the job right now. This, after watching this campaign and handling umpteen others in the past.

If your judgment's different, that's fine. But somehow I doubt you have sufficiently greater knowledge or insight here to describe my conclusions as "naive."
Of course, you're entitled to your opinions...

**rjk** · October-26-10, 10:04 AM

This is a state that hasn't voted for a republican presidential candidate since 1988 and Snyder has a 15-20 point lead? You can write some of that on the fact that a democrat has been in Lansing for 8 years, but it can't account for all of it.

You're not a very viable candidate if you're a democrat and are getting that type of an ass kicking in this increasingly left leaning state.

The Freep simply came to the same conclusion that the majority of people in Michigan have come to.

**English** · October-26-10, 10:28 AM

I knew Snyder would win back during the primaries. I really disliked one of the mailers I received from Bernero slamming Dillon's personal views on abortion. I'm conservative in the way that I choose to live my personal life, and try to quietly walk out my faith, but I'm socially liberal. I would be furious if someone told me that because of my worship and deeply held personal beliefs, I wasn't qualified to be a Democrat.

I still haven't decided who I will vote for in the gubernatorial race. Benson's got my vote, but I am extremely turned off by Bernero. I'm trying really hard to be a good Democrat, but nothing is turning me on. I wish I'd had the chance to hear him in person or meet him, because that's the only reason I voted for Gore in 2000 -- I really disliked him in the late 1990s and during the presidential campaign until I caught a glimpse of the charisma at a union rally in front of the DPL that we'd later witness in "An Inconvenient Truth."

I don't trust either candidate on Detroit issues, but I think receivership is looming no matter who gets in.

For all the mudslinging of his fellow Dems, Bernero has been extremely ineffective against Snyder. Maybe Snyder is the next Engler, but I don't think so. I give the Ann Arbor folks more credit than that -- he's very popular around town, and Bernero's style just doesn't sell to the creative class Dem types. We'll have to see what happens once Snyder is in office.

Originally Posted by MCP-001

Look at how many people were at Renaissance High when Clinton was in town. Given the press leading up to it, that place should have been packed [[for those of you unfamiliar with this campaign stop, it wasn't anywhere near it).

A lot of politically active Black folks are still mad about what Bill pulled [[or what they perceive that Bill pulled) during the Democratic primary in '08.

**iheartthed** · October-26-10, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Novine

"They once endorsed John Engler too."

When Fieger was running. Whatever knocks one wants to make against Virg Bernero, there's no comparison between the two.

Yeah, it was against Feiger, but they could have opted not to endorse if they were so adverse to endorsing a conservative candidate. The Detroit News, which typically endorses conservative candidates, refrained from endorsing in the 2004 Presidential race because the editorial board was not pleased with Bush's first term and were not impressed with John Kerry.

**Thruster315** · October-26-10, 10:33 AM

I look at newspaper endorsements the way I look at lawn signs. One can choose who they want to vote for regardless of how many signs are out there. C'mon people... think for yourselves! Just because a newspaper, Uncle Bob, or whomever endorses a candidate- one still should look at the issues and decide on whom they feel comfortable with. Voting is an individual thing. So I have no problems with the Freep endorsing Snyder; it's their right and I'm all for looking at both candidates before casting my vote.

**Novine** · October-26-10, 10:50 AM

"I won't argue with you about whether I'm "naive." That's your call, I suppose. But here are some facts:"

The facts confirm what I suspected, you've never worked the political beat in Michigan. I think you know that the people working up in Lansing like Peter Luke, Chris Christoff, Kathy Barks Hoffman or Rick Pluta have a much better sense of how Lansing works than the those ensconced on the editorial boards around the state. You get your short amount of face time with a handful of the candidates. But that doesn't tell you much about how effective they'll be in Lansing. It also doesn't give you a sense of how state government really works or who the major players are in Lansing. If you had worked that beat, I think you would truly understand the obstacles that Snyder will face if he gets elected. Bernero would face the same obstacles but unlike Snyder or Granholm, he's served in the state legislature and hailing from Lansing, has been able to maintain those relationships that are going to be critical to getting past the usual stumbling blocks.

My view of this editorial as being "naive" also comes from the fact that a Snyder administration is going to be stocked with a lot of the right-wingers who are going to be pushing agendas that usually don't get support from the Free Press editorial page. The same is true of the state legislature, doubly so if the Republicans take control of the State House and gain a super majority in the State Senate. Rick Snyder may not be leading the charge for a lot of hard right conservative ideas but there will be plenty of lawmakers more than willing to push them to his desk. A Bernero administration would serve as a check against those attempts to move Michigan far to the right. By endorsing Snyder, you've endorsed one party rule over Michigan for the next 2 years and you've endorsed the harm that will come to many Michigan residents by giving the Republicans unfettered control over state government.

**bailey** · October-26-10, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Novine

"I won't argue with you about whether I'm "naive." That's your call, I suppose. But here are some facts:"

The facts confirm what I suspected, you've never worked the political beat in Michigan. I think you know that the people working up in Lansing like Peter Luke, Chris Christoff, Kathy Barks Hoffman or Rick Pluta have a much better sense of how Lansing works than the those ensconced on the editorial boards around the state. You get your short amount of face time with a handful of the candidates. But that doesn't tell you much about how effective they'll be in Lansing. It also doesn't give you a sense of how state government really works or who the major players are in Lansing. If you had worked that beat, I think you would truly understand the obstacles that Snyder will face if he gets elected. Bernero would face the same obstacles but unlike Snyder or Granholm, he's served in the state legislature and hailing from Lansing, has been able to maintain those relationships that are going to be critical to getting past the usual stumbling blocks.

My view of this editorial as being "naive" also comes from the fact that a Snyder administration is going to be stocked with a lot of the right-wingers who are going to be pushing agendas that usually don't get support from the Free Press editorial page. The same is true of the state legislature, doubly so if the Republicans take control of the State House and gain a super majority in the State Senate. Rick Snyder may not be leading the charge for a lot of hard right conservative ideas but there will be plenty of lawmakers more than willing to push them to his desk. A Bernero administration would serve as a check against those attempts to move Michigan far to the right. By endorsing Snyder, you've endorsed one party rule over Michigan for the next 2 years and you've endorsed the harm that will come to many Michigan residents by giving the Republicans unfettered control over state government.

What "check" have the Democrats been in the last 8 years against hard right ideas? Prop 2 banning gay marriage? Uh...Granholm and the dems couldnt be bothered to argue against that. Medical marijuana and stem cells? Amendments passed by the people of Michigan but are being sabotaged at all levels by hard right wingers with hardly any opposition. Workplace protections for gays? Nah, too controversial. Second parent adoptions? doesn't make it out of committee. Banning smoking in Casinos? of course not! Random Asst AG's stalking college kids? no biggie. Heck today's paper outlines the failure to get something as simple as an anti bullying law passed over the objections of the chirstianist right wing [[michigan being one of only FIVE states not to manage this pretty small thing) because to acknowledge that kids are bullied to death because they are [[or are suspected of being) gay would be to acknowledge and support the 'radical homosexual agenda". I mean seriously? That is just hard right social agenda. They cave even faster on fiscal matters. See Dillon, Andrew. They couldn't accomplish anything meaningful when they had the gov and the house, how are they going to be a check against anything?

**Novine** · October-26-10, 11:38 AM

If you think a workplace ban on smoking would have passed under a Republican Governor and Republican-controlled legislature, you're probably using some medicinal marijuana. Lots of crack-pot ideas made it through the legislature to the Governor's desk only to be vetoed. Here's one example:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111526.php

Dillon has been a horrible Speaker of the House. But Dillon isn't representative of the Democrats who will remain in Lansing after the election.

**artds** · October-26-10, 11:47 AM

Come on now, people. How influential do you think these newspaper endorsement are?

Everyone in this thread seems to have their minds pretty well made up as to who they're voting for.

Do you really need a newspaper endoresement to make you feel better about voting for the person you were going to vote for anyway?

**kraig** · October-26-10, 12:03 PM

Political ideologies aside, it all comes down to this. When the Republicans are in control, they do a good job of pushing through their agenda. When the Democrats are in control, they don't. Milliken and Engler, effective at pushing through an agenda. Heck, in Millikens case, he's hands down the best Governor that this state has had in the past 30-40 years. Blanchard and Granholm, piss poor. It goes beyond Bernero. The democratic party has to get its act together. Its best candidate, Dennis Archer, is sitting on the sidelines.

**MCP-001** · October-26-10, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by English

A lot of politically active Black folks are still mad about what Bill pulled [[or what they perceive that Bill pulled) during the Democratic primary in '08.

I'm aware of the friction, but do you mean to tell me that not even out-of-town democrats would come to Detroit to see Bill Clinton?

That was the telling part...

**R8RBOB** · October-26-10, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by kraig

Political ideologies aside, it all comes down to this. When the Republicans are in control, they do a good job of pushing through their agenda. When the Democrats are in control, they don't. Milliken and Engler, effective at pushing through an agenda. Heck, in Millikens case, he's hands down the best Governor that this state has had in the past 30-40 years. Blanchard and Granholm, piss poor. It goes beyond Bernero. The democratic party has to get its act together. Its best candidate, Dennis Archer, is sitting on the sidelines.

Archer sat on the sidelines because he knew a Democrat would not win governorship in 2010. Why waste a campaign that was not going to produce a win? Rick Snyder will win because he has not:

1) Flashed his GOP pledge pin.
2) Campaign with other GOP hopefuls
3) Mention abortion once in his ads.
4) Uttered the name Barack Obama or Obamacare in his commercials.

Snyder is playing the part of non-partisan candidate though he is the Republican. I believe Snyder will win Democratic Detroit because of this and the fact he is on record saying that Michigan must get Detroit back on its feet. [[Anyone noticed Dave Bing campaigning for Virg? BTW, where is Dave Bing?)

lilpup · October-26-10, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by rjk

in this increasingly left leaning state.

I disagree with this. Michigan has always been a swing state that prefers moderates whenever one's available. I think that's why Snyder is in favor - he seems moderate and has maintained that presentation by not saying much at all. But if he were sporting a D instead of an R he would be having a tougher time of it. The state has been swinging back toward R for about the last six years.

**iheartthed** · October-26-10, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by R8RBOB

Archer sat on the sidelines because he knew a Democrat would not win governorship in 2010. Why waste a campaign that was not going to produce a win? Rick Snyder will win because he has not:

1) Flashed his GOP pledge pin.
2) Campaign with other GOP hopefuls
3) Mention abortion once in his ads.
4) Uttered the name Barack Obama or Obamacare in his commercials.

Snyder is playing the part of non-partisan candidate though he is the Republican. I believe Snyder will win Democratic Detroit because of this and the fact he is on record saying that Michigan must get Detroit back on its feet. [[Anyone noticed Dave Bing campaigning for Virg? BTW, where is Dave Bing?)

I agree with the reasoning for him doing well but I don't think Snyder will win Detroit. He will probably do extraordinarily well for a Republican candidate, but having an outright win in Detroit [[city) is the longest of long shots.

**English** · October-26-10, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by MCP-001

I'm aware of the friction, but do you mean to tell me that not even out-of-town democrats would come to Detroit to see Bill Clinton?

That was the telling part...

I agree totally with you about that. The problem is that the Dems have managed to alienate all of their core constituencies in less than 2 years. Now they want us to vote straight ticket without telling us why -- they're just scaring us with what the Republicans will do, but do not seem to have much vision for how to save this Titanic of a state. The fringes of both parties scare me and most reasonable people, which is why Snyder will get independents and crossover Dems next week Tuesday. I doubt very much that he'll fill up Lansing with the Tea Partiers. He seems more reasonable than that.

As for Bernero, the Spartans' run to the BCS should be sufficient consolation.