Huffington Post: Obama has 20 (!!!) endorsements from CA. newspapers - Edwards and Clinton 1 each

[RiverStone]

Huff Post
1/29/08

<snip>

By Sunday, the Obama Campaign was holding a conference call with the press to announce the California Truth Squad, which will be quick "to respond to misleading negative attacks from the Clinton Campaign." Unless the Clintons harbor a political death wish, likely they have already set a new course, with a new tone--same as they did after Iowa. Therefore, the California Truth Squad may never muster; nevertheless, the nine pols, led by Congresswoman Barbara Lee, are ready--just as the Obama Campaign, stung, and perceiving, rightly or wrongly, that they were the object of dirty tricks at the Nevada caucuses, sent out the call nationwide for lawyers to come to South Carolina to monitor the voting. On Sunday, the San Francisco Chronicle endorsed Obama and thereby brought to twenty the senator's endorsements from California newspapers (to date, Clinton and Edwards have one endorsement each). Yet more evidence that the Clintons' and their surrogates' misstatements and insinuations about Obama have backfired is this reasoning from the Chronicle editorial board in making their decision: "Especially in recent days, her campaign has shown the sharp elbows that evoke the ugly underside of the Clinton years. . . ."

Now more California politicians are jumping on the Barack Express. Also Sunday, Xavier Becerra, the ranking Latino in the House of Representatives and assistant to Nancy Pelosi, announced his endorsement of Obama. Suddenly, California Latinos are coming out of the woodwork. Just before the South Carolina primary, state senate majority leader Gloria Romero was made a national co-chair of the campaign. By Monday noon, Joe Coto (chair of the CA Latino Caucus), Nicole Parra, Gilbert Cedillo and Dean Florez--all state legislators--were standing with Romero on the steps of the state Capitol in Sacramento to speak out, in both English and Spanish (Univision was rolling the camera), in a press conference for Obama. Why these folks didn't start campaigning last fall is the big question, but one drowned out by the bigger endorsements of the day from Ted Kennedy, his niece Caroline and Toni Morrison. Topping this good news--if such a thing is possible nine days out from primary--is the four million dollars the Obama Campaign raised online over the weekend

more:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-camp-makes-gains-in_b_83750.html

GoBama! seems to be challenging Clinton's once BIG lead in California. Only a little over a week to go --- but do you think Barack could actually win in California?

What was that Ted Kennedy said yesterday about...change is in the air?

p.s. The 20 to 1 newspaper ratio for Obama is amazing - anybody care to correct or confirm that?

[babylonsister]

1. WooT! Stand by for rationalizations. Thanks for more good news! nt

[Big Blue Marble]

15. What rationalizations?

Do Hillary supporters really use these instead of facts to support their candidate?

:sarcasm:

[Purveyor]

2. Thank you for posting this. K&R eom

[tishaLA]

3. wow! k&r!

i hope others are as kind about these endorsements as i have been about those for other candidates.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Counting Nationwide, Obama leaves the other candidates in the Dust!

Something to do with the actual interview with the selection committees. It appears that Obama just simply blows them away.

Anybody who actually listened to the entire "Reagan" interview instead of the 12 seconds would know why....He's just that good.

[my3boyz]

6. Awesome...

thank you so much for sharing this. I keep reading all the negatives about Obama on this board and it starts to get you down after a while. However, I try to remember that Barack said this would be an uphill battle. These little bits of good news do help. Thanks again!

[billbuckhead]

9. The establishment loves Obama

The black Raygun.

[NJSecularist]

5. Too bad newspaper endorsements mean little to nothing

[Quixote1818]

7. The only thing they mean, is that a group of people looked at all the candidates

and deiced on one. If that happens a lot in one state it could bode well for how people in that region will vote once they look at all the candidates.

[meow mix]

8. socal loves obama

gonna be real interesting to see how this shakes out

[tishaLA]

10. tasteful.

[Big Blue Marble]

16. First rationalization as Sister predicted.

NJ they sure don't hurt.

[MagsDem]

11. And he still won't win California

You know why? No one cares about endorsements. Have you ever checked your brain at the door and decided who you would vote for in a national election based on who endorsed them?

Me neither.

[Big Blue Marble]

17. The overwhelming number of endorsements

is indicative of the moment. Something big is changing in California.
He is still behind, but he is gaining fast with a week to go.

He does not have to win in votes to get a lot of delegates out of the state either.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

12. He will win newspaper editors while Clinton wins everybody else.

[spooky3]

13. I hope Edwards can stop the O-mentum!

[BuyingThyme]

14. That only proves he's the media favorite.

[OzarkDem]

18. Corporate America owns Obama, they're pushing product

What else do you expect them to do, they've invested heavily in his campaign.

The real issue is, what is Obama promising them in return? Would love to see videos of those endorsement interviews. More praise of St Reagan, more praise for trickle down economics.

Obama is a cheap whore a sellout, telling people what they want to hear.

[agdlp]

19. LATIMES stopped endorsing a generation ago - The perils of picking presidents

Sometime in the next few weeks, the Los Angeles Times will endorse two candidates -- a Democrat and a Republican -- in the Feb. 5 California presidential primary. A few months later, the paper will endorse a candidate for president.

These will be the first such endorsements the paper has made in 35 years. Although The Times routinely weighs in on ballot propositions and local and statewide political races, it has declined to endorse in a presidential race since it backed Richard Nixon in his successful 1972 reelection campaign.

The move back into the presidential endorsement business after such a long hiatus is an intriguing one, coming as it does at a moment when newspapers generally are declining in influence and fighting for their lives. The first endorsements will appear just weeks after the paper has been sold to a new owner.

But to consider it in its proper context, it is also important to understand why the paper stopped endorsing a generation ago. That was a complicated decision -- and one that told a story about the newspaper itself, about the Chandler family that owned and ran it, and about the long, complex relationship between Nixon and the paper

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-mcdougal20jan20,0,7627823.story?coll=la-news-comment