It's not going to happen.
3
Interesting that the New York Times forgot to even mention Rand Paul ONCE. Paul is the only one with a sane, non-interventionist foreign policy that involves an end of toppling regimes and giving away weapons rather than finding out if the sand of the Middle East can be made to glow as Cruz would like to do. Paul is a champion of the Bill of Rights including an end to the unconstitutional domestic spying that is so rampant. He is serious about criminal justice reform and bringing an end to the tax loopholes for the wealthy. He is a true fiscal conservative who is willing to examine ALL spending for possible cuts INCLUDING military spending. Finally, he seems to really just be a more decent human being than anyone else on the Republican stage. And if anyone is concerned with Paul’s low polling numbers, keep in mind that they are not any lower than Kasich’s. As other commenters have pointed out, Kasich isn’t quite as sane as he appears to be. While he may SEEM to not be as out of touch with reality as Trump or Cruz, I think some of his policies indicate otherwise. This leads me to the conclusion that the New York Times is not interested in a truly decent conservative candidate, but rather is interested in having a democrat elected while saving face with the pretense of being unbiased. I truly hope that Dr. Paul will surprise everyone in Iowa and force the media to finally discuss his beliefs.
11
Fortunately for Democrats, and Republican who would consider voting for Kasich would be laughed out of the party at this point. And a recommendation from the NYT can only hurt him among Repubs, so - THANK YOU!
4
I'm very sorry...
I do not get the concept of giving credibility to any of these appalling GOP contenders...
Does the NY Times feel that merely because there is a curve distinction for a less belligerent contender, that it has to give someone...anyone...its stamp of approval?
They should ALL be dismissed for the inadequacies they would bring to our country...period.
I do not get the concept of giving credibility to any of these appalling GOP contenders...
Does the NY Times feel that merely because there is a curve distinction for a less belligerent contender, that it has to give someone...anyone...its stamp of approval?
They should ALL be dismissed for the inadequacies they would bring to our country...period.
17
Yes, but still useless.
1
John Kasich is five furlongs ahead of the rest of the field!
1
Kasich may be the most reality based of all of them....but consider the context. Given the chance the party would be back to the days of the 1950s where the norm was segregation, nuclear deterence, no tolerance for other genders, life styles, etc. and just hard working white people...my wife and I are catching up on our serial watching....Mad Men recalls those days and many wish we would go back to it.
6
Last time around, the party spent years fighting Obama Care and then the RINOs stepped in and we wound up with the one candidate who could be guaranteed not to repeal it. The voters are fed up with candidates who only represent the dues paying special interests. There will be no "reset" this time and you can count out Bush, Rubio, and Kasich. If there was, you can expect a three or four way contest and all of the fun of a deadlocked electrical college.
4
"Even unemployment figures, which he’s pegged at 23 or 42 percent (the correct number is 5 percent) don’t merit his attention."
Saying unemployment is 5%, without any elaboration on what this actually measures, is pretty misleading.
Saying unemployment is 5%, without any elaboration on what this actually measures, is pretty misleading.
2
Whoever the NYT endorses for the GOP candidate for President is the candidate most likely to lose to their choice for the Democrat nominee for President. That is a fact.
3
"Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, though a distinct underdog, is the only plausible choice for Republicans tired of the extremism and inexperience on display in this race. "
Sometimes I can't believe how oblivious and stupid the people in high places in the media are. There is nothing -- NOTHING -- more extremist and dangerous than the establishment GOP. You want the country torn down?, the 20th century obliterated from the history book? Then elect some establishment Republican doing the bidding of the plutocrats. It's bad enough how the Democrats have been transformed by the neo-liberal wing from Bill Clinton to the completely useless, damaging Obama to be nothing but obsequious doormats at the feet of the right and money. But they at least to pretend they stand for something more than entrenched money. The establishment GOP is proud and in-your-face that it simply cares nothing but for neo-feudalism and crony capitalism at the expense of everything up to and including the planet.
Sometimes I can't believe how oblivious and stupid the people in high places in the media are. There is nothing -- NOTHING -- more extremist and dangerous than the establishment GOP. You want the country torn down?, the 20th century obliterated from the history book? Then elect some establishment Republican doing the bidding of the plutocrats. It's bad enough how the Democrats have been transformed by the neo-liberal wing from Bill Clinton to the completely useless, damaging Obama to be nothing but obsequious doormats at the feet of the right and money. But they at least to pretend they stand for something more than entrenched money. The establishment GOP is proud and in-your-face that it simply cares nothing but for neo-feudalism and crony capitalism at the expense of everything up to and including the planet.
4
A NYT editorial on the choice of a GOP nominee is laughable in itself, even though I agree with its conclusion.
2
Way To Go NYT !! A wonderful and everlasting choice of words to describe Trump and Cruz: " Those two...are equally objectionable." And just think - one of those equally objectionable men could occupy the White House and have his finger on the nuclear button very soon. Is that what we want, America?? Will you, or I, be able to sleep better knowing that fact? I think not. Can we, as a unified Western country, not come up with a better choice. I can say that this is a very good time to be very old like me.........
5
Democrats need someone to get excited about. Sanders could do it. Hillary has too much baggage, too many secrets. Let the GOP sort out their own mess.
3
Clearly no one here from Ohio. Kasich is a union buster who funnels taxpayer money into charter schools while starving the public schools. This has been a disaster for Ohio. And then there's "Jobs Ohio," a taxpayer-funded organization set up by Kasich with absolutely NO oversight. Millions gone...where? Kasich is the EMBODIMENT of the GOP establishment, a crony capitalist murdering the middle and working classes.
It is truly disturbing that Kasich is seen as a "reasonable" alternative to the two GOP front-runners.
It is truly disturbing that Kasich is seen as a "reasonable" alternative to the two GOP front-runners.
18
Really, editorial board? You've come down from the mountain top with the sage advice that the Party you despise should nominate a candidate with zero chance to win?
Very helpful. While you're at it, ask Tom Brady to choose his favorite New York Jet.
Very helpful. While you're at it, ask Tom Brady to choose his favorite New York Jet.
7
Kasich, a hyena in sheep's clothing. The Times strikes out again in its endorsements. Clinton and Kasich, the plutocracy is in love with both of them and the Times has shown that it stands with the plutocracy and not the people.
6
Given the Republican primary electorate, the NYTimes endorsement is the final nail in Kasich's coffin. If the Editorial Board had really wanted to help him, they should have endorsed Trump.
4
Among the blind the one-eyed man is king. Is that the new mantra of an increasingly desperate Party? Is that what this country wants to settle for?
4
So, the NY Times favors the least vicious sociopath? Got it.
8
Ted Cruz wants you Iowans to "vote for him 10 times." So, it looks like Republicans have turned to the old adage, "vote early, and vote often." I wouldn't be surprised if they took that to heart.
2
The dork from Ohio! Hahahahaha!
Hey, Big John, been to Cleveland lately?
Did you know every country in the world has a city they make fun of? Yes? Well, in Russia and China, they make fun of Cleveland! (just like everyone else)
Kasich couldn't carry Jim Traficant's jockstrap,
dead or alive..
Hey, Big John, been to Cleveland lately?
Did you know every country in the world has a city they make fun of? Yes? Well, in Russia and China, they make fun of Cleveland! (just like everyone else)
Kasich couldn't carry Jim Traficant's jockstrap,
dead or alive..
3
However, ANY Republican candidate brings forth more than Clinton/Sanders does. Sanders is a flat-out lunatic. No more needs to be said about him. Electing Clinton puts a sex-offender back in the White House as well as a future convict.
3
I completely agree with the endorsement of John Kasich.
2
Just a guess, but I would expect endorsement by the Times would sink any chance Kasich has of becoming the Republican nominee. The Republican base probably rates the NY Times right up there with immigrants and Obama on their hate list. Keep up the good work.
1
I figure the NYT is endorsing Kasich because they think he is only one Hillary might be able to beat.
1
Break with tradition NYT. When there is no good candidate, endorse no one.
4
As if Republican voters are looking at the NY Times for guidance. The editorial board's disdain for all things "R" is on display daily. Even their endorsement of Kasich is a left-handed compliment, replete with reasons why you really shouldn't vote for him either. I'm sure the other candidates will wear their non-endorsement by the NY Times as a badge of honor. If I were John Kasich, I'd reject it immediately. That might actually get him a few more votes.
3
Holy smokes! I actually agree with the NYT Editorial Board. Proves there is a first time for everything.
It always boils down to the lesser of the many evils for both parties...we don't have a Lincoln running every four yrs...and in this case the NY Times is right with Kasich and Hillary on the other side...
4
So according to the Times Clinton and Kasich, nothing new, as a part of the elite east coast "establishment ", that for far too long has controlled and ruined this country Poxy on them.
3
A plausible choice, but not for women. Did you bother to check his record?
1
You have grossly mistepresented Trump's statements regarding unemployment and 45% tariff, which he has repeatedly corrected you for. However, you also have grossly misrepresented the real Kasich, his scandals, his Ohio record (now ranking 23rd in education, from 5th rank when he took office; the JobsOhio and charter school scandals), concealing his attempt to sell Fracking rights in state parks, the cronyism, taking a $595k bonus from Lehman (you know, the subprime mortgage market scandal) and then bailing out before it crashed, leaving his clients, including the YUGE Ohio public employee pension fund with millions in losses, yada yada. But I forgive you, NYT, because you did, correctly, identify yourself as an EDITORIAL board, not a factual one.
4
Very clever NYT. By pushing for Kasich, a nice but weak man, you hope to get rid of Trump and Cruz, both strong individuals. This will then strengthen Ms. Clinton's chances to be our next President which is what you want.
1
You say Cruz is not about constitutional principles, and then don't give a single example. Then you say he is just saying anything.....and in the same breath say he is scary because he would do it. So which is it? Can't have it both ways.
The maturity of your takedown on Cruz is schoolyard level in maturity and contains no substance.
Why not just say you hate the guy? Would be shorter and more honest.
The maturity of your takedown on Cruz is schoolyard level in maturity and contains no substance.
Why not just say you hate the guy? Would be shorter and more honest.
2
Not so fast. He is no different from the rest of the group. He is a wolf in sheep's skin.
3
All from the NY Times which advocates electing the dirtiest, slimiest politician in the race. Hilary brags about being bought. At least trump is to arrogant to be bought.
2
Please don't write off Marco Rubio. He is a serious candidate and a potential winner against the odious Hillary.
Why didn't the NYT preface its endorsement by stating the obvious: "We know his record is bad, but..." "We know his record on union-busting but..." We know his penchant for wanting state invasion of women's private parts but..."
2
You are upset with Mr. Cruz because he is ambitious? Just curious, that was Hillary you picked for the Democrats, no?
2
Why do you bother? To give the impression that you (the whole NYT - not just the editorial board) are objective? Please
2
To the GOP voters Trump is probably the best of the worst but his motto is clear......
"It's not about WE it's about ME" Sad they can't see it.
"It's not about WE it's about ME" Sad they can't see it.
1
The first time I heard Kasich speak (an interview on NPR) my reaction was: 'wha..! what's this now? Sanity?? Hmm.. this one could be a real threat to us next year (it was 2015).'
Now.. I'd just like to thank the Republican base for being the Republican base and tossing any true potential threats to Hil' out of the general election.
Now.. I'd just like to thank the Republican base for being the Republican base and tossing any true potential threats to Hil' out of the general election.
You often can't tell Kasich from a liberal so brainwashed is he in sacred, inviolable politically correct dogma. He might well be worse than Hilary.
1
It's about time for this editorial, though it won't do him much good to have the NYT's "endorsement". John Kasich is highly experienced, intelligent, well-known (holding my nose here but he use to sub for Billo as host on FOX) and a reasonable guy who is not playing the extremist card to get elected. In fact he is the ONLY one trying to be realistic about the obvious--compromise and moderation get the job done along WITH Congress. He has been gone from Washington long enough not to be considered an insider (of this awful dysfunction of late) but certainly knows how it works (or should work). Criticism of his "bland" persona that has come up in the media is unwarranted. Seriously, would the oily Cruz, the orang-haired, rude Trump, the obese bully Christie, the drama king, ever-on-stage Rubio--look better as a president? For those of us who are centrists and/or independents (and actually control the electability factor), and are fed up with the Clinton dynasty and realize Bernie is truly qualified but unelectable, Kasich is about the only one I could pull the lever FOR at this point. Anyone who lives in states where anyone can vote in the primary should take advantage of it and VOTE FOR KASICH, assuming he stays in the race.
I don't need to add here to what I have said before about the different ways, not compliments, that get wrapped up in the umbrella of "demagogue" for Donald Trump. But the question: Why this column? And why, unlike the Dowd knives reserved for Hillary Clinton, this soft-shoe tap dance with Donald Trump?
Given time, there may be answers. For now, is this Maureen Dowd being the New York Times canary in the coal mine in the sense that we had all better make nice-nice to Donald Trump. He just may be, God forbid, the GOP presidential nominee.
Given time, there may be answers. For now, is this Maureen Dowd being the New York Times canary in the coal mine in the sense that we had all better make nice-nice to Donald Trump. He just may be, God forbid, the GOP presidential nominee.
1
But what about the time he was caught with a prostitute? Doesn't that render him unfit to be president?
1
Seriously? The same guy who insisted that he would create a governmental agency to spread "Judeo-Christian values" all over the world? Like all of his brethren, this guy does not understand the First Amendment. Like all of his fellow clown-car occupants, the Constitution consists of the Second Amendment and Jesus. No thank you.
4
The Times could have made a much stronger statement about the current situation by pointedly NOT endorsing any Republican candidate.
2
yea well...kasich has no chance...and who is to blame for moderate politicians not being able to draw the voters .... pissed off voters... they want to send a message to express their displeasure with the party elite...that has long ignored what they promised to do...and now... they must pay for it....
2
Ms. Clinton and Mr. Kasich. The NYT is soooooo predictable. It's all about the status quo. It's all about cementing the sovereignty of the country's plutocratic overlords. The NYT can't (or maybe does not want to) recognize the need for significant change. Sooner or later, however, we're gonna have to pay the piper.
3
To The Editors :
How about giving your readers....the FACTS:...
About those who have already governed :
Yes...an honest ...HONEST...an THOROUGH ..fact check of the Governors
and then let US....tell YOU...what We The People ..Think of your facts.
JEB Bush
John Kasich
Chris Christie
Bernie Sanders
Martin O'Malley
Each one of these candidates has been tested as governing a state or as
Mayor..so...the reality check...please editors...and then perhaps we will
TELL YOU...what WE THINK...after all isn't it your position that you
Tell us the FACTS...as your mentors have done...Didn't Edward Morrow tell
the American people ...The Facts from London...during the Blitz...
Well ....this is also a Blitz or distorted half truths by the media spinners.
So NYTimes Editors...put on your Joseph Pulitzer laurels and REPORT the
Facts about the candidates..
How about giving your readers....the FACTS:...
About those who have already governed :
Yes...an honest ...HONEST...an THOROUGH ..fact check of the Governors
and then let US....tell YOU...what We The People ..Think of your facts.
JEB Bush
John Kasich
Chris Christie
Bernie Sanders
Martin O'Malley
Each one of these candidates has been tested as governing a state or as
Mayor..so...the reality check...please editors...and then perhaps we will
TELL YOU...what WE THINK...after all isn't it your position that you
Tell us the FACTS...as your mentors have done...Didn't Edward Morrow tell
the American people ...The Facts from London...during the Blitz...
Well ....this is also a Blitz or distorted half truths by the media spinners.
So NYTimes Editors...put on your Joseph Pulitzer laurels and REPORT the
Facts about the candidates..
2
And yet he said the Climate change talks in Paris - with 193 nations - should have been cancelled so we could deal with ISIL. Apparently, he doesn't recognize a real existential threat when he sees it.
1
>
This NYT's endorsement is the kiss of death for a republican. I doubt he's happy about it. It is something he'll show his grandkids but not his fellow republicans.
Most importantly, any truth it might have is meaningless.
This NYT's endorsement is the kiss of death for a republican. I doubt he's happy about it. It is something he'll show his grandkids but not his fellow republicans.
Most importantly, any truth it might have is meaningless.
2
Anyone notice the giant Hilary op-ad above this one? Looks like the Time's board is worries about how a Trump-Sanders race would finish
2
This article is like looking at a table filled with horrible food, and then recommending that someone eats the one thing on the table tastes only a little disgusting as opposed to everything else which is completely disgusting.
2
John Katich is a good man and would be a good president, as would Jeb, Marco, and Christi.
But in its endorsement of Hillary, the Times is somewhat quiet. You say she is experienced. Based on what? Yes, she has had impressive job titles, but show one thing she has actually accomplished. Just one thing. Please. Crickets are chirping.
But in its endorsement of Hillary, the Times is somewhat quiet. You say she is experienced. Based on what? Yes, she has had impressive job titles, but show one thing she has actually accomplished. Just one thing. Please. Crickets are chirping.
2
Kasich may as well stop his campaign now.
Getting their tacit endorsement is the kiss of death.
Getting their tacit endorsement is the kiss of death.
3
The Editorial Board gets props for singling out John Kasich as the most decent Republican running for President.
Too bad they completely blew it on the Democrat side.
Too bad they completely blew it on the Democrat side.
This is the letter I wrote to Frank Bruni when he had some positive comments about our Ohio governor. As an Ohio resident and an educator, I am completely opposed to John Kasich for president (or anything). He talks in New Hampshire about the “people in the shadows” while his Ohio Republican government does away with much-needed food subsidies in Ohio cities and funding for programs for mentally handicapped individuals of all ages. Ohio’s prison system, now mostly privatized, is a disgrace, and while Kasich is embracing the ecology in South Carolina, the condition of the water in Ohio is terrible as we move ahead with more fracking and fewer dollars for cleaning up Lake Erie. Kasich also talks about his improvement of jobs and the economy with the “Ohio Miracle,” but he neglects to mention that he has taken money from local municipalities to “balance the budget,” and his “JobsOhio” program is a murky mess with no transparency. His record on women’s health rights is abysmal, as his signature of the recent Ohio budget with sweeping new restrictions on reproductive rights, would indicate. While Kasich is showing his “softer side” in his Iowa speeches and discussing helping poor children in Africa, he has embraced a questionable at best and terrible at worst charter school movement, while at the same time the owners of these charter schools donate huge funds into Ohio Republican campaign coffers. What, in any of this, makes John Kasich qualify for a candidate as president?
4
Is "moderate Republican" now considered to be an oxymoron?
2
Quite frankly, I'm surprised the Times even needed to pick a "least objectionable" GOP candidate. I'm not certain this was even necessary.
2
'say anything to win', is that what every politician does? To think otherwise is delusional.
3
Republican endorsed by NYT. That has to be the ultimate kiss of death.
Re: " 'I am so tired of my colleagues out here on the stage spending all their time talking about Barack Obama,' he [Kasich] told a town hall crowd in New Hampshire. 'His term is over.' ”
It's strange that the only Republican who has figured out that he won't be running against Obama under any circumstances is flailing on the bottom. This doesn't bode well the Republican Party's chances. If you don't even know who your opponent is, how can you possibly beat him?
It's strange that the only Republican who has figured out that he won't be running against Obama under any circumstances is flailing on the bottom. This doesn't bode well the Republican Party's chances. If you don't even know who your opponent is, how can you possibly beat him?
Endorsing Kasich because he's not quite as vicious, crazy and dangerous as the rest of the clowns in the car, is beneath the Times.
You should have refused to endorse a Republican.
You should have refused to endorse a Republican.
2
So Kasich is the "best" of the group of crazies and clowns running for the Republican nomination for President,and THAT is reason enough for the NYT to sort of endorse him? Give your readers a break! There are many,many examples throughout world history of men who were the "least objectionable" obtaining power over a nation with resulting chaos and in some cases horror. Please,NYT,print your correction notice!
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." – John Kenneth Galbraith
Eight years of anti-Obama hate-pills have been fed to the Republican voters. They are up so high that Kasich looks like down to them.
2
Well, you have now presented Kasich with the kiss of death. Imagine the effect on his candidacy when he announces to a rapt audience that he has been endorsed by the New York Times!
2
Oh, dear. A NY Times endorsement is a kiss of death for a Republican. And Kasich really is the only competent Republican in the GOP's present field. Seems like a nice guy.
Of course, the NY Times endorsement will be the kiss of death for Kasich amongst the Insane Wing of the GOP.
Trumps unemployment numbers are a lot closer than the ones the government puts out. I'm going through just under 100 resume's for one part time job posted 5 days ago....It's for 24 hours a week and 10% of the applicants have B.A.'s.
4
For the lone Republican reader not used to unabashed Manifesto (where the Putin's and Qaddafi's are always opposed by someone who always gets exactly slightly less than 20% of the vote--)
And, yes, they call that an election, because the rabble cannot be trusted to choose what's good for them. This is astonishing and condescending chutzpah, and undoubtedly reveals the panic in the newsroom. The Times thinks Hillary is so weak she has to run against someone no one has heard of outside of his state? I think the NY Times is fast losing hope that the Trump nightmare will go away. How do you cover President DaDonald, especially, after baiting the beast? 4 years, perhaps 8 years--surely, someone should begin working on Plan B.
And, yes, they call that an election, because the rabble cannot be trusted to choose what's good for them. This is astonishing and condescending chutzpah, and undoubtedly reveals the panic in the newsroom. The Times thinks Hillary is so weak she has to run against someone no one has heard of outside of his state? I think the NY Times is fast losing hope that the Trump nightmare will go away. How do you cover President DaDonald, especially, after baiting the beast? 4 years, perhaps 8 years--surely, someone should begin working on Plan B.
3
No endorsement of a Republican candidate would have been better.
11
Hey, NYT, trying to shape the race? Tough. People are sending a clear message. They do not want any status quo. They have had enough. You could show more respect for all those who support radical candidate. Instead, you talk down to them. Forget about Trump and Cruz. What about the people who have had enough? Could you show them some respect? Can you understand what they have been going through? And stop calling Trump insane. You insult the people who come to his rallies. Talk to them. They are just as much citizens as you are. They are your equals.
4
My opinion of Trump: He has found his new toy.
Kasich, I agree, is the best of the Republican pack.
Kasich, I agree, is the best of the Republican pack.
6
Mr. Kasich said in an interview about the NYT endorsement. "How can that not be helpful?" Here's how it's not helpful, John. Do you have any idea at all, how angry, Amerrcan, republican, conservative, Christian voters, the voters who are tired of being lied to, and about, and betrayed, the ones who are "as mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore", feel about an endorsement by the New York Times who is always there to pick our candidates, to be helpful, any idea at all? Well, it's not good.
3
Are you kidding me?? Mr. Buckeye Vaginal Ultrasound for all women getting an abortion? He's as loony as the others but knows to tamp that down during debates. There is nothing moderate about him. Yech....
15
Kasich is fine. But who can put any credibility in an endorsement which says, in its second paragraph, that for unemployment in the USA "the correct number is 5 percent"? What planet do you folks live on? Everyone knows that number is cooked. Everyone knows the true number is closer to 15 percent if you bother to count those who gave up looking for employment, and even higher if you count those in crummy part-time jobs with no benefits.
4
The problem is if you want sensible, conservative-minded establishment policies you can get them from the better man, Hillary Clinton.
7
Vote for Kasich? I'd sooner shoot all ten of my toes with a nail gun. Who needs another union baiting corporatist apologist for the plutocracy? Scott Walker has already packed his bags and Kasich is just a Xerox copy out there trying fraudulently to look "sensible." He is an enemy of the middle class. Who needs this guy?
15
Kasich has been a big voter suppression governor, that disqualifies him for any serious cnsideration for the job of presidency ! He is another bought tool for the establishment that speaks a good game then turns around and screws his citizens.
15
Great choice NYT. Now, where do I sign up to be considered for Kasich's Sec. of Judeo-Christian ethics?
2
There is precedent for the candidates being Ugly and Uglier, and Dumb and Dumber such that the NYT has refused to mmake an endorsement in a particular race.
It should have done so in this case.
Not being as knoolish as the rest of the Republican candidates should not be regarded as a virtue in Kasich's case.
This editorial is still laboring under the allusion that there must be someone on the Republican side acceptably not moderate but moderate enough to be regarded as a serious candidate for the office of POTUS.
No there isn't.
Kasich's voting record in his 18 years in Congress put him well to the right of every Democrat except three Blue Dog Democrats from safe districts in the South, two of whom eventually became Republicans.
Kasich is a MINO. Check the ideological plotting of his voting record.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/john_kasich/400590
Impeccable for someone who worked for Fox News after getting laid off because Lehman imploded.
But unworthy of even being considered for POTUS.
It should have done so in this case.
Not being as knoolish as the rest of the Republican candidates should not be regarded as a virtue in Kasich's case.
This editorial is still laboring under the allusion that there must be someone on the Republican side acceptably not moderate but moderate enough to be regarded as a serious candidate for the office of POTUS.
No there isn't.
Kasich's voting record in his 18 years in Congress put him well to the right of every Democrat except three Blue Dog Democrats from safe districts in the South, two of whom eventually became Republicans.
Kasich is a MINO. Check the ideological plotting of his voting record.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/john_kasich/400590
Impeccable for someone who worked for Fox News after getting laid off because Lehman imploded.
But unworthy of even being considered for POTUS.
5
Liberals trying desperately to influence the election. Kasich a total non factor, Hillary one step away from being cuffed and stuffed. The irrelevance of this endorsement and column can't be overstated. The fact that David Brooks is your onsite 'Republican voice' maybe why you guys are so wrong. Talk about living in a bubble, you've created you very own liberal bubble, where the outside world doesn't penetrate. Good luck this November!
4
I agree with everything you say about Kasich. He is the only sane choice remaining in the Republican race (and I might add, one who can carry the critical state of Ohio.) But please, the last thing any Republican candidate wants is an endorsement from the NY Times. It's the kiss of death - worse then "NY values." Kasich is largely being ignored by the rest of the field, but if he ever achieves double digit approvals, the first thing his opponents will hang him with will be this endorsement. Please , retract your endorsement and give this guy a chance!
1
Ugh. I can't even. Sanders, Trump or bust.
Yep, he's the best of the all-time worst. Bravo.
6
No! No, No, NO!!
As a woman and an MD I have watched in horror as Ohio Governor Kasich has not only signed every anti-abortion bill proposed by the Ohio legislature--he has helped write some of these backward and downright cruel measures.
“Since entering office in January 2011, Kasich has signed every abortion and women’s reproductive health provision that has landed on his desk. In four and a half years he has enacted 16 legislative proposals related to family planning funding and abortion access across the state. Although anti-abortion provisions are not limited to the Buckeye State — a July count from the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion-rights advocacy group, showed that 31 states have enacted a total of 282 abortion restrictions since January 2011 — Ohio stands out for the rate at which it’s adopting this legislation. The measures have altered when, where and by whom a pregnancy can be terminated in the state. And although Ohio is seen as a wild success story for anti-abortion advocates, the details of Kasich’s hard-line stance are often obscured. As governor HE CONCEALED HIS ADMINISTRATION’S ROLE IN THE CREATION OF SEVERAL ANTI-ABORTION MEASURES, and now he is viewed as one of the most moderate candidates in a GOP race that tips far to the right.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/john-kasichs-quiet-campaign-to-cut-a...
This horrible man is NOT a moderate. He is ruthless in trying to make all abortions illegal once again.
As a woman and an MD I have watched in horror as Ohio Governor Kasich has not only signed every anti-abortion bill proposed by the Ohio legislature--he has helped write some of these backward and downright cruel measures.
“Since entering office in January 2011, Kasich has signed every abortion and women’s reproductive health provision that has landed on his desk. In four and a half years he has enacted 16 legislative proposals related to family planning funding and abortion access across the state. Although anti-abortion provisions are not limited to the Buckeye State — a July count from the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion-rights advocacy group, showed that 31 states have enacted a total of 282 abortion restrictions since January 2011 — Ohio stands out for the rate at which it’s adopting this legislation. The measures have altered when, where and by whom a pregnancy can be terminated in the state. And although Ohio is seen as a wild success story for anti-abortion advocates, the details of Kasich’s hard-line stance are often obscured. As governor HE CONCEALED HIS ADMINISTRATION’S ROLE IN THE CREATION OF SEVERAL ANTI-ABORTION MEASURES, and now he is viewed as one of the most moderate candidates in a GOP race that tips far to the right.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/john-kasichs-quiet-campaign-to-cut-a...
This horrible man is NOT a moderate. He is ruthless in trying to make all abortions illegal once again.
18
The NYt advise is useful to the extant that it is always bad for republicans. Use the advise to know what not to do.
1
I'm a democrat, but I really like John Kasich.
Interesting.
The Globetrotters had the Generals.
You want Clinton to have Kasich.
For breakfast.
Let's see.
The Globetrotters had the Generals.
You want Clinton to have Kasich.
For breakfast.
Let's see.
The real unemployment rate is 5%? Robert Reich disagrees with you. And the NY Times certainly knows those numbers are "cooked."
That doesn't make Trump reasonable, or his numbers correct, but 5%, please!
Kasich is the best of them, no doubt.
That doesn't make Trump reasonable, or his numbers correct, but 5%, please!
Kasich is the best of them, no doubt.
As I've said from day one, when the clown car finally empties, the ticket will be Florida/Ohio.
1
He doesn't have a chance- The American public votes on "Optics" that's why JEB and Kasich will not fare well in a general election. Whatever "experience" they bring with them is lost in their presentation and mannerisms. Herky-Jerky movements, squinty eyes and always looking like they are about to lose their temper will not win over hearts. Americans want self assured confidence and charisma. Rubio and Trump will inevitably be the go-to guys for the nomination and HRC is in for the biggest political fight of her life.
2
Fortunately, Barack Obama's term isn't over, and Mr, Kasich knows it.
1
Bravo NYT -- you got this one just about right!
A Times Editorial recommendation for a Republican Candidate is a death knell. You should have recommended Trump.
1
You say Trump has no experience? Well he has people experience and that is more than Obama has/had. Hillary needs everyone (her husband, Deblasio and his wife, and others) to help her campaign? She's not too confident. Trump will be a very quick study in national security, defense and already knows more about global trade than anyone else including Clinton and Sanders. Don't worry about Trump.
7
What a kind heart the editorial board has in this fantasy island hope fest. Again you are neglecting to investigate and to understand the role of big money setting policy. The Koch’s big money gang has contempt for Kasich for anything other than as a token "kinder and gentler” conservative VP candidate to con the electorate. They expect something for their $900 million and they certainly would not take any back talk from the likes of Kasich. Kasich is a billionaire pawn as much as anyone. He is just playing a different role. You need to read "Dark Money" by Jane Meyer and come back to this planet.
14
Gov. Kasich attempts to engage in good-faith, intelligent debate.
That is why he barely registers with likely Republican voters.
That is why he barely registers with likely Republican voters.
37
5% unemployment. In your dream world.
9
Ohio is famous in the US history in having produced seven Presidents born in that State. But, I am inclined to Bloomberg.
4
The only intelligent candidate among the Republicans is Rand Paul. I don't agree with many of his ideas, but he's thoughtful, smart, and not a dictator like the rest of the bunch. Why the media has not focused on his qualifications is beyond me. Even you, New York Times, should have resurrected his candidacy instead of endorsing Kasich, who is against many of the individual freedoms that Paul supports.
9
I don't understand. On the same day that The Editorial Board endorses Clinton, you also promote Kasich. So you want your endorsement, Clinton, to run against a person who would be harder to beat than Trump or Cruz? I support Sanders, but Team Clinton would much rather run against the bonker candidates than the one that approaches sanity.
Agree that Kasich is the only responsible and sane Republican candidate in the race. However, the very fact that the NY Times Editorial Board "endorsed" him will ensure he does not get the nomination. The GOP of today doesn't respect or want sanity and responsibility.
11
While I agree on issues more with Rand Paul, Kasich is a reasonable guy with accomplishments and vision. He'd make a good president.
What's interesting to me about the current field of candidates on both sides is the lack of people you could describe as reasonable. Kasich is one.
What's interesting to me about the current field of candidates on both sides is the lack of people you could describe as reasonable. Kasich is one.
5
It appears that all of Kasich's virtues mentioned will serve to disqualify him among GOP primary voters.
12
No one mentions this, out of fear of bucking the majority, but this is really coming down to the real reason for the divide in this country, the battle between the reactionary religious & the progressive secular.If we go by the numbers, the religious vote wins hands down. Then how is it, the Democrats every once in the while win the White House.The Republicans lose because their economic policies eliminates the middle & lower classes The one thing that trumps religion , is putting Bread on the table., & I used the word Trump because it's Trump whom I'm thinking of, he is balancing himself between the religious & the secular, & will draw from both sides, & will become our next President. God help us !
4
From the media editorial board who endorsed Hillary Clinton for President assistance to the Republican Party on who they should have run against Clinton, priceless.
6
Well I guess the New York Times had to at least semi-endorse a Republican. Never has there been such a dearth of choices. When it comes down to it, not one of the Republican candidates is offering anything that distinguishes him/her. It is the same warmed over hash they have been offering for the past eight years: tax cuts for the wealthy; shredding of the social safety nets; misogyny; racism; denial of Civil Rights for "certain people"; no separation of church and state; and more wars. (I am sure I have left some hideous important platform plank out.) The only thing that distinguishes the candidates is how the same old tired message is delivered. Trump delivers it insult comedian style, Cruz and Rubio vie to see who can be the most pseudo religious in their delivery, Carson speaks softly in the hopes you won't believe you heard him state the pyramids were built to store grain, Jeb Bush just hopes you won't actually remember that his brother is related to him, and so on down the line.
Why anyone who is female, black, poor, old, LGBT, or a member of the Middle Class and sane would vote for any one of the Republican candidates is beyond me. The fact that these people ARE the Republican candidates is beyond me.
Why anyone who is female, black, poor, old, LGBT, or a member of the Middle Class and sane would vote for any one of the Republican candidates is beyond me. The fact that these people ARE the Republican candidates is beyond me.
30
It ain't just this campaign.
The GOP has been nasty and brutish since the felon Nixon and his nasty little confederate coconspirator Lee Atwater began "The Southern Strategy".
The GOP is now less like a political party and more like a religion.
And now, as is the case with all religions, members of the GOP simply cannot be reasoned with.
They now take pride in their institutionalized ignorance
It has gotten so bad that the party of William F. Buckley now proudly, almost rabidly supports, intellectual wastelands like Palin, Trump, Bachman, Scalia, Coulter and, of course, Fox-Kids.
The GOP has been nasty and brutish since the felon Nixon and his nasty little confederate coconspirator Lee Atwater began "The Southern Strategy".
The GOP is now less like a political party and more like a religion.
And now, as is the case with all religions, members of the GOP simply cannot be reasoned with.
They now take pride in their institutionalized ignorance
It has gotten so bad that the party of William F. Buckley now proudly, almost rabidly supports, intellectual wastelands like Palin, Trump, Bachman, Scalia, Coulter and, of course, Fox-Kids.
6
The NYTimes has given John Kasich a pass because they believe that he stands out from the "crazies," but also because they have done no rigorous research on the "wolf in sheep's clothing." Look at what he did with abortion, gun control, alternative energy and education in Ohio. His "big" agenda was to destroy public labor unions, and fortunately Ohio revolted through a direct referendum. But he has worked tirelessly on the extreme right-wing agenda in Ohio with a lock-step Republican General Assembly. Legislation is not even given time for debate.
PLEASE do some due diligence reporting on this former Fox News talking head.
If possible. please start the analysis with the Ohio economic recovery. No state benefited more from the Obama stimulus package than Ohio. Not only did Kasich open his arms for federal medicaid funds under Obamacare, the automobile industry in Ohio was saved by the Obama bailout. The next time Kasich claims to have created a job in Ohio, take a look at where the credit is due. At least that would be a start on political journalism.
Paradoxically, this NYTimes endorsement will be the national "kiss of death" for Kasich. It would have been better for Ohio if the Times could have just lived up to its journalistic credentials by reporting the candidate's record.
PLEASE do some due diligence reporting on this former Fox News talking head.
If possible. please start the analysis with the Ohio economic recovery. No state benefited more from the Obama stimulus package than Ohio. Not only did Kasich open his arms for federal medicaid funds under Obamacare, the automobile industry in Ohio was saved by the Obama bailout. The next time Kasich claims to have created a job in Ohio, take a look at where the credit is due. At least that would be a start on political journalism.
Paradoxically, this NYTimes endorsement will be the national "kiss of death" for Kasich. It would have been better for Ohio if the Times could have just lived up to its journalistic credentials by reporting the candidate's record.
11
The entire Republican party falls outside the democratic (small "d") consensus. For that matter, the leadership of the Democratic party does as well.
1
I have been saying this for a while. Looking at the field, whether you agree with his policy stances or not...he's sane, and he understands the nature of governance. It's really sad that these things are so rare in his party, things we used to take for granted, but there it is. He's sane. Qualified. And every time I think I see a sane republican, I have watched them have to pander to the farthest right, dumbest, and most racist and xenophobic base. Game over.
3
The only difference between Kasich and the rest of the GOP field is that he knows enough to tone down the insane rhetoric, rather than let it all hang out in public. In reality, he has no significant policy differences.
"Sane" Republicans have only two choices - either cast a protest vote for Rand Paul (which will have no effect on the final outcome, and will therefore be completely ignored by the Party insiders); or cross over and vote for Sanders, who really does have a shot at upending the status quo.
"Sane" Republicans have only two choices - either cast a protest vote for Rand Paul (which will have no effect on the final outcome, and will therefore be completely ignored by the Party insiders); or cross over and vote for Sanders, who really does have a shot at upending the status quo.
3
If the Republican 'establishment' ends up choosing a candidate not named Trump or Cruz, it is more likely to be Marco Rubio than John Kasich. The rules of the Republican Party are complicated. Up through March 15th, delegate seats are allocated proportionately to votes in the primaries. Thus, Trump, Cruz and Rubio will all get delegate seats (Kasich, probably not many). However, after March 15th, each State designates how it wants it delegates apportioned (some have a 'winner take all' rule). Further, there are a lot of Super-delegates who are not committed to any one candidate. Finally, the delegates are not necessarily committed to voting for whom the voters chose. If the nominee is not chosen on the first ballot, it could be a complete free-for-all at the Republican convention. Here is a Time Magazine article that sort of explains the rules:
http://time.com/4059030/republican-primary-calendar-2016-nomination-conv...
The Democrats, on the other hand, do have a proportional allocation of delegates for all States. But, they also have super-delegates.
http://time.com/4059030/republican-primary-calendar-2016-nomination-conv...
The Democrats, on the other hand, do have a proportional allocation of delegates for all States. But, they also have super-delegates.
2
The Times, like many others, is slowly working its way through the five Kubler- Ross stages of grief concerning Mr. Trump. We have seen denial, anger and bargaining. Soon they will find their way through through depression to a final stage of acceptance.
11
the Rs could have run huntsman in 2012 - but the fright wing media wouldn't allow it and cast a successful, truly conservative governor, diplomat, patriot as a traitor.
what's different about kasich?
what's different about kasich?
2
I live in Columbus, Ohio and am a Bernie Sanders supporter. He is my first choice but if the contest is between Hillary Clinton and John Kasich I will definitely hold my nose and vote for Hillary.
8
It would appear that the Times is simply endorsing the lesser of the evils. In this case, there is no point in endorsing any of the players.
8
I've never voted for a Republican in a general election before, but I would definitely vote for Kasich over Bernie Sanders and would consider him as a valid alternative to Hillary Clinton. Few moderate Democrats would honestly say they think public employee unions are not out of control, or don't protect poor-performing workers and structural inefficiencies in such critical sectors as public education.
Kasich knows what it's like to grow up lower-middle-class, he has legislative, private-sector finance, and executive experience. He has a history of proven bi-partisan cooperation.
If only we lived in an America where we could choose between moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans debating real policy points! A Hillary without the insincerity versus a Kasich would be a fine race!
Kasich knows what it's like to grow up lower-middle-class, he has legislative, private-sector finance, and executive experience. He has a history of proven bi-partisan cooperation.
If only we lived in an America where we could choose between moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans debating real policy points! A Hillary without the insincerity versus a Kasich would be a fine race!
5
I fully expect moments before the Caucus begins, that FN will have Breaking News: "A just released Fox poll of 800, has Cubio now in front." What Fox will forget to mention, is that the 800 are all employees of FN affiliates.
4
This endorsement is even less convincing to potential Republican voters than it is to anyone else.
4
As a lifelong Democrat, in my seventh decade by the by, I am as startled by the advancement of The Donald to the fore as many others out there are.
Are Republicans really that crazy? I say that, not to as The Donald or Don Rickles might do to insult them but, out of real surprise, because Republicans seem hellbent on nominating someone who is conservative, both fiscally and socially, a Christian, believes in traditional family values, is against abortion under any circumstances, is a strict constitutional interpreter, especially on the Second Amendment, and has a record of fighting for these issues.
And yet, Republicans have gone full blown bonkers over The Donald. They're ready to throw the baby out with the bath water, put all their chips into the pot, all in, gambling it all on a guy whose casinos have been taking their money for decades, and keeps them coming back for more, someone who has no record whatsoever. Now if that isn't the very definition of desperation I don't know what is.
Again, as I stated, I am a lifelong Democrat, and I am pleased beyond belief. Keep up the craziness, Republicans.
DD
Manhattan
Are Republicans really that crazy? I say that, not to as The Donald or Don Rickles might do to insult them but, out of real surprise, because Republicans seem hellbent on nominating someone who is conservative, both fiscally and socially, a Christian, believes in traditional family values, is against abortion under any circumstances, is a strict constitutional interpreter, especially on the Second Amendment, and has a record of fighting for these issues.
And yet, Republicans have gone full blown bonkers over The Donald. They're ready to throw the baby out with the bath water, put all their chips into the pot, all in, gambling it all on a guy whose casinos have been taking their money for decades, and keeps them coming back for more, someone who has no record whatsoever. Now if that isn't the very definition of desperation I don't know what is.
Again, as I stated, I am a lifelong Democrat, and I am pleased beyond belief. Keep up the craziness, Republicans.
DD
Manhattan
13
I concur with the view that Mr Kasich would be the most electable candidate on the Republican side, but does he have a realistic chance given the current sad state of affairs? I believe the answer is no.
2
Ugh - at the rabid and rancid comments being made, not at the Editorial.
Partisans - left and right - act as if the Union itself is on the precipice if their candidate is not the nominee and then elected. For over 200 years we've had vitriolic and nasty presidential elections and - short of the Civil War - we've seem to come through. The same will happen this time. Kasich and Clinton are both establishment candidates - as are Bush, Rubio, Cruz, etc. The only real outliers are Trump and Sanders.
Trump would outsource the job and finally completely turn this country in to the carnival its been on the path to since the new media age.
Sanders would be even less effectual than Obama other than to actually call it like it is for the powers that be. Having him put Wall St on the hot seat would be worth getting Bernie elected!
Short of a major upheaval in the way Washington operates or the disintegration of the Union, this whole election is one big joke.
Partisans - left and right - act as if the Union itself is on the precipice if their candidate is not the nominee and then elected. For over 200 years we've had vitriolic and nasty presidential elections and - short of the Civil War - we've seem to come through. The same will happen this time. Kasich and Clinton are both establishment candidates - as are Bush, Rubio, Cruz, etc. The only real outliers are Trump and Sanders.
Trump would outsource the job and finally completely turn this country in to the carnival its been on the path to since the new media age.
Sanders would be even less effectual than Obama other than to actually call it like it is for the powers that be. Having him put Wall St on the hot seat would be worth getting Bernie elected!
Short of a major upheaval in the way Washington operates or the disintegration of the Union, this whole election is one big joke.
6
Indeed, Kasich is also my choice if I were to choose a Republican. But I am: Feel the Berne!
6
We must get smart, Good People of America. This batch of BIG democracy-destroying money masters' operatives pretending they want to be President - or vice president or any other office in the land - are just a smoke screen to entertain the "great unwashed masses". That's supposed to be us. Only we shower or bathe every day if our water isn't polluted and we are on to their games. The real candidate will be magically selected at the republican convention and he will be wearing a Lincoln look-alike beard and carrying the Speaker of the House gavel he so miraculously inherited from John Boehner and Kevin McCarthy. His name is Paul Ryan and if you think he's reasonable and nice, able to work across the aisle, you had better check him out. He was legislative assistant to Sam Brownback, the current governor of Kansas, who is destroying the lives of 99% of the Good People of Kansas. Mr. Ryan and Nikki Haley, who I think he will miraculously choose as his running mate, are owned by the same BIG democracy-destroying money masters who have tried to take over OUR governments at all levels. Time to wake up and STOP THEM in the voting booth on November 8 and every election before and after.
4
Kasich was instrumental in killing the moderate Republican Party of Bob Dole. Shutting down the gov't in 1995 and the reelection of Bill Clinton can be laid at the door of Kasich and Newt Ginrich. Kasich and Ginrich are largely blamed as the fountainheads of the destructive partisanship of the Republican Party. The offsprings of that partisanship have moved to virulent extremes since Kasich left the congress. Kasich now seems a reasonable alternative to the demagogue Trump and the champion of the Freedom Caucus Cruz.
9
Kasich's a nut too. He's just less showy.
16
You failed to mention Rand Paul, the best candidate of either party. I realize his numbers aren't high but this is still no reason for a lack of an endorsement or at least some mention in the article.
3
I've thought all along that Kasich was the most reasonable of all the GOP candidates (which, of course, is like saying downing a bottle of pain-killers is the most reasonable way to commit suicide). That said, an endorsement from the Times effectively ends any chance Kasich had of winning over the yahoos on the far right...
5
I sure hope Gov. Kasich receives the nomination because then I, a Democratic woman will have someone I can vote for if Hillary (as the Times hopes she does) gets the nomination.
Go Bernie, Go Gov. Kasich.
Go Bernie, Go Gov. Kasich.
4
Kiss your reproductive freedom goodbye than.
Another completely tone-deaf editorial by the NYT that has no one convinced.
The editors might try getting out of their ivory offices and talking to more people on the ground. They might learn something.
The editors might try getting out of their ivory offices and talking to more people on the ground. They might learn something.
4
I have a feeling the learning curve might accelerate come November.
And what exactly should they learn?
Kasich, as are all republican candidates are against abortion in all cases. They want a woman to die rather then allow an abortion. They want woman to birth a fetus from rape and then give the rapist rights. They want women to have to birth severely deformed or brain damaged fetus's. They want to force women to carry a dead fetus rather than allowing it being aborted. They put more value on the fetus than a grown woman. No, wolves in sheep clothing do not fool me. I will be voting against each and every republican.
19
While I don't personally agree with all that he espouse, he is our best hope to move the country in the right direction. I know him personally, serving with him for twelve years in the US House. He seeks consensus, which must occur if the gridlock in our government is to ever be broken. There is not anyone among the present contenders for the presidency who would meet exactly all of the requirements that each of us would have for a president. But there is not anyone else who has the executive experience as governor and the knowledge of how government in Washington works than does he. Everyone can find some kind of problem with his beliefs, but you will never get all that you want. Again, he is our best hope.
5
I don't think the Republican field is very good -- it's just better than what the Democrats are offering.
And let's correct the unemployment rate statement. True, the unemployment rate today is 5% -- but it is 5% only because the way that number is calculated does not include those who have dropped out of the work force, those who are employed part time but want full time or those who have full time jobs at present but want to find a job in their chosen field and have not been able to do so. Add those in -- another 10% for those who have dropped out or can only find part time work and another 5% for those who are full time but under employed and you get close to 20%.
Any one familiar with today's job market knows that claiming a 5% unemployment rate misrepresents the actual state of the job market. A 20% figure much more accurately reflects what is going on. But the EB's failure to at least reference these points simply once again demonstrates that you cannot trust their facts -- or their logic. I'm not a Trump supporter by the way, but fair is fair.
And let's correct the unemployment rate statement. True, the unemployment rate today is 5% -- but it is 5% only because the way that number is calculated does not include those who have dropped out of the work force, those who are employed part time but want full time or those who have full time jobs at present but want to find a job in their chosen field and have not been able to do so. Add those in -- another 10% for those who have dropped out or can only find part time work and another 5% for those who are full time but under employed and you get close to 20%.
Any one familiar with today's job market knows that claiming a 5% unemployment rate misrepresents the actual state of the job market. A 20% figure much more accurately reflects what is going on. But the EB's failure to at least reference these points simply once again demonstrates that you cannot trust their facts -- or their logic. I'm not a Trump supporter by the way, but fair is fair.
8
Thank you for bringing up the issue of which unemployment rates should be used. You make some good points, but 20% is too high an estimation.
If you check the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the categories that you list are included in the U-6 unemployment rate. The u-6 rate as of December 2015 is at 9.9% (basically 10%).
At the beginning of 2010 the official unemployment rate peeked at 9.9% with a U-6 of more than 20%, but began to drop through that year and also the following years.
Thank you again for bringing it up.
If you check the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the categories that you list are included in the U-6 unemployment rate. The u-6 rate as of December 2015 is at 9.9% (basically 10%).
At the beginning of 2010 the official unemployment rate peeked at 9.9% with a U-6 of more than 20%, but began to drop through that year and also the following years.
Thank you again for bringing it up.
4
The 5% figure, while not telling the whole story, represents the same way unemployment has been measured for as long as I remember, so while what you're saying is not any big secret, that figure is useful enough for comparing 'apples to apples'. The numbers you're referring to are easily obtainable- and yours are greatly exaggerated.
Now put a bit of perspective on it and apply your same parameters to the high unemployment figures from other times, and try to take somewhat of an open-minded look at it..
Now put a bit of perspective on it and apply your same parameters to the high unemployment figures from other times, and try to take somewhat of an open-minded look at it..
1
Kasich has some fine qualities that place him above his Republican peers. He seems to have virtually no chance of success in the Republican 'dog eat dog' race to the top. His civility is refreshing, and he projects an honesty of character sorely lacking in the Republican lineup.
9
Trump thinks America will be made great again, as if it wasn't great enough already, by bludgeoning the rest of the world into submission. He wants to inflate the military, that means more exercises and potential threats in the backyards of other super powers only to provoke a Tonkin Bay affair. Funny, the mob that follows him probably couldn't fit a night at one of his hotels into their budgets. All republicans need to convince is voters, from management and management hopefuls who actually are the beneficiaries of trickle down of business tax breaks that don't fall far enough, Faith based and NRA voting blocks and the well to do enough in the six figure income brackets to gain a critical mass and stay viable. Our forefathers would be singing, "Look what you've done with my song" if they could peak into our world ... oligarchs as President; ruling from above is what they broke away from.
1
"The hope among some Republicans is that the Iowa caucuses on Monday and the New Hampshire primary on Feb. 9 will promote a candidate who can appeal to the half of their electorate that doesn’t support the two current front-runners."
If that is their hope then they shouldn't have allowed their primary process to be captured by the hard right. Which they did because the Republican establishment arrogantly and paternalistically thought they could control and manipulate the rubes and bumpkins, the "low-information voters."
Surprise!, the unwashed masses turned out to have a mind of their own and pretty quickly figured out that they didn't actually need the professional Republicans - who have been using them for decades - for much of anything. Now that money no longer need flow through the national party, the hard right has realized that they really don't need the party establishment for anything. Certainly not guidance.
As long as the hard right is manning the gateway to the general election, you will only see Republican candidates who reflect their values. And guess what, those values are pretty much repugnant to the majority of Americans.
And good luck to any of these candidates who tries to tack to the center after many months of spewing hard right rhetoric that the vast majority of us find offensive and off putting. Republicans are going to have to figure out some day that that tactic merely serves to bring the cravenness of their candidates into stark relief.
If that is their hope then they shouldn't have allowed their primary process to be captured by the hard right. Which they did because the Republican establishment arrogantly and paternalistically thought they could control and manipulate the rubes and bumpkins, the "low-information voters."
Surprise!, the unwashed masses turned out to have a mind of their own and pretty quickly figured out that they didn't actually need the professional Republicans - who have been using them for decades - for much of anything. Now that money no longer need flow through the national party, the hard right has realized that they really don't need the party establishment for anything. Certainly not guidance.
As long as the hard right is manning the gateway to the general election, you will only see Republican candidates who reflect their values. And guess what, those values are pretty much repugnant to the majority of Americans.
And good luck to any of these candidates who tries to tack to the center after many months of spewing hard right rhetoric that the vast majority of us find offensive and off putting. Republicans are going to have to figure out some day that that tactic merely serves to bring the cravenness of their candidates into stark relief.
9
The best of a bad lot without a chance of getting the nomination. Even if the Republican convention ends up deadlocked, as seems to be a distinct possibility, the smoke filled back room politicians are more likely to inflict another Bush on us.
6
No, Paul Ryan
Kasich's record in Ohio is worth a close look. The jobs gains he touts were primarily from fracking otherwise the trickle down policies have not worked in Ohio any better than in Kansas. or any other conservatve red state. In addition his so scalled education reform has been a boom to wealthy and relegous parents and a disaster for the poor, minorities, and those left in the public school system. Kasich and Bush have similar records. The policies of the extreme right has decimated the middle class. No amount of deregulation, lowering taxes, or lassiez faire is going to revive the middle class. It is past time for public policies that help the public not just the business elite.
25
"A Chance to Reset the Republican Race?" What is a reset? Reset to what?
Republicans have offered the same political dogma for more than 30 years. Nothing is going change. Perhaps the only voice of reasonable conservatism is Gov. John Kasich of Ohio. He will be drowned out though by Trump, Cruz, Rubio and the others. Republicans still believe in small, impotent government. They believe that taxes for the rich should be reduced so that jobs can be created despite the proof of the last 30 years that only the rich get richer.
Sometimes I think I'd like to see a good Republican with fresh ideas run for the presidency. Then I wake up.
There can be no reset. Republican dogma and philosophy calls for destruction of health care, closing of Planned Parenthood, ID for all voters, continued gerrymandering of political districts, no taxes for the rich, prohibition of legal abortion and perhaps even limited access to birth control. Republicans want to dismantle, totally dismantle Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Child Health Care Initiatives, unemployment compensation, worker pension plans, unions (especially public worker and teacher unions) and finally they want to reduce government to a point where it is almost non-existent and totally impotent.
This is fine for rich, white conservatives.
It's not fine for the rest of us. The rest of us want a piece of the American dream. We want to be successful, educated, free, healthy, and have jobs and a secure future, not a reset.
Republicans have offered the same political dogma for more than 30 years. Nothing is going change. Perhaps the only voice of reasonable conservatism is Gov. John Kasich of Ohio. He will be drowned out though by Trump, Cruz, Rubio and the others. Republicans still believe in small, impotent government. They believe that taxes for the rich should be reduced so that jobs can be created despite the proof of the last 30 years that only the rich get richer.
Sometimes I think I'd like to see a good Republican with fresh ideas run for the presidency. Then I wake up.
There can be no reset. Republican dogma and philosophy calls for destruction of health care, closing of Planned Parenthood, ID for all voters, continued gerrymandering of political districts, no taxes for the rich, prohibition of legal abortion and perhaps even limited access to birth control. Republicans want to dismantle, totally dismantle Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Child Health Care Initiatives, unemployment compensation, worker pension plans, unions (especially public worker and teacher unions) and finally they want to reduce government to a point where it is almost non-existent and totally impotent.
This is fine for rich, white conservatives.
It's not fine for the rest of us. The rest of us want a piece of the American dream. We want to be successful, educated, free, healthy, and have jobs and a secure future, not a reset.
15
So Gov. Kasich's primary qualification for president is that he is not as insane as the other candidates?
As a native of Ohio who ran screaming from the state in 1970 after the Kent State student murders, Kasich's reminds me of Gov. James Rhodes who ordered the national guard troops onto the Kent campus after J. Edgar Hoover told him that communist infiltrators were behind the students demonstrating against the war in Vietnam.
There is a certain muddle headed dullness to Ohio politicians that Rhodes and Kasich's exude, although that dullness can easily be confused for emotional stability.
My nominees would have been Sen. Bernie Sanders for the democrats and Mayor Michael Bloomberg, if he could be convinced to run as a Republican.
As a native of Ohio who ran screaming from the state in 1970 after the Kent State student murders, Kasich's reminds me of Gov. James Rhodes who ordered the national guard troops onto the Kent campus after J. Edgar Hoover told him that communist infiltrators were behind the students demonstrating against the war in Vietnam.
There is a certain muddle headed dullness to Ohio politicians that Rhodes and Kasich's exude, although that dullness can easily be confused for emotional stability.
My nominees would have been Sen. Bernie Sanders for the democrats and Mayor Michael Bloomberg, if he could be convinced to run as a Republican.
10
Since Rhodes and Kasich have nothing in common but six letters in their last name, that is quite as unfair as I would be by saying that Hillary reminds me of the last Secretary of State elected president, James Buchanan.
If you're trying to help Kasich, this was the wrong move.
8
The GOP might be in disarray today and under the grips of the extremist fringe, however wouldn't it be proper to allow it time and space to put its house in order, and set or reset its presidential race by itself, instead of outsiders suggesting the course.
3
With respect, Mr Sharma, what in the last 40 or so years might indicate that the Republican party would have any inclination to divert, in any way, from their dogma - or the shameful way, more often than not, in which they attempt to gain from appealing to voters' reactionary ignorance?
2
the party itself cannot get its act together, how will it fix its extremism from within?
Coming as it does from a Board that has not endorsed a Republican candidate since Eisenhower, and makes clear in the course of its endorsement of Mrs. Clinton that it won't consider changing this year, your endorsement of Gov. Kasich can only be seen as your attempt to set up the least objectionable Republican candidate who also represents the least threat to Mr.s Clinton. Your nondisclosure of your historic record is rather shameful.
6
The United States federal government is disgusting in every way possible. The more money they steal from us, the more money they spend. Most diasour relics in Congress today are bums, fakes, and sellouts. Go out and get a real job or run your own company like I do! You perception of those in office today will change. I assure you!
5
Does the NYT really think so little of the concept full citizenship for women that they would endorse this sexual fascist? How about at least a dissenting opinion by the women on the editorial board? Trump may be a consummate boor when it comes to women but all the others are genuinely threatening to women's life, liberty and their pursuit of happiness.
8
Moderate Republicanism is dead as a doornail. By endorsing Kasich the Times is being redundant. Small-government philosophy choked the life out of "compassionate conservatism" a long time ago.
3
I understand the endorsement for Hillary after Sanders had Karl Rove join his team. But John Kasich has the poison lead problem in Ohio that is killing people. Yes Gov. Kasich fulls his jobs for profit and looking to build more. He has no interest in concerns of minorities or gays. He kept silent about his State lead poisoning water. Yes John Kasich could not buy an election. Now the last hope was Mitt Romney after the Federal lawsuit against him was finished. Trump is a clown joke as the world watches. Poor Bernie Sanders almost had it with the fake scandals the GOP were doing. The his team stole Hillary's donors information, used AARP without permission and Karl Rove came in to ran a TV ad to attack Hillary for Bernie to get votes. Mrs. Sanders had to do TV interviews to clean up the mess Bernie made about Planned Parenthood and Human Rights. Ever notice the GOP are like the Gang who could not shoot Straight. Every legally act they try to do fails. Bernie was the back to if a GOP did not win and now Karl Rove has to help and again Koch bros will be spending millions.
1
Jackie Rawlings:
Republicans are trying to use Sanders (over his protests) to defeat Clinton, because they have a better chance (they think) to defeat Sanders than Clinton. He does not want or need Karl Rove and his bunch to mess with Democratic Politics.
Republicans are trying to use Sanders (over his protests) to defeat Clinton, because they have a better chance (they think) to defeat Sanders than Clinton. He does not want or need Karl Rove and his bunch to mess with Democratic Politics.
Jackie, Ohio doesn't have the big lead water problem...that's Flint, MICHIGAN. Admittedly close, and with another republican governor (Rick Snyder). While I'm loathe to endore any republican, at least Kasich has kept Ohio roads from being the pothole-fest that is Michigan. But on both sides of the border, things are screwed up due to republican partisan politics.
Methinks I hear desperation in the editorial room with the endorsements of Mrs Clinton and Gov Kasich. The NYT is mistrustful of the voice of the people. They prefer to see Trump voters as gullible fanatics, part of whose rage is directed at the smug know-it-alls of the establishment and its corporate media. But the ferment that is afoot though messy will result in a much overdue shake-up of the status quo. Kasich has as much chance of beating Trump as Sanders had of being editorially supported by the very serious NYT.
7
Unfortunately your endorsement of Kasich just made his chances of securing the nomination even less likely. Next cycle, do the country a favor and endorse the Trumps and Cruz's in the Republican race to ensure the country has some legitimate options like Mr. Kasich !
6
Great point lol
Many of us who remember the February surprises of 2011 in Wisconsin and Ohio do not necessarily see Governor Kasich as any sort of "moderate", especially when it comes to the rights of workers. In the glaring Klieg light of dysfunction that is the current candidate field on the right, however, I can see how his particular Kochian/ALEC torch might dim in comparison and make him seem so.
11
Same whine in a different bottle. Kasich is an unbridled extremist on tax cuts for the wealthy, corporate welfare, the Supreme Court, the environment, the military, marriage equality, the right to choose. Don't be fooled.
23
Putting up a Berlin-like wall in Texas and other border states is not the right direction of the United States of America. The symbolism alone is anathema.
A foreign policy is a plan of action to assure America's safety in the present and in the future. It includes diminishing the "Will to Destroy" us. That's why trade helps everyone, but the American worker who lost a lot of money through unreasonable out-sourcing policies that in effect hurt our economy. It was the great Reagan Backfire.
A foreign policy is a plan of action to assure America's safety in the present and in the future. It includes diminishing the "Will to Destroy" us. That's why trade helps everyone, but the American worker who lost a lot of money through unreasonable out-sourcing policies that in effect hurt our economy. It was the great Reagan Backfire.
5
The Beelin wall was erected to keep people in, not out. Trumps plan is much like your house, erect security measures to keep unwanted people out.
1
You really think it is a positive that he has fought to limit poor women's access to healthcare? Of all the republicans he does seem to be most normal, but his hate for women's choice (legal since 1973) and his bigotry about same sex marriage (legal since 2015) should completely disqualify him to lead our nation.
13
With respect, you need to read more carefully. The Time's endorsement was in spite of his position of reproductive rights. He does not believe or advocate any of the Republican fantasies. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
1
I am a Democrat, however I have been constantly impressed with Gov. Kasich. I don't agree with him about everything, but his attitude and past work about government's duty to protect the poor, the mentally ill and others "in the shadows" reaches my soul. I don't doubt that's the case with many people, Republican or Democrat. Unfortunately the public is hearing little about this aspect of American life from either party or their candidates. I also believe Kasich has the ability to compromise and work with members of either party if elected. I fear other candidates, should they win, will automatically, either historically or deliberately, bring ongoing rancor to their Presidential position that will be legislatively difficult to overcome.
17
I'm a Democrat too, and I completely agree with your comments. I do not agree with all of Governor Katich's positions but I do sense in him the ability to compromise. More importantly I believe that he has a sense of integrity which is something his competitors in the Republican "food fight" entirely lack.
2
He's a cannabis hater, so he doesn't want to bring those folks "in from the shadows", he wants them as marginalized as possible, while the people choosing the often really dangerous drug alcohol are allowed to run wild. The hypocrisy of supposed Christians and supposed freedom lovers hating on cannabis but not alcohol is stunning.
And their hating on medicinal cannabis is far worse, that's nothing less than a war crime against humanity. Taking medicine out of the mouths of children, what are 'Christians' like Kasich thinking?
And their hating on medicinal cannabis is far worse, that's nothing less than a war crime against humanity. Taking medicine out of the mouths of children, what are 'Christians' like Kasich thinking?
1
I think you're confusing Kasich with a human being with a heart and a conscience.
Kasich has neither.
He just appears sane because he's surrounded by world class whack jobs.
Kasich has neither.
He just appears sane because he's surrounded by world class whack jobs.
There is no chance to reset. When one gets to the end of the list of Republican candidates the answer is, "None of the Above."
8
Here's a left handed compliment: Kasich is the best of the worst. He and Bush want to focus on critical issues but are constantly hijacked by the histrionics of the three front runners: Trump, Cruz, Rubio. Ironically, being endorsed by the Times may be the nail in the coffin for Kasich.
7
nzierler--They don't expect him to be a news maker.
It’s an old joke, nzierler, but John Kasich’s receiving the endorsement for the Republican nomination from the New York Times is like winning the award for Skinniest Kid at Fat Camp. As far as Kasich having to worry about a negative backlash, Marco Rubio has sewn up the Des Moines Register endorsement, and in New Hampshire Chris Christie received the endorsement of the most important paper for Republicans, the Union Leader. Kasich had to settle for the Boston Globe, so he may have expected the NYT nod.
Couldn't sit this one out, eh Times?
The fact that Kasich is the least objectionable of the most objectionable list of candidates ever put forward by a major party is not a reason to endorse him.
The criteria for endorsement should be whether the person is qualified to be president and Kasich ("no moderate") clearly is not.
The fact that Kasich is the least objectionable of the most objectionable list of candidates ever put forward by a major party is not a reason to endorse him.
The criteria for endorsement should be whether the person is qualified to be president and Kasich ("no moderate") clearly is not.
6
This newspaper does not support Republican candidates for president.
For you to suggest that Kasich, one of the least popular and most liberal, should be their nominee when people you detest like Trump and Cruz, is pathetic.
And desperate.
Trump will get the nomination.
And he will beat Hillary in the election. At that point she will be hardly able to show her face in public after months of FBI investigations and absolute incompetence in having top secret documents on an unprotected server with Iran and Russia stealing our secrets thanks to her stupidity.
Live with it.
For you to suggest that Kasich, one of the least popular and most liberal, should be their nominee when people you detest like Trump and Cruz, is pathetic.
And desperate.
Trump will get the nomination.
And he will beat Hillary in the election. At that point she will be hardly able to show her face in public after months of FBI investigations and absolute incompetence in having top secret documents on an unprotected server with Iran and Russia stealing our secrets thanks to her stupidity.
Live with it.
7
To be fair, the NYT did support William McKinley. Twice.
The New York Times Editorial Board is correct that Governor John Kasich of Ohio is the only feasible presidential aspirant among the incredibly flawed group of Republicans seeking the office. That does not mean, however, that Mr. Kasich would make a good president. He only looks good in comparison to the strange crew vying for the G.O.P. nomination.
Governor Kasich has extreme views about banning abortions and dismantling labor unions. On a personality level, he has demonstrated a mean streak and a temper to Ohioans, although the national audience has not yet seen those traits. Mr. Kasich also seems to have a very short attention span, tiring of details easily.
Governor Kasich has yet to explain how he has changed from the experienced Congressman who gladly followed Speaker Newt Gingrich down the path to shutting down the Federal Government. Maybe we should not complain so much about a reckless Ted Cruz or the Tea Party radicals.
Again, it is a sad commentary on the other Republican candidates that even John Kasich starts to look good.
Governor Kasich has extreme views about banning abortions and dismantling labor unions. On a personality level, he has demonstrated a mean streak and a temper to Ohioans, although the national audience has not yet seen those traits. Mr. Kasich also seems to have a very short attention span, tiring of details easily.
Governor Kasich has yet to explain how he has changed from the experienced Congressman who gladly followed Speaker Newt Gingrich down the path to shutting down the Federal Government. Maybe we should not complain so much about a reckless Ted Cruz or the Tea Party radicals.
Again, it is a sad commentary on the other Republican candidates that even John Kasich starts to look good.
13
How could any newspaper with the basic journalistic integrity and professionalism simultaneously endorse Hillary Clinton and John Kasich, the two individuals with the diametrically opposite system of values, political platforms and worldviews?
How could any independent newspaper endorse the two old school candidates at the very moment the fellow Americans are fed up with the political establishment that kept our country on the wrong course for so long, request the change of direction and trust only the outsiders completely detached from the traditional centers of power?
Do our journalists have the slightest ideas what’s going on in America?
If they had, would our politicians be able to do what they being doing for so long?
Whom do our journalists truly work for: the newspaper owners or the public and the readers?
Can this country ever be protected by the politicians that take the credit for the good things but proclaim self not guilty of all the bad things?
Can the readers be really served by the journalists that let the politicians use such ridiculously wrong logic for at least a couple of decades?
How could any independent newspaper endorse the two old school candidates at the very moment the fellow Americans are fed up with the political establishment that kept our country on the wrong course for so long, request the change of direction and trust only the outsiders completely detached from the traditional centers of power?
Do our journalists have the slightest ideas what’s going on in America?
If they had, would our politicians be able to do what they being doing for so long?
Whom do our journalists truly work for: the newspaper owners or the public and the readers?
Can this country ever be protected by the politicians that take the credit for the good things but proclaim self not guilty of all the bad things?
Can the readers be really served by the journalists that let the politicians use such ridiculously wrong logic for at least a couple of decades?
3
What a kind heart the editorial board has in this fantasy island fantasy. Again you are neglecting to investigate and to understand the role of big money setting policy. The Koch’s big money gang has contempt for Kasich for anything other than a token "kinder and gentler” conservative VP candidate to con the electorate in the general election. They expect something for their $900 million and they certainly would not take any actual back talk from Kasich. Kasich is a billionaire pawn as much as anyone. He is just playing a different role. You need to read "Dark Money" by Jane Meyer and come back to this planet.
9
I could vote for Mr. Kasich but first there would have to be some evidence he could win the nomination. i don't see that happening.
What I like about Mr. Trump is he has made freedom of speech possible. For example millions of Americans think "barring Muslims" is a good idea. Now they can actually say this.
What I like about Mr. Trump is he has made freedom of speech possible. For example millions of Americans think "barring Muslims" is a good idea. Now they can actually say this.
3
"Free Speech" to say what? Hateful things about women, Hispanics, Blacks, pretty much everyone except white men? To sully an important constitutional right with hate does not a president make. DT lives to shock, beginning & end of story.
Kasich is a more or less normal Republican. Right of center but serious and not at constant war with common sense, consistency, honesty, and basic facts. The rest are freaks dragging the GOP towards the scrap heap of history. He would also be easier for Hillary to beat, which is also of considerable concern to the New York Times.
2
Forget picking a candidate from that lot.
What the Times needs to say, over and over again, is that the national Republican Party is no longer a viable source for policy and civil discussion. It is an overflowing toilet that needs to be removed and dragged to the curb.
What the Times needs to say, over and over again, is that the national Republican Party is no longer a viable source for policy and civil discussion. It is an overflowing toilet that needs to be removed and dragged to the curb.
11
And the democrats are all rainbows and daffodils? Please! It's all the same, it just depends on which team you chose!
1
I remember watching the early debates that Kasich, Sanders and Trump were the only doves. I know it sounds absurd to call Trump a dove but he seemed the only one who did not want to go to war with Russia.
But what are the odds that Kasich will be nominated? And an endorsement from the NYT (which bypassed Sanders in favor of Hillary), how much good will it do him?
But what are the odds that Kasich will be nominated? And an endorsement from the NYT (which bypassed Sanders in favor of Hillary), how much good will it do him?
2
I understand it is extremely hard for NYT to support someone from the irresponsible GOP kindergarten, but, there is only one with a little kind of judgment, now, Rand Paul. I know, being against invading other countries, will not fit very well with the GOP establishment. So, the less evil, Kasich, if only he could forget about his obsession with Iran. Done deal, sir, and the real world will not care about any future US president.
5
It is interesting to note that the NYT is castigating people on the Republican side for being all about ego and saying anything to win, yet they have endorsed Hillary, who epitomizes those very things, as their nominee on the Democratic side.
I will say it again, this is the worst Presidential field I have seen in 40+ years of voting. If the leading candidates receive their party's nomination, I honestly don't think I will vote for either one. I can't in good conscience help either of two very flawed people become President. Alas for my poor country that it may come to this.
I will say it again, this is the worst Presidential field I have seen in 40+ years of voting. If the leading candidates receive their party's nomination, I honestly don't think I will vote for either one. I can't in good conscience help either of two very flawed people become President. Alas for my poor country that it may come to this.
3
As a resident of Ohio, I can tell you that Mr. Kasich has governed as an extremist. After winning the office as Governor by blaming the 2008 recession on Governor Strickland while he (Mr. Kasich) was an officer with Lehman Bros whose default was one of the triggers for the recession that followed, he is now trying to claim credit for the subsequent recovery even though the facts show that Ohio is trailing the national average in most measures of this recovery. Mr. Kasich tried unsuccessfully to strip union rights from public workers when his supported legislation was overwhelmingly overturned by a public referendum but he did succeed in slashing income taxes mostly for the already wealthy and eliminated the Ohio estate tax which has shifted the burden of these taxes onto those who do not have multi-million dollar estates to pass on to those who did nothing to earn them except choose the right parents.
Yes, it is true that Mr. Kasich has moderated his positions recently but I suspect that that is simply another of his self serving calculations, thinking that he must do so to make himself appear more attractive to independent voters while he makes his run for national office. Clearly his efforts at deception have worked with regard to the NY Times editorial staff.
As much as I fear for the day when Mr. Kasich national ambitions end and he returns to his extremist agenda for Ohio, I fear even more for the nation if this con artist should succeed in his run for President.
Yes, it is true that Mr. Kasich has moderated his positions recently but I suspect that that is simply another of his self serving calculations, thinking that he must do so to make himself appear more attractive to independent voters while he makes his run for national office. Clearly his efforts at deception have worked with regard to the NY Times editorial staff.
As much as I fear for the day when Mr. Kasich national ambitions end and he returns to his extremist agenda for Ohio, I fear even more for the nation if this con artist should succeed in his run for President.
18
The Republicans previously had a chance to nominate a grounded, competent, thoughtful, smart and accomplished governor, Jon Huntsman, who had far more integrity than the rest but ignored him and now they seem to be in the thrall of psychopaths including the entre field except perhaps Ron Paul and John Kasich. Trump is a potential Hitler and braggart much like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Most concerning is why would any American take any of these candidates seriously. That is the real question. Why are so many Americans incapable of recognizing they are being conned? The answer needs to be pursued with great compassion, thoughtfulness, vigor and depth.
18
Kasich does not have a chance to beat Hillary Clinton but Trump does because he brings something different to the table.He is not controlled by either party time to shake up the establishment and get this country going in the right direction. A sound immigration policy would be a good start.
4
Are you trying to say that a sound immigration policy (for Hispanics only) consists of building a wall that Mexico will pay for and trucks to patrol our cities and countryside looking for "illegals to round up?
2
There goes the Clinton surrogate machine again, trying to set up a fail safe for their gal Hillary. Will the NYT publish an article after the Iowa caucus, or even the NH primary, admitting that their pick on the Republican side was bogus? Probably not. But the NYT will be endorsing Hillary even after Bernie Sanders beats her up and down and across the country. You watch!
1
Only in America is a billionaire considered an outsider.
1
I have to say, Kasich would have no trouble looking Presidential, even adult next to an aged frat boy like Trump. I'd submit Trump could be made to look as uninformed and illiterate as Palin put to the test.
2
The Times got it right here. John Kasich isn't flashy but he is a practical person who has a pretty good record of being dogged, steadfast, prudent, and willing to compromise with political opponents. I hope conservatives reading this editorial (and maybe this comment) will give his candidacy the consideration it merits.
6
I would have expected the NYT to endorse Kasich, because he reflects many of the values I have read over and over in the Times in spite of his being conservative on economic issues such as unions. Most Republican voters disagree with these views on foreign policy, national security and immigration.
Marco Rubio is a much better candidate, and is someone whose views can appeal to mainstream American voters. Although Rubio supports a version of immigration reform, a hotly contested issue in conservative Republican circles he is, nevertheless, highly respected and trusted on issues of national security. He is extremely bright and considerably more thoughtful than Kasich on the issues that concern us today.
Marco Rubio is a much better candidate, and is someone whose views can appeal to mainstream American voters. Although Rubio supports a version of immigration reform, a hotly contested issue in conservative Republican circles he is, nevertheless, highly respected and trusted on issues of national security. He is extremely bright and considerably more thoughtful than Kasich on the issues that concern us today.
I think kasich sounds reasonable mostly because one compares and contrast him to the rest of the wing nuts. Honestly, I believe it is time for the GOP to implode, and then try to rebuild. They cannot go on as they are-- defeatists, war-mongers, obstructionists, appealing to a far extreme group of people like evangelicals from the boonies or gun nuts, etc. Take them all out to the woodshed and come back with Ike, or Bob Dole. Then we can consider them as a viable party.
1
The best decision for the editorial board of the New York Times would have been to endorse no one for the Republican nomination. The fact that they chose Kasich proves my point. He is extreme in the way he believes his religion should inform his decisions if elected President. What kind of people would he appoint to judgeships and to the Supreme Court? In Ohio he has damaged public education on all levels. He is strongly anti-abortion. He says that he accepts the Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage, but it goes against his religious beliefs. And who knows what he'd try to do in this regard if he became President? He brags of his achievements with the economy of Ohio, but where would Ohio be if President Obama had not saved General Motors and Chrysler. Kasich was against bailing out the auto industry at the time, but later praised it when it proved successful. I see no good reason to endorse this man for the Republican nomination. That he is willing to compromise and work with others is not enough. As I say, the best option would have been to endorse no one. Is it possible for the New York Times to change its mind?
6
This is about something being very wrong with the Republican Party itself. They cannot manifest a popular electable candidate, because they are so far from the center on social issues, and have little to no interest in rebalancing the economy to help the middle class. They will have little to no hope of finding an electable candidate, now and down the road, until they make significant changes in their core principles.
6
I'm not surprised at a lukewarm endorsement, for a candidate that barely registers in the polling. It must really pain the editorial board to even have to endorse a Republican. Their world would be a better place without any pesky conservatives.
2
what exactly is conservative about your party?
Kasich probably would take the Times endorsement more of a caution than of a victory. Consider how far away the republication voters have shifted over years, we have now Trump and Cruz being the top choices and none of those votes seems to have the attention to hear what a modest Kasich is saying. If the Times really want to do a favor to the country, I'd very interested to see what would happen if the Times endorsed Trump.
1
Donald Trump is clearly the alpha male in the Republican race. The rest, including Mr. Kasich, are nothing more than bull-prepping cuckservatives. Trump is the only candidate addressing the real issues affecting voters - mass immigration, loss of American jobs and endless wars in the Middle East.
4
You got it Thomas!
2
While Kasich seems like the only adult Republican in the race; when he talks about social issues or taxes, it's W all over again.
P.S. If Catholic politicians use their piety to show what wonderful people they are. So how could they so easily blow off the Pope and his belittle his messages on ecology and climate change?
P.S. If Catholic politicians use their piety to show what wonderful people they are. So how could they so easily blow off the Pope and his belittle his messages on ecology and climate change?
6
Kasich is not a Catholic. He was raised Catholic, but converted to Anglicanism a Protestant denomination.
I would have expected the NYT to endorse Kasich, because he does not run too far astray of many of the values reflected in the Times, in spite of his being conservative on economic issues such as unions. Most Republican voters disagree with these views on foreign policy, national security and immigration.
Marco Rubio is a much better candidate, and is someone whose views can appeal to mainstream American voters. Although Rubio supports a version of immigration reform, a hotly contested issue in conservative Republican circles he is, nevertheless, highly respected and trusted on issues of national security. He is extremely bright and considerably more thoughtful than Kasich on the issues that concern us today.
Marco Rubio is a much better candidate, and is someone whose views can appeal to mainstream American voters. Although Rubio supports a version of immigration reform, a hotly contested issue in conservative Republican circles he is, nevertheless, highly respected and trusted on issues of national security. He is extremely bright and considerably more thoughtful than Kasich on the issues that concern us today.
Yes!
His views on some issues are too conservative for me, but he is a real candidate from the real world for a possible real future in an approach to governing that is based in reality and that has a real chance of working in a realistic way, which includes being practical, capable of compromise, and not needing to be energized by hatred and anger.
I will still have to vote for Hillary Clinton -- for lack of a better democratic candidate -- but this is one serious republican. Yes to the NYT's choices.
His views on some issues are too conservative for me, but he is a real candidate from the real world for a possible real future in an approach to governing that is based in reality and that has a real chance of working in a realistic way, which includes being practical, capable of compromise, and not needing to be energized by hatred and anger.
I will still have to vote for Hillary Clinton -- for lack of a better democratic candidate -- but this is one serious republican. Yes to the NYT's choices.
4
I agree that he's the least unlikable(?) of the GOP candidates but my biggest fear is that he selects Rubio for VP. That man should be no where near the White House, especially on someone's coat tails. Even more than that, that ticket would probably beat Hillary easily (OH and FL) and we'd get very conservative Supreme Court nominees from it.
2
Today’s editorial is insightful, evidence-based, overdue and on target for the broader Republican constituency!
Unlike other candidates who thrive on the seeds of discontent plaguing the GOP, Gov. John Kasich, notwithstanding his occasional governance flaws, has so far stayed on the high road of turning dissent into concrete constructive endeavors.
Alas, the editorial will earn few friends in Iowa where it will be a mere isolated event, either unnoticed or of marginal impact on Monday!
Unlike other candidates who thrive on the seeds of discontent plaguing the GOP, Gov. John Kasich, notwithstanding his occasional governance flaws, has so far stayed on the high road of turning dissent into concrete constructive endeavors.
Alas, the editorial will earn few friends in Iowa where it will be a mere isolated event, either unnoticed or of marginal impact on Monday!
1
I agree that John Kasich is the best in the field of Republican candidates for President. At least he is rational and humble but I am not sure about some of his position or willingness to address important issues.
Kasich is hard-nosed and conservative, but knows where the levers of power are in Washington, is competent, and most importantly, pragmatic. If he ascended to the presidency I would not fear for our nation.
4
The fight for the soul of the Republican Party is now between Rubio and Trump/Cruz. A Rubio nomination would result in the tribalists being shown the door. That is what the Grand Old Party, and the nation, desperately needs. If that doesn't happen, American politics is going to get really ugly. It's time for all people of good will to rally around Rubio.
John Kasich presents himself as the benevolent moderate. ohio is now one of the most toxic states: our air, our lakes, our rivers, our soil, and now our aquifers, all due to unfettered corporate interests, coal, oil & gas, big agriculture/GMO's, factory farms. He wants to privatize public education, and take away women's right to choose.
He is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
He is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
13
I will readily concede that the only consistently adult presence on the stage throughout the Republican Nomination Marathon and Mud Wrestling Extravaganza has been John Kasich.
Which is exactly why he hasn't a whisper of a prayer of a long-shot chance at the nomination. Not by this Republican Party.
Which is exactly why he hasn't a whisper of a prayer of a long-shot chance at the nomination. Not by this Republican Party.
1
Without doubt the only half-way sane Republican candidate. Kasich has a proven record as governor and did the "right thing" by expanding Medicaid in his state. Sadly, I feel his chances are obtaining the nomination are close to zero. He is a classic moderate in a time of extremists and the only "adult" playing in the Republican sandbox.
4
I hardly think that rescinding reproductive rights, which are at the core of the right to self-determination for half the population, is "positive". Yet this candidate has been signing off on that for several years in Ohio, and would likely do the same, lacking any proof to the contrary, if a national bill was to come across his desk.
No. There are no republican candidates that can be trusted to ensure this fundamental right.
No. There are no republican candidates that can be trusted to ensure this fundamental right.
3
"He favors a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and he speaks of government’s duty to protect the poor, the mentally ill and others 'in the shadows'."
I like both choices of NYT. I am a very liberal Democrat, a naturalized Indian American. Ideologically, my views resonate with those of Bernie Sanders. But I do not see any realistic path for Sen. Sanders to win. So almost as gladly I would accept Hillary Clinton as the next president, albeit my second choice. Similarly, as a compromise I would accept John Kasich as the next president. I do not like any other Republicans. I thought Donald Trump, despite his bluster wouldn't be a bad president. But your editorial & his policy pronouncements scare me. His tax plan is plain nuts.
As for path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, I am not for it. It's a killer clause. If the Senate hadn't pushed for it, we would have had a comprehensive "accommodation" plan for them. Most undocumented immigrants only care about becoming legal. They wouldn't terribly mind if they don't become citizens.
I like both choices of NYT. I am a very liberal Democrat, a naturalized Indian American. Ideologically, my views resonate with those of Bernie Sanders. But I do not see any realistic path for Sen. Sanders to win. So almost as gladly I would accept Hillary Clinton as the next president, albeit my second choice. Similarly, as a compromise I would accept John Kasich as the next president. I do not like any other Republicans. I thought Donald Trump, despite his bluster wouldn't be a bad president. But your editorial & his policy pronouncements scare me. His tax plan is plain nuts.
As for path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, I am not for it. It's a killer clause. If the Senate hadn't pushed for it, we would have had a comprehensive "accommodation" plan for them. Most undocumented immigrants only care about becoming legal. They wouldn't terribly mind if they don't become citizens.
2
I suppose if one must pick one Republican candidate in order to appear more fair, I would agree with the Kasich choice, even though he arguably represents the "best of the worst" group of candidates most of us have ever witnessed. So yes, Mr. Kasich is the appropriate "nose-holding" choice from the current Death Star of GOP storm troopers
3
Kasich is the ultimate political bag man who has taken Ohio's state treasury and unloaded it to his corporate sponsors. Look no further than the charter school participants who have looted Ohio's education budget for years under this governor to get the idea of how public/private partnerships really are set up to work for the contractor at the exclusion of Ohio's children. It is nothing less than a criminal enterprise where statistical fraud has been bally-hooed as a success.
3
Women don't want any Republican men in their uterus, but that does not deter Kasich from limiting reproductive services to 8, from requiring a medical exam to determine "viability", and granting fetal rights that subordinate their mothers.
Social Security recipients don't want to have their benefits reduced to avoid the need for the wealthy to contribute more than the tax ceiling: $118,000.
While Kasich is the most rational choice on the Republican stage....he still has serious issues.
Social Security recipients don't want to have their benefits reduced to avoid the need for the wealthy to contribute more than the tax ceiling: $118,000.
While Kasich is the most rational choice on the Republican stage....he still has serious issues.
6
The problem I find with the Kasich endorsement is that it marginalizes the endorsement for MSec Clinton. As others have stated, why make the lesser evil [italics] choice at all? Poor judgment on one endorsement is similar to the adage that a cook is only as good as the last meal prepared. Kasich's photo is under Clinton's photo.
2
If America is stupid enough to vote in a loser like Trump and bible thumping right maniacally Cruz, we get whatever deserve. We downtrodden from Bush, so the idiots will get screed again with either of these losers. I'm an Independent and thought Kasich was the smartest and most qualified of the bunch. I have decided who will get my vote, but I know if Cruz or Trump get the GOP nomination, I certainly will vote for anyone but them. Trump doesn't have any ideas or plans, he simply says the same things over and over again. When pressed, he insults, says he will hire the best minds, etc. I'm gonna try this tactic on my next interview and we how eel that goes over!
I'm still hoping Bloomberg jumps in. But I will definitely back Clinton or Sanders if either he or Kasich don't win.
Besides Kasich, all of the GOP candidates are losers, especially Christie, Rubio, Santorum, Fiorina and Huckabee. I truly hope that a country that elected Obama twice, will not regress back to politics of hate, devisiveness and scare tactics and vote in a Trump or Cruz. If they do, this country wil never be the same and the stacks, racism, divide between rich/poor will be even greater.
I'm still hoping Bloomberg jumps in. But I will definitely back Clinton or Sanders if either he or Kasich don't win.
Besides Kasich, all of the GOP candidates are losers, especially Christie, Rubio, Santorum, Fiorina and Huckabee. I truly hope that a country that elected Obama twice, will not regress back to politics of hate, devisiveness and scare tactics and vote in a Trump or Cruz. If they do, this country wil never be the same and the stacks, racism, divide between rich/poor will be even greater.
3
Governor Kasich is clearly the least of the evils -- someone who doesn't come off as a complete lunatic or moron -- but that is faint praise indeed. But if he should get elected, it would be an unmitigated disaster for the country: Notwithstanding his support for Medicaid expansion, would he have the will to veto the next repeal of the ACA that will surely come or any of the other horrors that the Republicans, who would then probably control both houses, pass? Worse, he will probably get the opportunity to appoint another Scalia to the Supreme Court. That damage wouldn't be undone in my lifetime.
4
the unemployment figure of 5% supplied by the government is pure fiction.
other countries include part timers who want to be employed full time as being unemployed . the labor force participation rate is the lowest in decades.
if those figures were adjusted properly the unemployment rate would be in the mid to upper teens. while Trump may exaggerate the numbers it doesn't take away that government statistics are nothing but a sham. under employment is a serious problem in this country. of all the candidates at least TRump is wlling to acknowledge it.
as an aside do any nyt readers believe government statistics that inflation is running at last than 2%/yr?
other countries include part timers who want to be employed full time as being unemployed . the labor force participation rate is the lowest in decades.
if those figures were adjusted properly the unemployment rate would be in the mid to upper teens. while Trump may exaggerate the numbers it doesn't take away that government statistics are nothing but a sham. under employment is a serious problem in this country. of all the candidates at least TRump is wlling to acknowledge it.
as an aside do any nyt readers believe government statistics that inflation is running at last than 2%/yr?
1
A confession is in order. I have always been under the impression that the New York Times is too irredeemably and bitterly partisan to weigh in honestly on the Republican presidential field. Fortunately, I was incorrect. While I am understandably miffed at the brief and underwhelming way it was presented, I was applaud the Times' well-deserved endorsement of Gov. Kasich.
As a member a species -- moderate Republicans, although it is far from clear if using the term "moderate" as an adjective describing "Republican" is even grammatically, much less logically, correct -- nearing the level of irrelevance usually reserved for those literally extinct, I have long ago resigned myself to observing haplessly the state of the modern Republican Party. Admittedly, I was initially amused by The Donald and his cohort of childish idiots. Not anymore.
I have been a supporter of Gov. Kasich's presidential bid for some time now. He has extensive experience as both a high profile member of congress and highly successful governor, and possesses views are both well thought out and reasonably moderate. Just as importantly, he not only extols the virtues of bipartisanship but can point to a record attesting to his championship of it. Crucially, he is also more than conservative enough to credibly claim the mantle as the leader of the Republican Party.
Unfortunately, he has next to no chance of winning the primaries. A Bloomberg-Kasich ticket, perhaps?
As a member a species -- moderate Republicans, although it is far from clear if using the term "moderate" as an adjective describing "Republican" is even grammatically, much less logically, correct -- nearing the level of irrelevance usually reserved for those literally extinct, I have long ago resigned myself to observing haplessly the state of the modern Republican Party. Admittedly, I was initially amused by The Donald and his cohort of childish idiots. Not anymore.
I have been a supporter of Gov. Kasich's presidential bid for some time now. He has extensive experience as both a high profile member of congress and highly successful governor, and possesses views are both well thought out and reasonably moderate. Just as importantly, he not only extols the virtues of bipartisanship but can point to a record attesting to his championship of it. Crucially, he is also more than conservative enough to credibly claim the mantle as the leader of the Republican Party.
Unfortunately, he has next to no chance of winning the primaries. A Bloomberg-Kasich ticket, perhaps?
1
Both main U.S. political parties are so mired in corruption, complacency and irresponsible greed and incompetence that they have produced a government that has zero commitment or capability to protect the genuine economic interests, security and even physical survival of the American people.
Trump and/or Sanders, please.
Trump and/or Sanders, please.
1
.
.
During the months following the Republican Convention, something will happen. I know not what. It could be foreign, it could be domestic, it could be in space. It could be frightening or it could be wondrous. But something will happen that will be of such magnitude that a United States President would -- and will -- comment publicly on it.
The Republican nominee for President should -- and will -- give a public comment on the topic. (I would hope for a written comment, but the nominee will opt to appear before cameras.)
Among all the candidates on the main debate stage for either of the two most recent Republican debates, John Kasich is the only one I can envision having a rational idea for what to say to the nation, as his party's standard-bearer. The only exception is that I think some of the other contenders would know what to say if an important person were to pass away.
The most ambitious Republican in the race is probably Rubio; the most intelligent, probably Cruz; the most gifted, probably Carson; the most earnest, probably Rand Paul; the most aggressive, probably Christie. But Kasich stands out as the one who seems best able to relate quickly and sanely to the widest variety of subject matter; and so I appreciate NYT's decision to take note of his skills.
Regarding Donald Trump: He was portrayed very effectively by Andy Griffith in "A Face in the Crowd", a brilliant 1950s film (w/Lee Remick, Patricia Neal, Walter Matthau) about media, politics, and magnetism.
.
During the months following the Republican Convention, something will happen. I know not what. It could be foreign, it could be domestic, it could be in space. It could be frightening or it could be wondrous. But something will happen that will be of such magnitude that a United States President would -- and will -- comment publicly on it.
The Republican nominee for President should -- and will -- give a public comment on the topic. (I would hope for a written comment, but the nominee will opt to appear before cameras.)
Among all the candidates on the main debate stage for either of the two most recent Republican debates, John Kasich is the only one I can envision having a rational idea for what to say to the nation, as his party's standard-bearer. The only exception is that I think some of the other contenders would know what to say if an important person were to pass away.
The most ambitious Republican in the race is probably Rubio; the most intelligent, probably Cruz; the most gifted, probably Carson; the most earnest, probably Rand Paul; the most aggressive, probably Christie. But Kasich stands out as the one who seems best able to relate quickly and sanely to the widest variety of subject matter; and so I appreciate NYT's decision to take note of his skills.
Regarding Donald Trump: He was portrayed very effectively by Andy Griffith in "A Face in the Crowd", a brilliant 1950s film (w/Lee Remick, Patricia Neal, Walter Matthau) about media, politics, and magnetism.
2
Literate Americans will vote for who they want to be president after determining what is in their best interest and the national interest without prodding by their friends and without endorsements by the media. That is what makes our democracy great. Endorsing Gov. Kasich who is in a single digits in the polls is not going to catapult him closer to being the front runner and endorsing Sec. Hillary Clinton is a futile effort to provide the push Hillary needs to tip the polls in her favor. Monday will test the wisdom of the editorial board of NYT and once again reveal whether these kinds of endorsements are an exercise in futility that generates a lot of comments but makes no real difference or it helps the endorsed person.
1
A much wiser choice than the one you made for the Democratic nomination. Governor Kasich, whilst no moderate by a long shot, is at least someone who takes the tenets of his Christian faith much more seriously than the parvenus without executive experience or an understanding of Christianity (like Sens Cruz and Rubio). Hence, his comparably compassionate views on immigration and a role for government to protect the weakest in society - something that could actually win working-class voters for the Republican Party, which occasionally appears more as a lobby group for plutocrats than a legitimate political force. It's important for Republicans to start going well beyond the bluster, incompetent rambling and obstinance with which they have conducted themselves in the Obama Years. Governor Kasich clearly possesses the executive experience, knowledge of Congress (though the political landscape in DC has changed for the worse since the 1990s) and cross-party appeal to non-traditional constituencies for the Republicans. He has also been the one eschewing shameful personal attacks on President Obama.
The problem for him is twofold: First, he is not charismatic. But then again, it's arguable that his charismatic, "high-energy" colleagues are far worse. Second, the Year of Trump has indelibly tarred the GOP's reputation among Latinos, blacks and women. It's debatable whether Kasich would overcome that. Nonetheless, a smart choice!
The problem for him is twofold: First, he is not charismatic. But then again, it's arguable that his charismatic, "high-energy" colleagues are far worse. Second, the Year of Trump has indelibly tarred the GOP's reputation among Latinos, blacks and women. It's debatable whether Kasich would overcome that. Nonetheless, a smart choice!
The point being missed of that Kasich is an extreme conservative also. I remember when he took office and the really right wing positions he took until the voters reined him in somewhat. In his Senate bill 5, he pushed the same anti union and anti teachers rhetoric as the Republican governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker.
It should be noted that according to Pew, the number two state that has lost the largest percentage of their middle class, is Ohio and Wisconsin was number one. Republicans have a race to the bottom going on. Kasich has has his own water pollution problems in Sebring, Ohio.
It should be noted that according to Pew, the number two state that has lost the largest percentage of their middle class, is Ohio and Wisconsin was number one. Republicans have a race to the bottom going on. Kasich has has his own water pollution problems in Sebring, Ohio.
3
What is positive about John Kasich is his unwillingness to degrade himself by indulging in heated debates, in which candidates can sell their charisma and populist rhetoric.
The question is whether there are enough sensible GOP grassroots supporters, who will vote for him.
The question is whether there are enough sensible GOP grassroots supporters, who will vote for him.
9
Actually, did you forget his rude and repeated interruptions during the first several debates, resulting in the moderators and other debaters correcting him several times? After being labeled a loser in virtually all reviews, he changed his tactic. His campaign advisors told him to shut up for the remaining debates, so he could not hurt himself. Funny how people see what they want to see
4
Perhaps Gov Kasich is the best of the bunch but for the record he was trying to be Gov Scott Walk-lite. He failed only because the people of Ohio refused to let him have his way.
27
If only the State of Wisconsin's constitution had allowed for Act 10 to be voted on by the people like Ohio was able to on SB 5, and in quick fashion like in Ohio. Instead we had to wait a year to begin to attempt a recall of the governor, a more difficult endeavor. Cheers to Ohio, and thanks to those who came and stood with us here. A lot of us will not soon forget your support. But I still don't think I want your governor (or ours) for president!
1
Translation:
"We don't really like any of the kids from the other side of the tracks, but this one is the least objectionable of the lot..."
"We don't really like any of the kids from the other side of the tracks, but this one is the least objectionable of the lot..."
20
"Even unemployment figures, which he’s pegged at 23 or 42 percent (the correct number is 5 percent)..."
It's hard to tell who's telling the bigger whopper, Trump or the Times.
(And nice to see the Times can be as childish as Trump.)
It's hard to tell who's telling the bigger whopper, Trump or the Times.
(And nice to see the Times can be as childish as Trump.)
9
The 5% is a deceptive number. It does not account for those leaving the workforce and not looking for work because none available and it misrepresents the part timer jobs as well as other stats.
Sure, the official unemployment number always under counts the long term unemployed, the discouraged, and the underemployed, but at least 5% comes from data compiled by an official source [1]. Where did Donald's numbers come from? Can you provide the source?
As Daniel Moynihan said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
[1] http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
As Daniel Moynihan said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
[1] http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
2
Just curious if the NYT has looked into Kasich's various scandals. He has a state auditor who is also a co-chair of his campaign, he has a program called JobsOhio which appears to only filter monies to large corporations without really creating the jobs promised, and that is exempt from state audits. He has a real problem with education, in that his oversight of charter schools has them rated as the worst in the country, and falsifying test scores to elicit more federal funds, which when discovered forced the state superintendent of schools to resign. Esquire ran quite an article on it just last week. It is quite well known in Ohio that he forced an Turnpike director for the state to resign so that he could install the wife of one of his political cronies in 2013. There are many more, including that he has a habit of signing unpopular legislation at midnight, when he thinks nobody will notice.
Or, is this just a "lesser of the many evils" endorsement?
Or, is this just a "lesser of the many evils" endorsement?
66
"Or, is this just a "lesser of the many evils" endorsement?".
I think the Editorial makes it clear this is, indeed, the case.
It's not so much an endorsement as a commentary on the extent of derangement of the RP candidates.
Rubio, "abortion murder" - that's his view. Millions of American women, murderers! Providers, murderers! Even incest, rape, life of the mother!
Christie, similar!
Never forget, the next president, probably four Supreme Court nominees.
I think the Editorial makes it clear this is, indeed, the case.
It's not so much an endorsement as a commentary on the extent of derangement of the RP candidates.
Rubio, "abortion murder" - that's his view. Millions of American women, murderers! Providers, murderers! Even incest, rape, life of the mother!
Christie, similar!
Never forget, the next president, probably four Supreme Court nominees.
2
I'd say it's a lesser of many evils endorsement. It would be nice if we could all vote for someone rather than against a candidate.
Surely you meant Hillary if you are wanting the NYT to investigate scandals....more scandals to investigate than the NYT has reporters
1
This is sort of hilarious.
The NYT would like Republican primary voters to be the kind of reasonable conservatives who'd vote for Kasich, because that sustains the Very Serious People view of politics and bipartisanship and compromise. As Prof. Krugman notes elsewhere on its pages, Republicans are now radical extremists and after a couple of cycles where establishment conservatives were nominated and lost, the GOP primary is finally going to anoint someone who embraces the crazy.
The NYT would like Republican primary voters to be the kind of reasonable conservatives who'd vote for Kasich, because that sustains the Very Serious People view of politics and bipartisanship and compromise. As Prof. Krugman notes elsewhere on its pages, Republicans are now radical extremists and after a couple of cycles where establishment conservatives were nominated and lost, the GOP primary is finally going to anoint someone who embraces the crazy.
13
I could vote for Kasich, but Jeb Bush is the stronger candidate and a reasonable man.
5
If you could vote for Kasich, no reasonable person is going to accept your evaluation of which candidate is good or reasonable. The GOP doesn't have good or reasonable candidates.
Kasich?- oh yeah, the moderate (ha ha) who knew nothing about the Oregon armed occupation of federal land... Great guy. What you don't know can't hurt you. Just us.
12
John Kasich has a prickly personality that rubs some people the wrong way. But, living in Cleveland, I've been impressed by his ability to "cross the aisle" - particularly to work with Cleveland's Democratic mayor Frank Jackson - on a host of social and economic issues. The voters chastened him for his anti-union nonsense, and he seems to have learned from that. He showed political courage in backing Medicaid expansion. He's pro-business in a sensible way. He's definitely not an "extremist," as some commenters here allege - he's a reasonable, old-fashioned pragmatist, who - as the Times points out - puts the people's interest first, including that of the less fortunate. In other words, a "compassionate conservative." And he governs a large, exceedingly complex state that is, perhaps more than any other, a microcosm of America in all its diversity and interests. I wish the Times had been more detailed in its assessment of him, but without question he's the most "presidential" of the current Republican crop.
16
I agree with most of what you said here and I like Kasich. The one objection is the path to citizenship. I can't walk over the border without my passport with being detained and I'm an American! You can't either. No other country lets people simply walk over the border and then plead for citzenship. I am open to more visas, work permits and legal immigration. This, I'm afraid, is where the two loudmouths Trump and Cruz get their support. They are the only 2 candidates out of both sides who oppose illegal immigration. And on this issue, most of America agrees with them.
11
I have an opinion similar to yours and indeed as a legal immigrant I am even more peeved at the "laissez faire" attitude of the NYT and the Democrats. Even with a degree from Harvard, I had to get special permission from RFK before I could get a green card. So the idea of 11 million people getting the same rights while just walking in seems wrong, wrong, wrong!
But my experience of Hispanics is that they are nice people, and ahem, a bit nicer than Anglos. I still remember a young woman from Colombia saying to me, "me casa, su casa." (Hope I have it right). One of my recent co-authors is Mexican, another is Spanish. They really are kind and affectionate people.
And the idea of forcibly deporting 11 million people seems impractical. But something can be done.
A fence? Hungary already built one while we are bemoaning our inability to build a wall. But hey, they are a superpower and we are just a small country (smile).
I realistic goal would be to enforce punishments on employers, put a few in prison, set the goal of reducing the number of illegal immigrants to five million in six years and to one million in ten. Allow citizenship with a lot of care but work visas with a bit less care.
But Hillary is singing to the Hispanic vote and Trump to the anti-Hispanic whites. And then we Americans quarrel over whose absurd policy we are going to support!
But my experience of Hispanics is that they are nice people, and ahem, a bit nicer than Anglos. I still remember a young woman from Colombia saying to me, "me casa, su casa." (Hope I have it right). One of my recent co-authors is Mexican, another is Spanish. They really are kind and affectionate people.
And the idea of forcibly deporting 11 million people seems impractical. But something can be done.
A fence? Hungary already built one while we are bemoaning our inability to build a wall. But hey, they are a superpower and we are just a small country (smile).
I realistic goal would be to enforce punishments on employers, put a few in prison, set the goal of reducing the number of illegal immigrants to five million in six years and to one million in ten. Allow citizenship with a lot of care but work visas with a bit less care.
But Hillary is singing to the Hispanic vote and Trump to the anti-Hispanic whites. And then we Americans quarrel over whose absurd policy we are going to support!
2
That's one of the things that will sink the Democrats this year. Simply no room to maneuver. Their supporters insist on an absolutist open borders policy, which is pushing those whose jobs are marginal, of any race, to Trump.
1
You would have been better off endorsing Cruz. Any endorsement for the Republican primary from the New York Times is pretty much the kiss of death.
15
Cruz would have repudiated the endorsement. Kasich is desperate enough to drink from the chalice even though it might be poisoned.
1
Yes, and we want the least objectionable and sane sounding Republicans (the valid threats) to get that "Kiss" ('strategy', you see?) We'd much rather face the 'distractions', i.e. "Carnival-T" or "Despicable-C". Either one will do.
You got my support on Kasich. Cruz is a creepy chameleon. Trump is analogous to other reality tv stars like the Kardashians. Both are the detritus of society. They prove Marshall McCluhan's point that the medium is the message. Lastly, Rubio might just be the sleeper. Although I am for Bernie, I'll vote for Hillary is she gets the nomination. It's a no brainer.
24
It doesn't take much imagination to see Kasich's rivals using this NYT endorsement as a way to tar him. It's sad, because he is indeed the best the Republicans have so far.
11
Kasich would be OK. As a (usually) Republican voter, I agree more with his views than any of the others. I'm just not sure he inspires many people with how he delivers his message. For better or worse -- I'd even say sadly -- sometimes that's more important in a presidential election than the actual message.
Lot of talk in the comments about the intolerable choices a moderate has in the Republican primary, and as a moderate I agree. But I'd throw it back to you guys on the Democratic side, too. I'm struggling to point out out the moderate among Democrats in this cycle. There were a couple that were basically laughed off the stage in the first debate, and they never really came across as serious candidates anyway. But even Hillary Clinton, who's been...let's say flexible on many issues over the years has been racing to the left during the primary.
I think the move to the extreme is more pronounced on the right since it's been going on longer, but it's certainly happening on the left now, too, with "real" progressives supposedly taking their party back from "the establishment," much like "real" conservatives have been saying on the right.
I don't think this shift gives us moderate candidates willing to compromise. I think it gives us people like Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders getting more attention than they should on the national stage.
Lot of talk in the comments about the intolerable choices a moderate has in the Republican primary, and as a moderate I agree. But I'd throw it back to you guys on the Democratic side, too. I'm struggling to point out out the moderate among Democrats in this cycle. There were a couple that were basically laughed off the stage in the first debate, and they never really came across as serious candidates anyway. But even Hillary Clinton, who's been...let's say flexible on many issues over the years has been racing to the left during the primary.
I think the move to the extreme is more pronounced on the right since it's been going on longer, but it's certainly happening on the left now, too, with "real" progressives supposedly taking their party back from "the establishment," much like "real" conservatives have been saying on the right.
I don't think this shift gives us moderate candidates willing to compromise. I think it gives us people like Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders getting more attention than they should on the national stage.
4
There is no comparison between Republican extremism and (mostly imaginary) Democratic extremism. Perhaps HIllary has shifted left during this election--but she was starting from a bit right of center. Sanders is more honestly liberal, but he's not talking about nationalizing industry. The Republicans, on the other hand, were insane and shifted toward even more insanity.
A slight move left for the Democrats just means we've got a far-right party and a left-center party, at best. There've been times recently when the Dems have been a center-right party, though that's still much better than the far-right Republicans.
A slight move left for the Democrats just means we've got a far-right party and a left-center party, at best. There've been times recently when the Dems have been a center-right party, though that's still much better than the far-right Republicans.
2
Eric: The Obama administration is using the muscle of the federal government to force school districts to allow boys to shower in the girl's locker room. I have trouble seeing that as right of center.
1
The Times's endorsement of John Kasich is shockingly wrongheaded. I hope that voters understand that Kasich's "$2 billion surplus' is the result of his $2 billion cut in the state education budget; that Ohio's turn-around in jobs was because of President Obama's bailout of the auto industry and was well underway when Kasich assumed office; that the expansion of Medicaid though ultimately laudable has to do with his extremely fundamental conservative religious views that inform other aspects of policy in his administration, including the person he chose to be his running mate, Ohio's Lieutenant Governor; that during his first campaign for governor he trashed his Republcan predecessor: that Kasich is on par with Rubio, Cruz, Trump and their anti-intellectual anti-Constitutional ilk - the anti-Civil Rights doctrines they speak in support of, Kasich more quietly enforces.
19
Not happy with the Times' Democratic endorsement, but I agree with this endorsement of John Kasich, who is head and shoulders above his competitors.
Unfortunately, an endorsement by the Times is unlikely to help Governor Kasich with the Republican base.
Unfortunately, an endorsement by the Times is unlikely to help Governor Kasich with the Republican base.
3
The problem with a reasonable Republican is that Republican policies, in 2016, aren't reasonable. Kasich doesn't represent reason; he just looks reasonable when you put him next to Trump. And perhaps that means he's more electable, but the end results would be unreasonable Republican policies.
If you're Republican, go ahead and vote for Trump. He represents your party, and if you're still comfortable calling yourself a Republican in 2016, he's the candidate you deserve.
If you're Republican, go ahead and vote for Trump. He represents your party, and if you're still comfortable calling yourself a Republican in 2016, he's the candidate you deserve.
11
...and by process of elimination...the Oscar...I mean NYT endorsement, goes to Kasich.
3
He's the only Republican candidate that is remotely positive in his outlook.....the best of a sorry lot.
4
Illinois' problem is too many years of corrupt, 'hide the potato' planning. The pension systems of state employees, both union and non-union, have not seen their pay-in for too many years, and it has frozen the prospects of this great state.
I agree, my home's government is no example for effectiveness on fiscal matters. Meanwhile a nearsighted Republican is now the Governor and his term will end with nothing accomplished. Except I'll have to wait three years for a viable alternative. How about a Pat Quinn aged around 35 years of age?
I agree, my home's government is no example for effectiveness on fiscal matters. Meanwhile a nearsighted Republican is now the Governor and his term will end with nothing accomplished. Except I'll have to wait three years for a viable alternative. How about a Pat Quinn aged around 35 years of age?
2
I'm sure all three Republicans who read the NYT are going to be very impressed by this op/ed.
12
Unlike the close minded Democrats here on this site, I, as a Republican subscribe and read the NYT. I want to be informed on all sides of all issues. I also subscribe and read the WSJ. Try opening your mind to all sides of issues...you may surprise yourself. The only Democrat who was worth my vote this election would have been Jim Webb.
1
I like Kasich; but as usual you tend to apply your standards unevenly. It's fine to suggest that Christie will 'engage' with the dead King Hussein; but he obviously misspoke. It's not like Clinton or Obama ever misspeak, or do they? I guess the '57 states' comment or the 'corpseman' comment don't count.
There's nothing wrong with the Times having an opinion; but at least try and be even-handed about it.
There's nothing wrong with the Times having an opinion; but at least try and be even-handed about it.
14
You forgot Obama's praise of the intercontinental railroad.
As a liberal democrat, I can only hope the Republicans ignore your endorsement and analysis.
5
A NY Times endorsement, for any Republican, is the kiss of death. Thanks anyway.
7
If I were a Republican I'd support Kasich, the only GOP candidate remotely qualified to be president.
5
We, in Ohio, know Kasich, and we would not wish this disaster upon any other state, let alone our whole country. The astounding fact that the NYT endorsed this puppet of corporate America (Lehman Brothers, etc.), virulent anti-labor politician (Ohio Senate Bill 5), rabid abortion foe, downright stupid man (refused $400 million from feds to start high-speed rail), lunatic babbler, ad nauseum painfully reveals just how abysmal the cast of Republican candidates is. Please, for the sake of the NYT's integrity, reconsider.
23
Had Gov. Kasich accepted the money for high speed rail, then the further costs and losses would have fallen upon the state, on a route that people prefer to drive.
Buckeye,
Don't be surprise that they endorsed a puppet of corporate America. Their democratic pick is a puppet of multi-nationals.
Don't be surprise that they endorsed a puppet of corporate America. Their democratic pick is a puppet of multi-nationals.
I live in Ohio, and I voted for Kasich and will vote for him for POTUS...maybe you voted for Ed FitzGerald...Google him, folks
Kasish would be better off in the Republican primaries if he was endorsed by Fidel Castro. You just gave him his final kiss of death May he rest in peace.
4
I'm not a republican but I will point out that the NYTimes has been wrong about Trump's chances at EVERY SINGLE turn. The reason for that is that e paper seems to have little understanding of why the Republican base is so angry. Endorsing Kasich just demonstrates to me that the paper continues to struggle there.
The country has gone through a bunch of large cultural shifts and while I believe these are for the most part good, there has been a tendency to paint even legitimate concerns as mortal sins. Don't believe that we need new pronouns for every flavor of gender identity? Get called a homophobe. Wonder about the wisdom of letting in millions of refugees without any plan to assimilate? You're xenophobic! (Or even racist!)
The left has been very good in using these tactics to stop discussion (as seen in the cover up of the New Years attacks in Europe by newspapers and officials afraid of being "anti-refugee"). So when someone comes along who doesn't need to care what anyone thinks (like trump) there is a huge appeal for people who feel shut out of the political discussion who now have someone to speak for them. Dismissing their concerns out of hand as nativism, racism, or just anger (even though certainly there may be elements there) is ignoring the concerns of a large class of people.
I don't believe that Trump would be a great president, but the NYTimes editorial board should ask itself why it doesn't understand that so many people do..
The country has gone through a bunch of large cultural shifts and while I believe these are for the most part good, there has been a tendency to paint even legitimate concerns as mortal sins. Don't believe that we need new pronouns for every flavor of gender identity? Get called a homophobe. Wonder about the wisdom of letting in millions of refugees without any plan to assimilate? You're xenophobic! (Or even racist!)
The left has been very good in using these tactics to stop discussion (as seen in the cover up of the New Years attacks in Europe by newspapers and officials afraid of being "anti-refugee"). So when someone comes along who doesn't need to care what anyone thinks (like trump) there is a huge appeal for people who feel shut out of the political discussion who now have someone to speak for them. Dismissing their concerns out of hand as nativism, racism, or just anger (even though certainly there may be elements there) is ignoring the concerns of a large class of people.
I don't believe that Trump would be a great president, but the NYTimes editorial board should ask itself why it doesn't understand that so many people do..
10
C: People are losing their jobs for advocating the same position on gay marriage that Mx Obama ran on in 2008. They are becoming pariahs in their industry. That's wrong.
If the NYT could have endorsed anyone (or thing) less competitive, they'd have made a case for endorsing an old-couch someone left on the sidewalk over the weekend.
1
There's only one Republican in the race anxious to win the title of "liberals' favorite candidate." He seems to take pleasure in bashing conservatives, hoping that people like those who populate the NY Times Editorial Board will like them. Kasich was clearly gunning for that title and won it!
The funny thing is, these candidates then actually believe the liberals like them, when they don't. Beware John - if by some miracle you get the nomination, the NY Times and its Editorial Board will discover that you're Satan and do everything they can to ensure your loss.
The funny thing is, these candidates then actually believe the liberals like them, when they don't. Beware John - if by some miracle you get the nomination, the NY Times and its Editorial Board will discover that you're Satan and do everything they can to ensure your loss.
2
Alan: That is what the times did in 2012. Paint Romney as the only acceptable choice in the primary and once he got the nomination, paint him as a reactionary. That was Romney, not Paul.
From the article, "[Kasich] has been capable of compromise and believes in the ability of government to improve lives."
Whatever delusions are the NYT Editorial Board suffering under that they believe the Republican Party electorate cares one whit about compromise or in the facility of government. The GOP believes in never compromising ever (remember them all refusing 1 dollar in tax increases even if it is coupled with 100 dollars of spending cuts?), and that the government is always the problem, not the solution.
The very reason the NYT sets forth as the basis for their endorsement is the very reason the GOP base will not vote for Kasich.
Whatever delusions are the NYT Editorial Board suffering under that they believe the Republican Party electorate cares one whit about compromise or in the facility of government. The GOP believes in never compromising ever (remember them all refusing 1 dollar in tax increases even if it is coupled with 100 dollars of spending cuts?), and that the government is always the problem, not the solution.
The very reason the NYT sets forth as the basis for their endorsement is the very reason the GOP base will not vote for Kasich.
5
The Kasich nod makes no sense. If you want a "compassionate conservative" acceptable to the country club crowd up in Scarsdale, and have discounted Governor Bridgegate, what's wrong with Jeb? Granted he seems terribly uncomfortable on a podium and would be slaughtered by Hillary, but so does (and would) John. In short, why didn't the Times simply fess up that everyone of big stage and little stage Republicans are impossible, though for different reasons?
4
They would by doing so give evidence to those who contend the times is a partisan website.
I'm assuming the debate in the NYTimes editorial board was basically between Kasich, Bush and Christie. With one person speaking up for Rubio.
Wait a sec. What's with this jumping on the Kasich bandwagon. What about Harold Stassen? Okay, he's dead. But not to consider him is blatant life-ism and can not be tolerated!
4
If Rand Paul was more anxious to please everybody than to present himself honestly, he'd stand a better chance of winning the media circus contest. I think he's the best of the Republican candidates, but the too-eager beavers are getting the attention.
9
I'm still not grasping the rationale of Rand Paul even being a Republican.
I guess it got him elected, but he stands so far apart from every other Republican, I can't figure out how they interact.
I guess it got him elected, but he stands so far apart from every other Republican, I can't figure out how they interact.
At best Paul and his dad are indifferent to antisemitism. The notion that they were unaware of what was in their own newsletters is not credible. The libertarian movement has cynnically courted radical fringe groups that are fueled by racism and antisemitism. Additionally, early in Rand Paul's campaign one of his staff had to resign when his antisemetic writings were discovered. Paul has some appealing ideas, but he's a celf-certified creep
Uh, you just said that if Paul were a better pandar as opposed to somebody who stood on principles, he'd be doing way better.
I mean, his principles are as disconnected from reality as anything Ayn Rand ever wrote, but that cannot have been your intent.
I mean, his principles are as disconnected from reality as anything Ayn Rand ever wrote, but that cannot have been your intent.
You have shown sound judgment here in endorsing Kasich, who is one of the three sane contenders for R nomination, the other two being Jeb and Rand Paul. Rand Paul, like Sanders, is idealistic and unelectable. So, it is going to be a choice between Kasich and Jeb. Bush-Kasich or the other way around would be a good ticket.
13
Does the NYT have any idea of how many Republicans read its paper? Will their endorsement have any power?
14
There does seem to be some question as to whether it is recommending Kasich because they think he is the best candidate, or if they are simply rooting for the lowest possible seed to survive and be easy meat for Thrillary.
Yes.
Not much.
What difference does it make?
Their job is to state and rationalize an opinion.
They did that.
It was not, by any rational interpretation of political or media reality, an attempt to influence Iowa Republicans in Monday's caucus. Those people (Iowans) do not care a cow patty about the NYT editorial board's opinion.
You misunderstand their job. It is not necessarily to influence. It is to inform - not of "facts" - but rather of their interpretation of the information available and, from that, to form a consensus among a limited number of informed individuals. Are they infallible? No. To their credit they don't make that claim. Are they partisan? The answer will always depend on who you ask and whether the editorial board's opinions jibe with those being asked. If they endorse your candidate, they must be brilliant. If not, then charlatans or worse - every one! C'mon America - can't we do better than that? The Times endorsed Kasich, the Des Moines Register endorsed Rubio. In the end, it isn't newspapers or TV pundits (with their bizarre Jedi mind control tricks...) It's the actual voters that count. Let's just hope more smart voters than dumb ones come out. I believe dumb people have a right to vote. I just don't want them to carry the day.
Not much.
What difference does it make?
Their job is to state and rationalize an opinion.
They did that.
It was not, by any rational interpretation of political or media reality, an attempt to influence Iowa Republicans in Monday's caucus. Those people (Iowans) do not care a cow patty about the NYT editorial board's opinion.
You misunderstand their job. It is not necessarily to influence. It is to inform - not of "facts" - but rather of their interpretation of the information available and, from that, to form a consensus among a limited number of informed individuals. Are they infallible? No. To their credit they don't make that claim. Are they partisan? The answer will always depend on who you ask and whether the editorial board's opinions jibe with those being asked. If they endorse your candidate, they must be brilliant. If not, then charlatans or worse - every one! C'mon America - can't we do better than that? The Times endorsed Kasich, the Des Moines Register endorsed Rubio. In the end, it isn't newspapers or TV pundits (with their bizarre Jedi mind control tricks...) It's the actual voters that count. Let's just hope more smart voters than dumb ones come out. I believe dumb people have a right to vote. I just don't want them to carry the day.
I have to assume those are rhetorical questions since the obvious answers are "yes" and "no."
Dear NYT,
Why endorse any Republican at all? There isn't one who will protect reproductive rights. That should be a showstopper.
Why endorse any Republican at all? There isn't one who will protect reproductive rights. That should be a showstopper.
47
Some 70% of Hispanics living in the U.S. are against abortion. Give them a path to citizenship and they will change the Democratic Party's pro-choice stance.
Re: "Why endorse any Republican at all? There isn't one who will protect reproductive rights."
Because "reproductive rights" is only one of many important issues facing America today.
Just because you will vote Democratic (in support of reproductive rights) doesn't mean that the Republican candidates aren't important, even to you -- despite your best effort, one of them might be the next POTUS.
Do you really not care which one?
Because "reproductive rights" is only one of many important issues facing America today.
Just because you will vote Democratic (in support of reproductive rights) doesn't mean that the Republican candidates aren't important, even to you -- despite your best effort, one of them might be the next POTUS.
Do you really not care which one?
There is no moderate, no acceptable Republican candidate running for President this year. The only rational response by a responsible newspaper is to refuse to endorse any of the candidates, none of whom should be allowed within 100 miles of the White House.
48
Correct!! Any sane newspaper would not endorse of the shameful TP/GOP candidates. They are a horror show!
I was going to recommend, then realized you said "Republican", not "Democratic".
I am very surprised that this notion of "trickle down" economics and making the wealthy richer improves the economy is still out there after all this time. We may as well discuss whether the world is flat or the moon is made of cheese.
What we need is a economy that "trickles up". When middle class and lower middle class people do better, they buy more. Doesn't this make wealthy people wealthier? This is what made America economically great in the first place. It wasn't the wealthy that did it, it was the huge middle class, which other countries did not have. "Trickle down" is nothing more than a way to make hyper self wealthy individuals even wealthier. Their lifestyle doesn't improve, they just get a lower number in the annual list of wealthy persons.
I am discouraged that Obama is being such a gentleman while these caustic liars and deceivers convince a large army of fools that he has failed us. We don't need a gentleman right now, we need a President that will go out and throw some hard punches and expose this group for being the unqualified, self absorbed low rent frauds that they all are.
John Kasich is not qualified to be President, he is just the best of the worst.
What we need is a economy that "trickles up". When middle class and lower middle class people do better, they buy more. Doesn't this make wealthy people wealthier? This is what made America economically great in the first place. It wasn't the wealthy that did it, it was the huge middle class, which other countries did not have. "Trickle down" is nothing more than a way to make hyper self wealthy individuals even wealthier. Their lifestyle doesn't improve, they just get a lower number in the annual list of wealthy persons.
I am discouraged that Obama is being such a gentleman while these caustic liars and deceivers convince a large army of fools that he has failed us. We don't need a gentleman right now, we need a President that will go out and throw some hard punches and expose this group for being the unqualified, self absorbed low rent frauds that they all are.
John Kasich is not qualified to be President, he is just the best of the worst.
63
Trickle-down is just one of the ugly theories designed to lull the majority of Americans -- to the benefit of the top fraction of 1%. No coincidence that Karl Rove and his ilk, plus the virulent super-rich (Koch et al.) are succeeding in taking apart the large middle class and working class that were the guts of the U.S. postwar boom. We are dangerous -- relatively well educated with, formerly, decent pay and somewhat comfortable lives. We are also viewed, many of us, as the trouble-makers, challenging authority and the power of the growing oligarchy. The top Republican candidates, if elected, would continue the policies that Reagan-Bush designed to benefit the rich at great cost to the rest of us.
1
Perfectly stated.
Bingo. Thanks.
Millions of Americans like Donald Trump's rhetoric and his aggressive prowess,etc. So some people can criticize him all they want but it won't STOP his advance to the Oval office and the next potus especially now that Clinton is up to her kneck in BIG trouble !
7
Donald Demagogue is definitely on a roll to exploit as many Americans as possible. No experience, no solutions and complete narcissist to boot. Only the most cyncial dumbed-down portion of the electorate would support that embarrassment!
Dear NY Times,
In your list of 'Bad Things' that Gov. Kasich has done in Ohio you forgot voter suppression.
Boo Hiss on all Republican candidates!
In your list of 'Bad Things' that Gov. Kasich has done in Ohio you forgot voter suppression.
Boo Hiss on all Republican candidates!
47
Being way wrong and being nuts are not the same.
Oh sure..OH streets are falling apart, crime rate increasing, Heroin infestation and overdose, airport is sitting empty and people are missing flights for cancellation and where is Gov. John Kasich ?
He is in Washington running for Presidency for the post he can not win.
He is in Washington running for Presidency for the post he can not win.
22
Airport sitting empty? Complete falsehood. I am Hillary supporter in Columbus but will not tolerate outright fabrication in your comment. For republican nomination Kasich is best compassionate choice.
happy11712 you must not travel much. After delta has taken over the airport, time after time we have missed important overseas meetings only because of the flight cancellation which would result missing the connecting flight.
I am talking about Cincinnati International Airport.
I am talking about Cincinnati International Airport.
As a vice president? Probably he could run Ohio from D.C. and still handle the less-than-rigorous duties of the vice president. (Plus then he would get TW0 pensions!)
2
Excellent choices NYT! Great editorials on both endorsements. Thank you!
7
For once, I agree completely with the NYT's endorsements. If you want to go Democrat, HRC is a far better choice than Bernie, exactly for the reasons that the NYTimes mentions-great experience, realistic goals and plans-unlike Sanders-and the toughness required for this job. Although I do not think she was a rousing success as a Secretary of State, she is still is way more qualified than Sen. Sanders. And if you want to vote GOP, the only sane choice-despite his shortcomings on certain issues, but Hillary has plenty of shortcomings, too-is Gov. Kasich. He does have a social conscience, is not a Tea Party crazy or a war mongerer. The die hard ueberleft Democrats on this comment page should stop trashing the Times for pointing our the relative reasonableness of Gov Kasich- come on guys, not everybody will vote Dem. and instead of demonizing your fellow Americans who do not want either HRC or BS in the White House, you should hope and pray that Rep. Americans do not go out and vote for zealots, nasty crazies or racists, and vote for Kasich. Although Marco Rubio seems a nice guy, too, and knowledgeable on foreign policy, he is way too extreme about reproductive rights and wants to repeal the ACA, Christie is a liar, Jeb is on his way out and has a lot of baggage, Dr Carson is a nice guy but totally unsuitable for the highest political office in the country, and Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are beyond the pale-so what other choice do we have if the majority would vote GOP?
remarkable that you would pick Kasich over Jeb Bush, a true national figure known for integrity, intelligence and moderation.
7
As a Florida resident during Jeb!'s tenure all I can say is - (hysterical laughing in the background) - not so much.
Jeb! Moderate? See Schiavo.
LOL!
I'm voting for Trump. As a hardline Republican, does the NY Times really think that their endorsement means anything to Republicans?
9
I'm assuming you don't mean the NYT is hardline Republican, which is what your sentence actually says.
The point of an endorsement is to articulate the relative qualifications of the candidates. It's up to voters to decide on the basis of all the information they get from various sources.
I acknowledge that logic and informed decisions aren't really what Trump voters are about, though.
The point of an endorsement is to articulate the relative qualifications of the candidates. It's up to voters to decide on the basis of all the information they get from various sources.
I acknowledge that logic and informed decisions aren't really what Trump voters are about, though.
35
C Wolfe: we know the times will endorse the Democrat in November. So what business does it have trying to pick who should oppose its favorite candidate? It's like watching the other semifinal and rooting for the lower seed to win to make things easy on your own team.
Great Scott,
I and the NY Times Editorial Board
actually agree.
I have to go lie down and take nap
and make sure I am not dreaming.
I and the NY Times Editorial Board
actually agree.
I have to go lie down and take nap
and make sure I am not dreaming.
8
Kasich reminds me of a little-town-boy- done-good who now thinks he is superior to everyone else. You'd have to live in Ohio to understand this....18 years in congress and five years as governor and people still don't know who you are?.....that should tell you something. By the way, Kasich won reelection by default. That's his game, apparently again. No great honor to be referred to as the only "plausible" candidate left....
24
He comes across as a complete slob in the debates. It's sad that this is the best that the Republicans, per The New York Times, can come up with. At least he's not slick, like some of them, but he seems like a schlub.
Female here.
Why in the world would I vote for anyone, male or female, who thinks they have a say on any decision that I care to make on my own body?
Do I tell him what to do with his body?
For the last 50 years I have demanded, once anyone tells me they are going to make decisions on my body on abortion or contraception, I have DEMANDED that they only have 2 children! Or 1, or NONE! That that is my wish, my demand, and that I will do everything in my power to force them to abide with my demand.
Gosh, they don't like THAT. They get huffy and snarly.
Let's get real - Kasich wouldn't stand for that for one second, not one.
Yet he expects me to and uses all his power to DEMAND it of me?
No way. This isn't any nice guy.
He may seem more sane than the other snakes, but snake he is.
You, Times, should have simply said that there is no valid choice within the Republican Party... for, yes, this all comes down to "choice".
Why in the world would I vote for anyone, male or female, who thinks they have a say on any decision that I care to make on my own body?
Do I tell him what to do with his body?
For the last 50 years I have demanded, once anyone tells me they are going to make decisions on my body on abortion or contraception, I have DEMANDED that they only have 2 children! Or 1, or NONE! That that is my wish, my demand, and that I will do everything in my power to force them to abide with my demand.
Gosh, they don't like THAT. They get huffy and snarly.
Let's get real - Kasich wouldn't stand for that for one second, not one.
Yet he expects me to and uses all his power to DEMAND it of me?
No way. This isn't any nice guy.
He may seem more sane than the other snakes, but snake he is.
You, Times, should have simply said that there is no valid choice within the Republican Party... for, yes, this all comes down to "choice".
43
@rosa,
Another female here. You've got one of the best comments I've read so far.
Preach, sister!! Preach!!
1-31-16@1:45 am et
Another female here. You've got one of the best comments I've read so far.
Preach, sister!! Preach!!
1-31-16@1:45 am et
1
Faint praise indeed...the least of several evils.
And next to Hillary Clinton his rare accomplishments pale in comparison.
This 'endorsement' was a waste of both bandwidth on line and print space in the paper.
And next to Hillary Clinton his rare accomplishments pale in comparison.
This 'endorsement' was a waste of both bandwidth on line and print space in the paper.
6
Kasich was the man in Congress who balanced the budget. In Ohio, he balanced the budget and took on public service Union's without the divisive talk of Christie or Walker.
And what did Hillary accomplish after having a Senate seat handed to her? And will she be remembered as a great Secretary of State?
And what did Hillary accomplish after having a Senate seat handed to her? And will she be remembered as a great Secretary of State?
1
I'm afraid that a New York Times endorsement is a "Scarlet A" for these Republicans.
11
Kasich was already unpopular because he set his Super PAC loose on Trump. This, however, seals his doom. It's like getting an endorsement, say, from Stalin.
I cannot imagine Trump as President. I doubt he honestly thinks so either. He views himself as the CEO of America, N.L.C. (No Liability Country) where he can snap his fingers and everyone will do his bidding.
His true intent is to upgrade is 757 with two souped-up 747s at tax payer's expense - a true 0.001%er!
His true intent is to upgrade is 757 with two souped-up 747s at tax payer's expense - a true 0.001%er!
11
Here's the thing. Yes, to whatever extent necessary other Republican candidates will represent Kasich's endorsement by the Times as proof of why he's polling badly now. Not a real conservative, not obnoxious enough, soft on nuking ISIS, too good at his job, whatever. That doesn't mean the Times didn't do what it thought it must in judging him to be the best qualified Republican in the race today. The Times could've said they weren't going to endorse ANY Republican this time around but just imagine what a s---storm of accusations of bias that would've touched off. The Times people know all this but they still had a job to do and they did it. I honestly would like to think the NYT endorsement would be of some benefit to Governor Kasich, but I cannot see that happening in the context of current political antics on the right. I am appalled by what I hear and see from the Republican frontrunners - and their endorsements from people like Putin, Palin, Rick Perry - and yes - Dennis Rodman - just make the circus all the more whacky. If this is what most Republican voters want I can only say be careful what you wish for...
14
You left out Glenn Beck
In the midst of all the chaos and the coming apart at the seams of the once great GOP, the party born of the Wit and Wisdom of Men like Abraham Lincoln, WHAT A REFRESHING EDITORIAL from the NYTimes Editors!!! This is like A DAY IN SPRINGTIME. i do hope that it will be read by millions. THERE IS STILL A LOT OF TIME LEFT for the American People to regain/RESET their better senses. As "The Incomparable" Ben Franklin used to say, "THE LEAST COMMON OF ALL SENSES IS COMMON SENSE!" Bravo. No, Bravissimo, NYTimes! You make me proud to be an American again.
3
Lincoln was not a founder of the Republican Party. He was fairly late to the party as he hung onto his Whig membership for quite some time, relative to people like, say, Greeley.
Were you expecting the Times to support Trump or Cruz? Your comment is confusing.
Flint , Michigan and lack of outrage makes me be ashamed to be an American. We are evil at home. We are evil abroad .
Being the least clownish candidate earns the NYT endorsement?
You should have said what you and much of America really think: Not one of the Republican candidates is worthy of the public's support.
You should have said what you and much of America really think: Not one of the Republican candidates is worthy of the public's support.
43
anything to stop the Donald!
John Kasich does come off as seemingly the most reasonable guy in the room, mostly because the rest of the GOP field is so crazy. He appears to be the voice of moderation until you look closely at his policies and some of the things he has done in Ohio and find he is just as far far right as the rest of the pack. Most of this country does not want the extremes. When you have an extreme view or an extremist leader, you are definitely leaving the bulk of the country completely behind. Most Moderate Republicans even view Obama as a slightly center left Moderate. Hillary Clinton is a center left moderate. But the Republicans have gone so far to the right wing extremes now that the center is very far from their point of view, they can't even see it anymore. Any extremist is not good for the country. Don't vote one in.
24
The first thing you learn in politics is never to allow the opposing party to select your candidate. The candidate they like the most will be a watered-down version of their party, and therefore the one least likely to win for your party. Few Democrats want a Republican-lite, and few Republicans want a Democrat-lite.
10
As a Kasich fan, I sadly agree. Kiss of death.
6
Cruz surely would be an awful President, but just to dismiss his proposal of a VAT tax to replace Social Security shows just how reactionary the New York Times has become.
It is the voice of its "middle class" readers who don't pay nearly as high a Social Security federal income tax rate as those on minimum wage. Every civilized country has a VAT, which is why every civilized country has a decent health system. Naturally Hllary won't tax the middle class at around $200,000--the richest 5%--so she promises no program whatsoever to assuage the anger that is fueling Trump's numbers.
It is the voice of its "middle class" readers who don't pay nearly as high a Social Security federal income tax rate as those on minimum wage. Every civilized country has a VAT, which is why every civilized country has a decent health system. Naturally Hllary won't tax the middle class at around $200,000--the richest 5%--so she promises no program whatsoever to assuage the anger that is fueling Trump's numbers.
4
Jerry, you are sounding far from the real world. Be careful.
1
While I do not agree with a VAT, it is the UPPER middle class that is enjoying a nice benefit here -- those who earn over $118K and get to opt out of further SS payroll taxes.
The fact is, the current level of payroll taxation is too low for the level of benefits NOW and much too low for the future of retired boomers. It needs to be raised, on everyone. Ditto for Medicare.
This is a fact. Nothing in life is free. I support SS and Medicare, but they are falling behind in revenues what is required for the future. Obama made things worse with his 2% "tax holiday", which only deepened the crisis.
I do not support a VAT, because it falls most heavily on the poor & working class, who by necessity must spend 100% of their income on necessities -- while the wealthy can buy off-shore or barter, and do not spend all of their income on necessities but can shelter it.
Hillary can't tax the upper 4-5% (those who earn over $225K or so) because that's her "sweet spot" -- her main supporters, affluent white urban professional liberals. So any plan to reform SS is dead in the water.
The fact is, the current level of payroll taxation is too low for the level of benefits NOW and much too low for the future of retired boomers. It needs to be raised, on everyone. Ditto for Medicare.
This is a fact. Nothing in life is free. I support SS and Medicare, but they are falling behind in revenues what is required for the future. Obama made things worse with his 2% "tax holiday", which only deepened the crisis.
I do not support a VAT, because it falls most heavily on the poor & working class, who by necessity must spend 100% of their income on necessities -- while the wealthy can buy off-shore or barter, and do not spend all of their income on necessities but can shelter it.
Hillary can't tax the upper 4-5% (those who earn over $225K or so) because that's her "sweet spot" -- her main supporters, affluent white urban professional liberals. So any plan to reform SS is dead in the water.
2
Sales taxes are regressive.
1
Reasonable Republicans must realize that all the talk about taking back America and small government is but rhetorical hot air. Neither the size of the country nor its present economic and social condition lends itself to a miniaturization of government. They also should have seen that giving more money to the wealthy does not create jobs. That the prosperity of the country depends on the well-being of its citizens at large. Well-paid workers create demand which creates jobs. Under-paid workers cannot buy what the country can produce. The idea that state government is more efficient than the federal government is a sad myth. Consider the sorry state of Illinois. look what Michigan is doing with its water or Texas with woman health or Republican controlled states with insurance for the poor or their efforts to hinder voting. Obviously, a more centrist candidate is good for the country but with the present fanatics now in Congress, he will have a tough time.
52
What you seem to be saying is that reasonable Republicans need to vote for Democrats. And you're right.
15
The purpose of putting things in state hands is the first step in eliminating them. You put them in the state's hands and give them block grants. Then just keep cutting down the funding of the grants. The savings goes to tax breaks and benefits to the donor class.
3
Sure glad that the Federal govt's finances are in such good shape,they won't miss the $13B for Kasich's Medicaid.Free money!
5
Yup. Goven that in fact they are.
Well, except for Kansas and Louisiana. Gee what happened there?
Well, except for Kansas and Louisiana. Gee what happened there?
John Kasich's ideology is not "somewhat rigid" as one male commentor noted. It is downright back to 1952 if you are a woman. Do not be fooled, ladies. Kasich wants to take away all rights for women. Just because he doesn't foam at the mouth about reproductive rights doesn't mean Kasich won't push a far-right agenda in the White House like he is doing in his state.
68
1952? How about 1932 or before. He's a knuckle dragger. All of this talk about him being nice? What planet are people on. He made a complete fool of himself in the one debate and stories of how he is rude and ugly to people who don't agree with him are what his "handlers" say frighten them most. He goes off on people. He balances budgets by giving the donor class tax cuts and raids benefits for the 99% to pay for them. He has said he'll be using SS to help balance the budget and then smarted off by saying: Sorry Seniors: in a tough luck for you buddy type tone. I believe that Bill had something to do with the Times endorsements...right as Hillary is getting bad news from the FBI and right before the first caucus plus picking the lowest rated national candidate on the Republican side to endorse. Kasich will get buzz sawed by Hillary.
4
Zika virus, a President who believes abortion should be illegal under any and all circumstances and a barking mad Republican congress run by evangelicals. What could go wrong?
87
What's wrong? Your assessment of his position on abortion. Nowhere will you find once scintilla of evidence suggesting he opposes abortion in any circumstance.
3
Just google Scott A. about your governor and his views on abortion.
To be sure, he's far less noisy and crazy, even more polite. But, he is still a far right extremist, not a moderate. I would be happy to have him lose to the Democratic candidate.
25
Well, it's certainly clear there are no women on the Editorial Staff of the NY Times.
John Kasich is the most regressive candidate running when it comes to issues that affect women. I suppose that makes him just fine for the boys club in the news business.
John Kasich is the most regressive candidate running when it comes to issues that affect women. I suppose that makes him just fine for the boys club in the news business.
39
"John Kasich is the most regressive candidate running. . . ".
You'd better review Rubio's position on abortion (no exceptions!) before stating this about Kasich.
You'd better review Rubio's position on abortion (no exceptions!) before stating this about Kasich.
3
Who from the GOP would you recommend?
Why on earth would I want the N.Y. Times choosing the candidate I want.Kasich is too moderate, might as well vote democrat.There has to be a choice.Cruz is my choice for ways you will never understand, living in your liberal N.Y. bubble.The fact that the Democrat Party would even consider putting in another Clinton(Hillary no less) in the white house is whats frightening.I'm tired of wishy washy Republicans that give the Democrats everything and don't fight for the people who put them in office.Yes I'm informed and yes I care for my Country.I'm Mexican, I'm American and I completely disagree with your assessment of Cruz.If you don't want a conservative vote Democrat but please quit trying to make the party of my choice not a choice.
8
If you want a sane candidate, you're going to need to vote for a Democrat. Kasich might be half-sane, which, as you point out, disqualifies him for the votes of the sort of half-illiterates that would even briefly consider voting for Cruz.
3
Trump is our man. The only thing I like about Cruz is getting rid of ethanol. Only idiots would want our food prices to go to operate our auto. The people will have to learn how to get along without this added income. They should be ashamed of pushing ethanol on us. It is bad for car motors, it makes meat price go sky high because farmers have to pay higher prices for feed. We all have seen prices at the market increase so that poor people can't afford meat. Bread prices have tripled in the last seven years.
2
"I'm tired of wishy washy Republicans that give the Democrats everything and don't fight for the people who put them in office."
How many times have the Republicans fruitlessly voted to kill the ACA? And done nothing else? Other than shut down the government over the debt ceiling? Where do you get "Republicans that give the Democrats everything"?
How many times have the Republicans fruitlessly voted to kill the ACA? And done nothing else? Other than shut down the government over the debt ceiling? Where do you get "Republicans that give the Democrats everything"?
The NYTimes endorsement is probably falling on eardrums too blasted out by hate, fear and demagoguery to hear anything else. And the GOP has always loved their insane-Nixon --W or Trump -- Cruz anyone. Kasich is far too grounded in commonsense to be elected by today's off the padded walls GOP.
5
Kasich for President? Too little too late. NYT' s endorsement of Governor Kasich doesn't even mention his name until the 6th paragraph. A tepid endorsement at best. And I suspect given only in light of the insanity of the other candidates or the complete inelectibility of the remaining Bush.
14
Why The Times feels obligated to endorse a republican - any republican - is beyond me. Since Ronald Reagan they have become a bad joke on America, representing nothing but the base elements of our society. This year, all of them have revealed themselves to be anti-semitic racists of the first order. Because Kasich calls them names is no reason to endorse his views on women, unions abortion rights and marriage. Why you feel obligated to even mention any of them for president is telling - sometimes you can take this fairness thing too far, don't you think?
24
Really? And here I thought it was liberal college students doing all the kill-all-Jews demonstrations.
1
Criticism of Netanyahu equals anti-Semitism? Or are you talking about something else? Did the Times use an offensive slur?
Sometimes body language yells louder than a candidate would wish. If you watched John Kasich in the GOP debates, you would see someone so tightly coiled that he looked ready to either explode or implode. His hand and arm movements are sharp, choppy, uncoordinated -- like a lunatic's. I wouldn't trust John Kasich to have the presence of mind and necessary calm to respond to an international threat. Observe him; he's a scary guy.
30
By that metric, you must love Carson :P
6
Agreed re: body language. That's why Hillary has such an uphill battle, with her forced grins and deranged laugh.
I must commend the NYT Editorial Board on this choice. While Kasich wouldn't be my choice in a general election, he is a man of integrity and thus far in the campaign hasn't pandered to the base of his party, basically made up of Tea Party followers.
Ohio can be proud of this choice.
Ohio can be proud of this choice.
20
You can't get elected without being the choice of the "base" -- the main voters in your party.
I mean seriously -- duh.
I mean seriously -- duh.
2
Really a "man of integrity ...hasn't pandered"? Let's see if he signs the bill on his desk cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood. Then come back and we can talk.
Kasich is far too sane for at least 50% of the Republican Party. Tea Party-ism is like get some tropical fever - you sweat it out and maybe survive. I don't think the GOP in its present form will last as a coherent unit much longer.
11
We can only hope.
7
It's already gone. The GOP does not exist, it has been replaced by the Ultra Right Wing TRUE Conservative Party.
7
Read your endorsement of Kasich twice. I had a hard time discerning if you are actually endorsing Kasich or stating what is wrong with Trump and Cruz. I agree with your assessment of those two "gentlemen", but your support of Kasich rings hollow. I think he's got more going for him than what you've highlighted, and I would have appreciated a more thorough statement of his qualifications.
16
They do not actually support Mr. Kasich. (BTW: he's my governor and he's OK, but nothing special.)
What they want is the weakest imaginable candidate to go up against their Darling Golden Girl Hillary.
Kasich lacks the fame, the looks, the height, the finances -- pretty darn much EVERYTHING that it would take to win. He has the charisma of a baked potato.
IF by some miracle, Kasich got nominated -- oh my, the NYT would turn on him a rage of white hot fury. Suddenly the most minor things he ever did wrong on grade school would be headlines. He'd be a wife-beating monster who tortures his dog. That's what they did to Romney, a very mainstream and moderate Republican. They utterly character-assassinated the man, every bleepin' day....dog on the roof, dancing horses, etc.
So folks, you are not getting Kasich (unless he's a VP choice, which I doubt). You are getting Trump or Cruz. And you "asked for it" by being so unfair to ALL the Republicans and even your own Bernie Sanders.
What they want is the weakest imaginable candidate to go up against their Darling Golden Girl Hillary.
Kasich lacks the fame, the looks, the height, the finances -- pretty darn much EVERYTHING that it would take to win. He has the charisma of a baked potato.
IF by some miracle, Kasich got nominated -- oh my, the NYT would turn on him a rage of white hot fury. Suddenly the most minor things he ever did wrong on grade school would be headlines. He'd be a wife-beating monster who tortures his dog. That's what they did to Romney, a very mainstream and moderate Republican. They utterly character-assassinated the man, every bleepin' day....dog on the roof, dancing horses, etc.
So folks, you are not getting Kasich (unless he's a VP choice, which I doubt). You are getting Trump or Cruz. And you "asked for it" by being so unfair to ALL the Republicans and even your own Bernie Sanders.
3
Oh, give me a break! Our governor may not be a mouth-frother, but he's a union-buster and a foe of women's rights, a chum of the charter-school millionaires and Wall Street fraudsters who want to privatize Social Security. Why does the NY Times find it necessary to endorse *any* of the Repub con artists?
27
If picking the right GOP candidate were posed as a multiple choice question, the correct answer would be "none of the above". However, if you have to really pick one, your choice of Kasich seems reasonable as any.
2
JK is a standard right winger, so he looks better than the other GOP loons. So what? He would still appoint disastrous reactionary judges, and he has never denounced the fraud of Reaganomics.
7
Wasn't it Kasich who said he'd like to ban all teacher lounges in schools?
Who even wants to support someone like that--a person who targets a group of actual Americans and treats every single one of them like a lazy complainer? Some of those teachers served in the military that gave layabouts like Kasich their freedoms.
No more mean. Christie and Kasich are mean.
Who even wants to support someone like that--a person who targets a group of actual Americans and treats every single one of them like a lazy complainer? Some of those teachers served in the military that gave layabouts like Kasich their freedoms.
No more mean. Christie and Kasich are mean.
12
OK. Kasich must be a fool if he said he wanted to ban teacher lounges. Lounge is a misnomer. Mainly those "lounges" are for grading papers or preparing for class.
3
Indeed, he's way too far right for me, but he's on the sanity grid which, for that party, is saying something.
7
Obama's the most far right President in my lifetime.I doubt Kasich would be more pro govt than Obama.
1
Precocious jrj90620. You must have been born on or after January 20, 2009. Obama - most far right? My goodness.
And to think, more than half of my comments don't get posted.
And to think, more than half of my comments don't get posted.
2
In general, I am impressed by Mr. Kasich. But I will not vote for anyone with his beliefs about women's issues.
7
ABSOLUTELY! . . .
Gov. John Kasich is the only obvious Republican candidate who would not only make a potentially excellent president ... he may have the potential to save the G, O. P. from the serious and dangerous destruction which has been visited upon it by Mr. Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz who have egomaniacal and fascist tendencies.
As the party is in danger of being both fractured and disappear as we knew it and no longer be a national institution but morph into many separate and regional ideological political groups.
Though at this juncture, I plan to vote for Mrs. Clinton though I believe that Sen. Sanders has played a vital role in educated the nation about many root causes of the many problems (especially income inequality) the is hurting the viability of union membership, the shrinking middle class and the underclass.
Also, I wish to add Sen. Elizabeth Warren for her input which she like Bernie has offered.
Gov. John Kasich is the only obvious Republican candidate who would not only make a potentially excellent president ... he may have the potential to save the G, O. P. from the serious and dangerous destruction which has been visited upon it by Mr. Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz who have egomaniacal and fascist tendencies.
As the party is in danger of being both fractured and disappear as we knew it and no longer be a national institution but morph into many separate and regional ideological political groups.
Though at this juncture, I plan to vote for Mrs. Clinton though I believe that Sen. Sanders has played a vital role in educated the nation about many root causes of the many problems (especially income inequality) the is hurting the viability of union membership, the shrinking middle class and the underclass.
Also, I wish to add Sen. Elizabeth Warren for her input which she like Bernie has offered.
5
Only in comparison to the other clown car riders is John Kasich a moderate. His anti-choice stance would be extremist, except for all the others in the race in his party.
11
I would like to see Kasich win the republican nomination because it would be a good policy focused campaign against the democratic nominee.
As a independent - centrist, I couldn't say whom I would vote for between Kasich and Clinton, but at least we would be discussing the issues.
And to some of the letter writers out there: most of the country is concerned about economic and security issues - we don't get too excited about abortion and gay marriage. Personally, I believe people should be free to marry whomever they want and abort a fetus, except if it's late term. But neither issue will affect my vote.
As a independent - centrist, I couldn't say whom I would vote for between Kasich and Clinton, but at least we would be discussing the issues.
And to some of the letter writers out there: most of the country is concerned about economic and security issues - we don't get too excited about abortion and gay marriage. Personally, I believe people should be free to marry whomever they want and abort a fetus, except if it's late term. But neither issue will affect my vote.
11
Steven, this time a womans right to choose will affect my vote, because I see a whole party that wants to end what we fought so hard for, and which will always occur, legal or not. Maybe that is a gender distinction, as otherwise you sound reasonable.
1
The endorsement of Kasich is more an attempt to insult the Republicans than a serious endorsement. There is a chance of snowball in hell that Kasich could win any states, including his Ohio.
11
One quibble. Ted Cruz is no warmonger. The "carpet bombing" comments are rhetoric and when asked to clarify his position on defeating ISIS, it's not that different from the other candidates. The one big difference with Cruz is that he doesn't support neoconservative campaigns to topple secular dictators, like all the Establishment Republicans, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders. If anything Cruz (along with Rand Paul and Martin O'Malley) is one of the candidates that could least accurately be described as a warmonger.
3
Warmonger? Cruz? The carpet - bombing make-the-sand-glow guy isn't a warmonger? Oh, that's just stuff he says in public? That's just rhetoric? Yeah, right, don't believe him, his lips say bomb bomb bomb but his eyes say " I'm just making use of rhetoric?" If TC's doesnt mean carpet - bomb-- which he mistakenly claims was done in the first Gulf War, why does he like to say it? Chasing ISIS, who is not a horde waiting in the desert but a force inhabiting cities and the entire landscape, with a bombing campaign is enough warmongering to earn the title
9
No disrespect, but you guys need to spend a few days in Ohio where the man you just endorsed is destroying public education by turning entire school systems over to operators of for-profit charters who fund his campaigns, is more than happy to defund Planned Parenthood, has turned the state's economic development agency into an accountable entity that doles out money to people who dole out money to him and the list goes on and on and on and on.
It says something about the GOP when this cretin is the best on an almost unbelievably bad lot. In one word it says the party is pitiful.
The fact is there isn't one occupant of the clown car that passes for the GOP field who deserves and endorsement. You should be ashamed.
It says something about the GOP when this cretin is the best on an almost unbelievably bad lot. In one word it says the party is pitiful.
The fact is there isn't one occupant of the clown car that passes for the GOP field who deserves and endorsement. You should be ashamed.
52
Endorsement by this editorial is a bit strong. Damning with faint praise is more like it.
2
You are so very right. You forgot to mention how his budget balancing and tax cuts have also gutted the budgets of local governments and their ability to pay for necessary services.
Sorry ... the Times reporters are busy in Flint, exposing the misfeasance and malfeasance of Gov Rick Snyder (until now, the GOP's 2020 presidential candidate in waiting). Wait ... what's that? Oh sorry. The Times is too busy sending reporters to write about Marco Rubio's boots or topless sunbathers in Prospect Park.
Yes, Kasich is the best choice among republicans. As a liberal, I would not vote for him. However, this candidate has my respect. He would make a fine president were he to get elected - I am assuming - because he has a track record of solving problems and getting things done. Along the way, he has become a tad mealy mouthed. I will take that; we are not electing a replacement for the Big Dude. If he picks Rubio as his running mate, there is very little a democratic candidate can do to win the electoral college after losing Ohio and Florida.
9
Kasich is head-and-shoulders the best candidate the GOP has this year. If the party leaders had supported him instead of letting him languish in the polls, even behind Bush, Christie, Rubio, and the clowns, he would've presented a serious challenge to either Clinton or Sanders. But he's spent too long polling at ~1% to be taken seriously any more.
3
Setting aside the current crop of Republican candidates for president, I would be interested to know a Republican or Republicans who the editorial board would endorse for the GOP ticket and contrast that to the present high-office seekers. This Kasich endorsement comes off as the least objectionable of a bad crop, considering half the editorial was devoted to the shortcomings of the other candidates (compared to the lengthy supportive endorsement of Hillary Clinton).
1
The Republican part of 2016 doesn't produce candidates that a sane person would vote for.
2
kasich has credentials. rand paul, however, seems to have a better chance of getting republican support than he does. that says more about the failure of the republican party to actually lead than even the popularity of donald and ted. all that time spent blaming obama did not serve to deny him a second term. instead it convinced the "base" that something they were entitled to had been denied or taken from them and they had not been protected by their own. if the tide keeps rolling in the same direction, it may well be that neither of the candidates endorsed by the times will be elected in november.
1
The Editorial Board still does not understand what roils American blue collar workers.
If the Editorial Board would read its own newspaper of today, it would read that General Motors will start to import Buick and Cadillac cars made in the hinterlands of China by very lowly paid Chinese auto workers into the US.
And sell them as GM cars !
The Donald 's 45 percent tariff on Chinese imports would stop such revolting job destroying shenanigans by an US company bailed out with taxpayers money.
If the Editorial Board would read its own newspaper of today, it would read that General Motors will start to import Buick and Cadillac cars made in the hinterlands of China by very lowly paid Chinese auto workers into the US.
And sell them as GM cars !
The Donald 's 45 percent tariff on Chinese imports would stop such revolting job destroying shenanigans by an US company bailed out with taxpayers money.
11
It was Mrs. Clinton's husband who brought import duties on Chinese products in line with those from our "most favored nations"; e.g., Germany, Italy.
That caused my company to close five manufacturing facilities in five years - I'm embarrassed to say. Ross Perot's "sucking sound" prophecy came to pass throughout American manufacturing.
And the Chinese let us twist in the wind on every vital issue, which, with their help, could be more easily resolved?
Yet Mrs. Clinton - with husband in tow - parades around as if she's for the working man and woman?
And Trump is a fool? And those who support him are just haters?
That caused my company to close five manufacturing facilities in five years - I'm embarrassed to say. Ross Perot's "sucking sound" prophecy came to pass throughout American manufacturing.
And the Chinese let us twist in the wind on every vital issue, which, with their help, could be more easily resolved?
Yet Mrs. Clinton - with husband in tow - parades around as if she's for the working man and woman?
And Trump is a fool? And those who support him are just haters?
10
The fact that free trade is destroying American jobs and is letting US corporations and 1% do horrendous things is not a reason to vote for Trump or Cruz or any other fearmonger.
5
Only problem Woof, the Donald cannot make that happen as if he was firing some fool on Celebrity Apprentice. Did your reality TV watching interfere with you getting through Civics 101?
I thought you were going to endorse Hillary as the best candidate for both parties.
11
Hillary would make a fine democrat and a republican. Real democrat, theoretical "big tent" republican. Sadly, there is no real world analog of this theoretical republican (ya know . .. the rugged individualism, live within their means, fiscal conservative, non-interventionist). Today's republican is a social conservative (wants a theocracy) and a fiscal liberal (wants all the goodies from the government).
1
The Times sis being intellectually and politically responsible. Although my heart belongs to Bernie, my mind agrees with Hilary for all the reasons the Times gives. The Times has chosen judiciously and well. Of all the Republican candidates, Kasich seems the only one who is not certifiable. I disagree with him; I will not vote for him, but he is coherent, actually has political views, and is rational. The national cannot afford anything less than this now -- or ever.
18
1) While I respect and agree with his thought, the question of abortion is one which is solely a woman's to answer and men have no business forcing their will on any woman;
2) People who labor for a living should be able to organize without opposition, especially from the state; and ,
3) Same sex marriage is not really any of his business.
Aside from these items he seems decent, but they are dictatorial enough to turn me away from his candidacy.
The rest of the Republican offerings are an insult to both our citizenry and intelligence.
2) People who labor for a living should be able to organize without opposition, especially from the state; and ,
3) Same sex marriage is not really any of his business.
Aside from these items he seems decent, but they are dictatorial enough to turn me away from his candidacy.
The rest of the Republican offerings are an insult to both our citizenry and intelligence.
11
I would never vote for Governor Kasich in a Republican primary now that he has been endorsed by the NY Times editorial board. I doubt that the Kasich campaign will highlight the Times' endorsement, and Governor Kasich will be called on to repudiate the endorsement, if not immediately then at the next Republican debate.
Since we have an open primary in Virginia I will be voting for Bernie Sanders, not because I support socialism, but because he is the opponent of Hillary Clinton.
Since we have an open primary in Virginia I will be voting for Bernie Sanders, not because I support socialism, but because he is the opponent of Hillary Clinton.
10
Be careful what you wish for. Remember that the next President will probably get to appoint 3 Supreme Court Justices. Hold your nose if you must, but please pull the Democratic lever.
2
So you seem to know what you are against. What are you for?
1
I am for honest politicians; without a sense of entitlement. Consequently, I am not for Hillary Clinton. Maybe you can get Jon Corzine to run for office again in New Jersey; he always had a sense of entitlement similar to the Clintons.
Actually, Mr.Trump is right about the unemployment figures.
Besides the people who legitimately can't find work, and the people who have given up looking for work, and the people who have managed to wangle their way onto the rolls of the disabled but who are actually able to work, and the people in this country who are making their living as criminals who should probably be counted as unemployed, there are also massive numbers of people in this country who "work" at fake, made-up jobs.
Government jobs are often characterized in this way, but the problem reaches far into the private sector as well. I myself know of people who "work" from home without really working because they are somebody’s girl friend.
But most fake jobs are in a different category entirely and consist of things like making coffee, drinking coffee, going to useless meetings, going to lunch, writing reports and emails that nobody reads or -- in the case of many women -- simply showing up for work and being decorative.
If economists ever bothered to study this matter seriously, the nation would quickly learn that the true unemployment rate in this country is probably as high as 25% or higher. I don't know what the country would actually do with this information if it had it, but generally speaking Trump and I believe it is better to know that your house is on fire than not to know.
Besides the people who legitimately can't find work, and the people who have given up looking for work, and the people who have managed to wangle their way onto the rolls of the disabled but who are actually able to work, and the people in this country who are making their living as criminals who should probably be counted as unemployed, there are also massive numbers of people in this country who "work" at fake, made-up jobs.
Government jobs are often characterized in this way, but the problem reaches far into the private sector as well. I myself know of people who "work" from home without really working because they are somebody’s girl friend.
But most fake jobs are in a different category entirely and consist of things like making coffee, drinking coffee, going to useless meetings, going to lunch, writing reports and emails that nobody reads or -- in the case of many women -- simply showing up for work and being decorative.
If economists ever bothered to study this matter seriously, the nation would quickly learn that the true unemployment rate in this country is probably as high as 25% or higher. I don't know what the country would actually do with this information if it had it, but generally speaking Trump and I believe it is better to know that your house is on fire than not to know.
8
Ignorance knows no bounds
2
Your point being?
1
I used to think that John Kasich was reasonably sane until he proposed the establishment of a U.S. government agency to promote Judeo-Christian values
around the world. That alone puts him in the same category with all the other Republican misfits in the race.
around the world. That alone puts him in the same category with all the other Republican misfits in the race.
7
You mean like Voice of America and CIA?
1
No. Air America promoted Western/American values, not JudeoChristian values. There really is a difference.
Sorry, EB, unfortunately the only option is to become an independent or a Democrat. The GOP went haywire because of the rank and file voters have lost their own moral compass and their limitless bile and brimstone distopic nonsense.
2
To endorse Kasich is to endorse the least implausible candidate. What the Times should be endorsing is the need for an actual reset: the need for an experienced, non-extremist Republican to enter the race now. Maybe a Jon Huntsman. But that electorate has been groomed for so long to embrace extremism that moderates and conservatives need not apply.
The Times, like so much of the establishment, with its endorsements of Kasich and Clinton is not discerning the pervasiveness in the electorate of "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore."
Both Times reporters and columnists need to redo their due diligence on Kasich. He signs trickle-down tax cuts that benefit primarily those atop the income distribution. His budgets favor under-performing charter schools at the expense of better-performing public education. In 2014 algae blooms due to agricultural runoff shut down the water supply of 400,000 people near Toledo. The Kasich administration had nothing to say about a solution. Invest in infrastructure? Not Governor Kasich. In his 2011 campaign, paraphrasing, Kasich said, "I don't have to say what I'll do if elected."
Ohio's economy has ridden the updraft of the national economic recovery which began before he became governor and in particular the revival of the auto industry engineered by the Obama Administration and the production of shale oil and gas. Kasich has been along for the ride.
Clinton and Bloomberg are the real moderate Republicans.
The Times, like so much of the establishment, with its endorsements of Kasich and Clinton is not discerning the pervasiveness in the electorate of "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore."
Both Times reporters and columnists need to redo their due diligence on Kasich. He signs trickle-down tax cuts that benefit primarily those atop the income distribution. His budgets favor under-performing charter schools at the expense of better-performing public education. In 2014 algae blooms due to agricultural runoff shut down the water supply of 400,000 people near Toledo. The Kasich administration had nothing to say about a solution. Invest in infrastructure? Not Governor Kasich. In his 2011 campaign, paraphrasing, Kasich said, "I don't have to say what I'll do if elected."
Ohio's economy has ridden the updraft of the national economic recovery which began before he became governor and in particular the revival of the auto industry engineered by the Obama Administration and the production of shale oil and gas. Kasich has been along for the ride.
Clinton and Bloomberg are the real moderate Republicans.
5
As repulsive as the republican candidates are John Kasich actually seems like a decent person . Unlike his party's other collection of human misfits,Kasich has comported himself as an experienced politician whose politically conservative views actually seem to have a basis in reality, even if I don't agree with him.
He has a sensible, reasonable position on immigration and though still ridiculously "conservative" with respect to breaking labor unions, opposing same sex marriage and being boringly pro life, he clearly is not maniacal like the rest of them. He is also not really" moderate" except when compared to the motley neer do wells he has to contend with.
If the republican machine had not instigated and nurtured all the hate in the country over the past so many years Kasich might have been an attractive candidate for a typical republican voter today. But the typical republican voter today seems to be looking for the demagogue with the quickest fix. Kind of what the Germans once searched for. Katich certainly is not that, and for that reason, will not be the republican candidate. The worst is yet to come.
He has a sensible, reasonable position on immigration and though still ridiculously "conservative" with respect to breaking labor unions, opposing same sex marriage and being boringly pro life, he clearly is not maniacal like the rest of them. He is also not really" moderate" except when compared to the motley neer do wells he has to contend with.
If the republican machine had not instigated and nurtured all the hate in the country over the past so many years Kasich might have been an attractive candidate for a typical republican voter today. But the typical republican voter today seems to be looking for the demagogue with the quickest fix. Kind of what the Germans once searched for. Katich certainly is not that, and for that reason, will not be the republican candidate. The worst is yet to come.
3
I strongly approve this New York Times endorsement also, although I would never vote for Gov. Kasich given his opposition to abortion in all cases, as well as his previous executive position at Lehman Brothers.
On many issues, however, he is surprisingly sane considering the other Republican candidates these days. And at least he isn't constantly ranting and acting like he has lost any touch with reality or common decency.
On many issues, however, he is surprisingly sane considering the other Republican candidates these days. And at least he isn't constantly ranting and acting like he has lost any touch with reality or common decency.
3
SMB,
Let's have coffee next time I'm up from Florida. Well said.
Let's have coffee next time I'm up from Florida. Well said.
A week ago, based on all that was being covered in the Times and other media, I predicted Kasich would be the GOP nominee. There is no one else in the clown car who is acceptable except as Dogpatch Dogcatcher. A concern, nevertheless, is Ohio's 18 electoral college votes. Obama carried Ohio in 2012 as he did Iowa, California with 55 and Florida with 29. But Kasich might be considered a "favorite son" and turn Ohio red. Certainly Ohio has been acting red with many of its recent bills and votes. Texas has
38 but Kasich is far too moderate for the typical Texas conservative. I suspect the Times is simply being pragmatic with a large dose of wishful thinking that none of the current GOP leaders will survive the brutal infighting. Come June, the world will have a larger awareness of what we're doing and the Republicans already are considered hateful in Europe.
38 but Kasich is far too moderate for the typical Texas conservative. I suspect the Times is simply being pragmatic with a large dose of wishful thinking that none of the current GOP leaders will survive the brutal infighting. Come June, the world will have a larger awareness of what we're doing and the Republicans already are considered hateful in Europe.
5
He may not be a very good campaigner and is sometimes so awkward with people that you wonder how he has gotten elected before. But, what candidate aside from him - on either side - has all the following qualities: He's been a successful legislator and a successful executive. He has experience with the military, foreign policy and state issues. He has been instrumental in balancing a budget with a Dem. president in office and when in the executive position himself in Ohio. He's got a moderate temperament (and among this crowd is practically saintly) and avoids fighting with most of the other candidates (which is a detriment in debates with the insane - "I was mentioned" rule), even for the most part, Trump, and that is not easy. He believes in the rule of law, even when he doesn't agree the law is as it should be and is the only Republican candidate other than Paul who seems to realize that police reforms are as important as protecting the police. He seems to see both sides of most issues, recognizing that people have different perspectives and goals, even where he has a side himself. And he isn't afraid to buck his own party - such as embracing the expansion of Medicaid in Ohio. I can't think of one other candidate who can match his qualities or credentials. Of course, partisan right wingers will disagree and he will be left wingers' favorite Republican unless he wins the nomination - then, of course, like McCain and Romney, he will become their bogey man.
5
You have to wear two hats when picking a preferred nominee. You have to ask how you like his platform. And second, you have to ask if he can win. I presume here that you care about winning.
This editorial identifies Kasich as the candidate with the most appealing positions among the Republicans. Fair enough. But if the two twin articles today are followed and we have a Clinton-Kasich race, Kasich is a massive underdog and he will lose. So there is something odd about identifying the Republican with the best policies. The ability to WIN must factor into the analysis.
Interestingly, Jeb Bush is not even mentioned. He's a perfect example of a guy who'd love to be a policy maker and maybe even be good at it, but he wishes he did not have to bother with campaigning. Our system is democracy, and for good or ill it contains this messy "look at me, look at me, vote for me" detail.
On the Democrat side, same thing. A true endorsement for someone like Sanders could only occur if a Sanders win is plausible. Otherwise, what's wrong with Martin O'Malley? He looks great to me as a candidate, but implicitly he's not in the discussion because the 'can't win' factor is so obvious.
Boiling it down, I accept the Times endorsement of Clinton at face value and will weigh it's merits. But, why not simply abstain from offering a Republican endorsement on the grounds that all the potential winners are too awful to contemplate.
This editorial identifies Kasich as the candidate with the most appealing positions among the Republicans. Fair enough. But if the two twin articles today are followed and we have a Clinton-Kasich race, Kasich is a massive underdog and he will lose. So there is something odd about identifying the Republican with the best policies. The ability to WIN must factor into the analysis.
Interestingly, Jeb Bush is not even mentioned. He's a perfect example of a guy who'd love to be a policy maker and maybe even be good at it, but he wishes he did not have to bother with campaigning. Our system is democracy, and for good or ill it contains this messy "look at me, look at me, vote for me" detail.
On the Democrat side, same thing. A true endorsement for someone like Sanders could only occur if a Sanders win is plausible. Otherwise, what's wrong with Martin O'Malley? He looks great to me as a candidate, but implicitly he's not in the discussion because the 'can't win' factor is so obvious.
Boiling it down, I accept the Times endorsement of Clinton at face value and will weigh it's merits. But, why not simply abstain from offering a Republican endorsement on the grounds that all the potential winners are too awful to contemplate.
1
Because the Times has Republican readers to whom the editorial board had a responsibility. Sorry, but there are many decent, intelligent people who vote Republican and who rely on the New York Times, to some degree, for insight and information. If you want one-sided news, read any Murdoch paper.
3
For those not paying attention, the Times endorsed JK for the Republican nomination - not the presidency. So no need to recount his questionable record as Governor or quiver at the prospect of his election to office of POTUS. One is history, the other an unlikely fantasy. What the NYT is saying is even with all his warts and hairs, JK is the best qualified of the current Republican field to be on the general election ballot. Look at the rest of the GOP freak show and argue against that - whatever Kasich's defects. As for the endorsement of HRC, it seems only to be common sense and should surprise no one. Sandersnistas may be offended, but should not be surprised. If it's any consolation, I don't believe the Times is wildly influential in Iowa. Who did the big Iowa newspaper (Des Moines Register) endorse?
5
They endorsed H. Clinton too which makes them 0 for 2. Christie would be elected long before Kasich, given the electorate's mood!
1
I sure hope the Republicans don't nominate Kasich. The Ohio governor would crush Hillary in a general election.
The Establishment really cannot grasp just how deeply people do not trust Hillary.
That's too bad, because there is still time to unite around an alternative candidate, but that will be much harder for the Democrats to do if they can't even acknowledge there's a problem.
I'm a progressive who doesn't believe that Hillary is electable.
The Establishment really cannot grasp just how deeply people do not trust Hillary.
That's too bad, because there is still time to unite around an alternative candidate, but that will be much harder for the Democrats to do if they can't even acknowledge there's a problem.
I'm a progressive who doesn't believe that Hillary is electable.
6
She's electable if Kasich is the candidate.
2
Reading the comments is very telling. No one trusts anyone. That is very sad. I have had my issues with this journal but I see their editorial views as honest and not an attempt to second guess and strategize a way for HRC to win. It has been clear for quite some time that this paper would endorse Ms. Clinton. But they have a responsibility in the primary to endorse one from the other side. Given the poor choices, they did their level best to single out the one who is the most reasoned and seasoned. What would all these suspicious readers have said if they endorsed any of the others? Clearly they would have been accused of the very same thing or of being disingenuous. I certainly prefer an honest attempt to find a viable candidate from this particular job pool.
10
How do they have any such responsibility? They undoubtedly will endorse the Democratic candidate in November. Why should they get to pick who their favored one plays in the finals?
2
Guess you haven't been following the news coverage, then. As the Times' readers point out consistently, the Times has ignored or marginalized Senator Sanders throughout this campaign, while reporting assiduously on Secretary Clinton. The extent of Times's pro-Clinton bias has stunned me-- and I'm speaking of the news pages.
2
Here: I might be wrong, but I think it is tradition that during the primaries, editors of most journals, pick one from each side to endorse. This might not be the case in states where voters can cross party lines to vote in the primaries but in NY and many others they can't do that.
Anetliner: Of course I have been following the coverage. That is why I said it has been obvious for some time that they would endorse Hillary. I agree completely about their coverage and lack thereof of Sanders. My reference was to the commenters who seemed to think it was a set up for Kasich to be a loser, the kiss of death for him, some sort of plot. On that point I disagreed and choose to believe it was their honest effort to pick the best of the worst.
Anetliner: Of course I have been following the coverage. That is why I said it has been obvious for some time that they would endorse Hillary. I agree completely about their coverage and lack thereof of Sanders. My reference was to the commenters who seemed to think it was a set up for Kasich to be a loser, the kiss of death for him, some sort of plot. On that point I disagreed and choose to believe it was their honest effort to pick the best of the worst.
Bring back Jon Hunstsman! He was the best candidate in 2012 and would shine in comparison to all of those running now! -- That said, I am a Democrat, but I really think it would be good for our nation to have a true race between two candidates who are both qualified for the office. Get rid of all the circus atmosphere -- and let people decide on the actual issues involved, not based on who is "less crazy" or who is more adept at garnering the attention of the media.
15
Most of the comments seem to have been written by liberal Democrats, who find Kasich wanting. However, he is running for the Republican nomination. Also, he is running for president of the entire country, not just bi-coastal. For Republicans who value general reasonableness and experience, as well as party survival, he is the right person.
6
He is running in the Republican party and he has the lowest numbers for an establishment candidate on the national stage. Hillary will clobber him.
5
There is no doubt that Kasich is the adult in the Republican field. Whether or not he could be Hilary is another thing entirely.
4
Did you see that obnoxious debate? Do you know what an adult is? His reputation in Ohio and elsewhere is anything but adult. The Times picked the lowest polling national Republican because Hillary will clobber him. Wait till he brings up balancing the budget and they find it is by raiding SS while giving the donor class tax breaks.
4
Mr. Plausible still opposes abortion in all cases except rape or incest.
Which means he favors punitively forcing women to bear unwanted pregnancies as punishment for having sex voluntarily.
No thanks.
Which means he favors punitively forcing women to bear unwanted pregnancies as punishment for having sex voluntarily.
No thanks.
20
SKV, is there any chance you would have voted for the Republican candidate in the general election?
1
Not to mention that he is going sign a bill being pushed state GOP leaders that REQUIRES a burial for all miscarried or aborted fetuses! This is actually true and featured in Ohio newspapers today.
5
You know, NYT, you don't HAVE to pick a candidate on both sides. There is the option of encouraging moderate Republicans to wait for its party to return to sanity.
7
How much has the NYT done over the past couple of years to help us understand who John Kasich is?
What's a newspaper for?
What's a newspaper for?
7
I note that at first, they ran the blurb with Kasich's photo without naming him. They must have figured no one knew him by sight because they added his name a little later.
People are sick and tired of political Hacks like Kasich he is the same old GOP puppet controlled by the establishment!!!.Vote For The Apprentice!! Make America Great Again!!!!!
6
Better an apprentice than their boss.
Kasich is likable and substantive. It is surprising that he isn't doing better.
Mitt Romney must now regret having deferred to Jeb Bush.
Mitt Romney must now regret having deferred to Jeb Bush.
9
John Kasich is neither likable and substantive. It is good that he isn't doing better.
4
He only sounds reasonable because he knows when keeping his mouth shut helps forward his agenda. At least we know what Cruz is up to so we can stop it.
8
In an eight paragraph endorsement, you name your pick only in the final three. Everything else was about Trump. #partoftheproblem
1
As governor, he’s gone after public-sector unions, fought to limit abortion rights and opposed same-sex marriage.
The above is deemed "reasonable?" He opposes same sex marriage, wants to destroy unions, and wants to limit a woman's right to choose. He appears to be as horrific as the rest of the loons running in the GOP primary.
The above is deemed "reasonable?" He opposes same sex marriage, wants to destroy unions, and wants to limit a woman's right to choose. He appears to be as horrific as the rest of the loons running in the GOP primary.
20
John Kasich IS "as horrific as the rest of the loons running in the GOP primary." His views on absolutely everything are just as far to the right as any of the other aspirants in his party; in fact, Republican voters have made it clear that they won't tolerate anyone in the party who is even just slightly to the right of Newt Gingrich.
It's very disappointing to hear the NY Times write as if Kasich is anything substantively different from the other GOP contenders. He's not.
It's very disappointing to hear the NY Times write as if Kasich is anything substantively different from the other GOP contenders. He's not.
2
I don't know any Conservatives who trust the NYT. So the endorsement of John Kasich by the Times is likely they kiss of death for his candidacy.
5
Kasich wants more job killing and nation draining trade pacts. Further more, like the rest of the establishment he is all for American high tech workers training their lower paid H1-B replacements furnished by Hillary supporter Tata Consultancy. He wants West Coast union construction workers to sit at home while the companies that hire illegals under bid them on jobs. The AFL-CIO magazine documents the loss of jobs and market share. Some unions are draining their retirement accounts to augment bids. Can't get rid of enough middle class jobs I say.
Furthermore, Sweden just announced it is deporting 80,000 asylum seekers as a result of the violence and out of control rapes that the police have been hiding. It has further been announced that 60% of the asylum seekers are not refugees fleeing conflict from Syria or Iraq. That is 60% of over a million. ISIS from their home base in Raqqa has been directing the infiltration. "Frans Timmerman, Vice President of the European Commission, told the Daily Telegraph:'It's about 60% of all asylum seekers. These are people that you assume have no reason to apply for refugee status.'" Check out Rothingham in Britain by Googling Rothingham Pakistani Muslim...to see what the Muslim men have done to over 1,400 girls..bbc, Forbes and other sources. Police were hiding that. Wouldn't want to miss that here in the US. While Europe is sending them back the Times wants that here.
Furthermore, Sweden just announced it is deporting 80,000 asylum seekers as a result of the violence and out of control rapes that the police have been hiding. It has further been announced that 60% of the asylum seekers are not refugees fleeing conflict from Syria or Iraq. That is 60% of over a million. ISIS from their home base in Raqqa has been directing the infiltration. "Frans Timmerman, Vice President of the European Commission, told the Daily Telegraph:'It's about 60% of all asylum seekers. These are people that you assume have no reason to apply for refugee status.'" Check out Rothingham in Britain by Googling Rothingham Pakistani Muslim...to see what the Muslim men have done to over 1,400 girls..bbc, Forbes and other sources. Police were hiding that. Wouldn't want to miss that here in the US. While Europe is sending them back the Times wants that here.
4
A Chance to Reset the Republican Race? The NYT doesn’t want to reset the Republican race. The Board wants Hillary to win.
By endorsing John Kasich, they have sealed the fate of the most viable Republican national candidate.
By endorsing John Kasich, they have sealed the fate of the most viable Republican national candidate.
5
So you think the NYT should have endorsed Trump?
1
I'm a Wyoming Republican. Both parties are fighting for control of the imploding, bankrupted global military empire that Eisenhower warned would come in 1961. Only a moderate like Kasich gives a ___ about infrastructure. NOBODY is stating an opinion about Puerto Rico imploding (like Crimea) in 2016. As far as I'm concerned, America will be an NDAA 2012 police state within a decade: with no-warrant arrests and permanent detention "for duration of hostilities." Imagine ONE PARTY GOP RULE: NDAA, a packed federal court system, USBP "checkpoints" within 100 miles of all US borders (perfect place for NDAA round up of people on any list). I love it! Dick Cheney's "Full Spectrum Domination" come to life! (PNAC 1997 doctrine for US global domination). Fascist America, sponsored by the global military empire and their domestic marketing arm, the fascist gun lobby NRA!
10
As the large African mammals are pushed ever closer to the precipice of extinction (let's explain to our grandchildren why we let Babar and Dumbo go extinct) I have wondered whether we should find some compromise regarding Barnum and Bailey's dark and leaky Pachyderm Ark. I have also advocated large ranches for the even-more-critically-endangered rhinoceros in states like Nebraska and, well, Wyoming. Glad to know we have one. Sincerely glad.
1
get a life
Gov. John "Milquetoast" Kasich of Ohio. When you support the snooping into the lives of US citizens, but, do not want to say so, you answer the question at the debate with; "Those conversations are best had in the situation room".
8
Actually, that was a very mature response from someone who is seasoned enough to know that there a million factors and considerations that would go into those kinds of decisions. One thing that is so wrong with so many people is that they think there is a clear "either/or" "yes/no" answer to everything and that they think they know what that answer is, and that the same answer would hold in every single situation. Life is more complex and it is a good thing to realize that you don't know everything and that sometimes there is no one-szie fits all response.
4
I'll take "damning with faint praise" for twenty...
9
For the past couple of decades the editorial page of the Times has functioned in a thoroughly partisan manner. Predictably, and not unjustifiably, your endorsement has gone to a Republican candidate who more closely mirrors your views, but if anyone believes you would endorse Kasich over Hillary Clinton...I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell.
5
The editorial page of any newspaper is by its nature partisan and has always been such since newspapers have existed.
10
The editorial page of a newspapers is supposed to express the opinion of its editorial board. Yes, the New York Times generally favors Democratic politicians. That is their right. The problem with journalism today is that news reporting is found to be slanted, and the biggest offender, I suggest, is Fox News. Did you watch the most recent Republican debate? Would you say that the moderators were objective? It appeared to me that they were very much on the side of the so-called establishment candidates and out to get Ted Cruz. Fox does the same thing on its news programs. Their treatment of Democratic candidates is ridiculous. That is what I call partisan journalism. The New York Times, on the other hand, tries very hard to provide balanced news reports. If anything, it is often guilty of providing balance when one side of the argument is clearly wrong.
4
And why would they when Hillary Clinton is the OBVIOUSLY superior candidate as anyone with an ounce of intelligence KNOWS, something I guess you obviously lack D.R.?
Poor Kasich. Now that he got an endorsement from NYT - at least sort of endorsement - he is doomed in the Republican primary. Many voters don't know him well, but once they learn NYT likes him, he is finished for GOP nomination.
24
I don't think you read the article too carefully. The NYT did not say they liked him. They said that of the candidates running, he would be the one that is the most plausible (and I infer, "level-headed") and that hopefully would appeal to those who are looking for someone other than the front-runners.
3
You are probably correct which only shows that Republicans, who actually think that Fox News is a real news channel, probably are not smart enough to understand anything written in the NYT, which is the most respected and, yes, the best newspaper in the world.
1
@child of babe: Oh, I read it alright and that is why I added the words "at least sort of". Of course NYT didn't say they like him; they don't like any of the current GOP candidates. Everyone knows that.
Would you go along with the conclusion that NYT dislikes Kasich the least?
Would you go along with the conclusion that NYT dislikes Kasich the least?
And while this is a reasonable choice-the least loathsome of the pack....can we now forsee that those other firebreathers will promptly use this endorsement by that big bad media propaganda machine, the NY Times, as proof that this guy should move to last on the list. He's simply not disingenuous (crazy) enough, folks
Poor Katich, about the last thing he needed was an NYTEB endorsement. Clever of the EB, but very cruel. He's a good governor and a good man from all accounts , but the only way he will end up in the oval office is via the VP route.
I think you are right
1
Of passing interest to Columbus Dispatch (& NY Times) readers may be a record billion $$ in liquor sales in 2015 as reported by the Ohio Department of Commerce. However, this announcement should also raise a red flag and once again serve as a reminder that because of actions taken by our absentee Governor Kasich and his pals in the Legislature, the profits from this gigantic liquor monopoly are funneled into the top secret JobsOhio development agency and the good folks of Ohio have no idea how the money is being spent. Despite the efforts of the Dispatch and State Auditor Dave Yost to access JobsOhio books, state law apparently prohibits the media and officials to report to Ohioans on the finances of this nefarious operation. So, Governor Kasich, wherever you may be wandering on the Presidential campaign trail, would you care to comment to the national media about the secrets within your personally-created and very private JobsOhio development agency?
6
Kasich isn't insane like the other Republicans running but according to you on his policies he's a bigot and doesn't believe women should be in control of their own lives.
Seriously, you've endorsed this guy?
Seriously, you've endorsed this guy?
4
I'm waiting for the "boy Obama was pretty darned good" 20/20 editorial pieces to start popping up like mushrooms ... there will be coming ... you read it here
3
"I've talked about hope, and the future and positive things."
NO Governor, you have not. For many, many women, forced to continue carrying a down syndrome fetus to terms would mean anything but.
How dare you tell a woman and her doctor she must carry on with this nature gone astray, happening. Some women and their families could handle it in fine fashion, but many more could not.
Who do you think you are? God? Besides it's the law of the land that entitles a woman to a safe abortion and for whatever reason she decides. Get out of our bodies and bedrooms.
NO Governor, you have not. For many, many women, forced to continue carrying a down syndrome fetus to terms would mean anything but.
How dare you tell a woman and her doctor she must carry on with this nature gone astray, happening. Some women and their families could handle it in fine fashion, but many more could not.
Who do you think you are? God? Besides it's the law of the land that entitles a woman to a safe abortion and for whatever reason she decides. Get out of our bodies and bedrooms.
17
Do you actually know a person with Down Syndrome? I find your comment that such a person is "nature gone astray" to be offensive. Maybe you should spend some time getting to know the individuals you describe; it may change your thinking, or at least your rhetoric.
1
Did you know the founder of Planned Parenthood was for eugenics? DIdn't Hitler promote eugenics? Its more important to be "life giving" than to be for a Darwinistic society. At the end of the day, pro-abortion and other similar selfish views will eventually lead to the undoing of society.
1
you're right: kasich is no moderate. there are no republican moderates in this race.
do you really think your "dismissal" of trump will hurt him among republican voters? he'll wear it proudly.
i suppose your endorsement of kasich is your way of killing him off--because he actually might be a threat in the general election. if that's your goal, okay. it may work a bit in new hampshire. you're really looking for an establishment jeb-hillary race, right?
do you really think your "dismissal" of trump will hurt him among republican voters? he'll wear it proudly.
i suppose your endorsement of kasich is your way of killing him off--because he actually might be a threat in the general election. if that's your goal, okay. it may work a bit in new hampshire. you're really looking for an establishment jeb-hillary race, right?
2
NY feedback is objective in its dislike for Trump, but for Cruz its finds nothing but an subjective opinion. Instead of demonizing him, NY should see why he's speaking to so many people. While i think Rubio is best among the lot, US needs a person of principles to lead and Cruz has proven it.
1
Bellevue is right on
1
Not sure who wrote the music, but the words the NYT Chorus is singing here are by Pauline Kael.
2
Since you chose to wait till the reader was almost at the end of the article to reveal who you were endorsing, you could have at least have put a name under the picture.
1
If not being crazy qualifies you for president, please elect me; a liberal Democrat, well regarded writer, ex-therapist therefore good with people, experience in negotiation....there you have it. If you don't want to do that, Hillary or Bernie please.
2
For a Republican, endorsement by the NY Times s the kiss of death!
2
They are just rooting for him in the semi-finals, hoping he will be easy meat for Thrillary. It's not like they are really endorsing him, which aside from Eisenhower and Willkie, the times has not done for a Republican since William McKinley.
2
Rand Paul must really frighten the editors. They don't even have the cojones to mention his name.
6
Obviously the only reason to ignore Rand Paul is that they're terrified of him... Couldn't be because he's irrelevant.
This is Nina Castro:
Hypothetical: if I had to vote for a Republican in this race, it would be John Kasich. The sad part is the reason: at least he's not crazy.
Hypothetical: if I had to vote for a Republican in this race, it would be John Kasich. The sad part is the reason: at least he's not crazy.
12
At least you got one of your endorsements right.
3
What about Rand Paul??
I'm telling you... that man's in it for the long haul... and may just be the last man standing.
I'm telling you... that man's in it for the long haul... and may just be the last man standing.
9
How will we be able to tell?
I totally agree with this Kasich endorsement, even though I won't vote Republican in November, regardless of who they nominate. I like the medieval allusion in the first sentence, "nasty, brutish and anything but short," as the other Republican candidates' rhetoric and proposals are pre-Enlightenment stuff.
8
The Republicans have put themselves in an interesting situation vis-a-vis health care. In an effort to compromise, the Democrats abandon single payer and adapt a Republican-inspired plan in the AFA. Whereupon it gets labelled "Obamacare", and then -- in the eyes of the people who actually developed the idea -- somehow becomes evil incarnate. Talk about your shifting goal posts!
I have a lot of problems with some of Governor Kaisch's views, but at least here we have a Republican who doesn't think that providing Americans with a (reasonably) effective and affordable (it's certainly less expensive than the system it replaced) program of universal public health care isn't a "bad" thing. How refreshing.
I have a lot of problems with some of Governor Kaisch's views, but at least here we have a Republican who doesn't think that providing Americans with a (reasonably) effective and affordable (it's certainly less expensive than the system it replaced) program of universal public health care isn't a "bad" thing. How refreshing.
11
In a rational political environment, a NYT endorsement would give further legitimacy and momentum to a Republican candidate by demonstrating an ability to reach independent voters. Unfortunately, and to their own peril, more conservative Republicans will view Kasich negatively for receiving such an endorsement. Rational thought and a rational candidate is not what many conservative voters seem to be seeking.
11
Neither do many progressives, JH from NJ-that is, a rational candidate. I for one do not think that picking a candidate who could easily run in Sweden, or the Netherlands, is a rational choice for the US. I think that the NYTimes, for once, picked the two best qualified, most reasonable candidates from the left AND the right- HRC and Kasich. I believe there is some truth to American exceptionalism, and although there are many, many things wrong with the economical, political and legal systems in this country, there are also things at which the US shines, and I for one would be loath to throw out the baby with the bathwater! And remember: in many Western European countries, although government and society in general are much less harsh-many government programs and financial support systems are being streamlined, modified, some moderately so, others radically, because the system imploded from within. It was no longer economically or financially feasible. Even the Socialists have admitted as much, and are collaborating on making necessary changes. Marco Rubio was right about one thing, at least: "Bernie Sanders is a great candidate......for Sweden!" And as for Kasich-The Times is right about him, too-he is the most reasonable, and sanest of his lot!
I am fairly certain that a New York Times endorsement is the last thing Governor Kasich wants or needs and certainly not one as tepid as this. Most of the editorial space is taken up assailing the other candidates. The Times could have saved us time and written their endorsement in three words. "He's not nuts!".
3
Kasich is the least scariest clown to emerge from the slapstick scrum the GOP is calling a nomination.
3
Kasich isn't even the best house in a bad neighborhood.
He's more like a boarded-up shack which still stands in the middle of an apocalyptic war zone.
He's more like a boarded-up shack which still stands in the middle of an apocalyptic war zone.
9
Could not agree more with your editorial. Governor Kasich is a voice of reason for the Republicans. I am so happy to see him finally getting some attention.
7
Hey Republicans, how's that "we have to stop being the party of the stupid" thingy working out?
4
Well, this is the Kiss of Death for John Kasich. The only candidate who actually seems to understand that the lack of jobs is the key to working class anger is now officially dead, killed by the endorsement of the New York Times. Hard to see how he can overcome this blow.
2
Hopefully, he won't. He's been horrible for the women of Ohio, Ohio's environment, and Ohio's middle class, and he deserves to have no further public role.
2
Not much has changed in Ohio since the 1990s when Ohio lost much of his manufacturing due to free trade. The jobless are still jobless with hundreds of businesses closed down due to free trade economics. In Congress Kasich locked hands with Clinton in the passing of free trade economics in 1995. causing the most massive dislocation of jobs in U.S. history. Million lost their jobs and businesses. In just Ohio, Michigan and Pa. , more than a thousand computer businesses closed down.
Gov Kasich hounded corporations that closed down due to free trade economics for back taxes. I received another threatening letter during the time he was deciding to run for president.
In today's Cleveland Plain Dealer, Kasich made the front page headlines which has a big picture of him. Inside the paper, in the Marketplace classified section, there is a tiny note about the new Chevy Cruze will be built in Mexico instead of Lordstown Ohio. If Trump was governor, this would have never happened. And so it goes in the New York TImes and Globalist Free Trader world. 92 million are jobless. The unemployment rate is fiction including in Ohio. A new working poor class has replaced the production workers middle class. Many of the new working poor need government assistance to survive. No one tells it like it is except for Trump. Trump is more for the common good an any other presidential candidate. http://tapsearchnews.filetap.com http://tapsearch.com/workers-dignity-betrayed
Gov Kasich hounded corporations that closed down due to free trade economics for back taxes. I received another threatening letter during the time he was deciding to run for president.
In today's Cleveland Plain Dealer, Kasich made the front page headlines which has a big picture of him. Inside the paper, in the Marketplace classified section, there is a tiny note about the new Chevy Cruze will be built in Mexico instead of Lordstown Ohio. If Trump was governor, this would have never happened. And so it goes in the New York TImes and Globalist Free Trader world. 92 million are jobless. The unemployment rate is fiction including in Ohio. A new working poor class has replaced the production workers middle class. Many of the new working poor need government assistance to survive. No one tells it like it is except for Trump. Trump is more for the common good an any other presidential candidate. http://tapsearchnews.filetap.com http://tapsearch.com/workers-dignity-betrayed
4
I was favorably impressed with Katich until he started talking about Iran. His harsh language about reimposing sanctions maybe even bombing Iran turned me off. Iran has been busy signing up business agreements with European countries and of course China has been active in Iran for some time. It certainly is true that the hard liners in Iran still have a strong position but with a young well educated population there is hope for a more constructive Iran role in foreign affairs going forward. It is past the time for U.S. politicians to simply castigate Iran and fail to cautiously take steps, including U.S. business investment, to make a change for the better.
7
The real issue for any sane person elected President will be dealing with our certifiably insane Congress. It's not too early to start figuring out how to take it back from its domination by a group of greedy, egomaniacal, obstreperous, childish, contrarian, cynical, manipulative, and myopic representatives of our body politic's most atavistic and regressive impulses, which has made real progress on important issues all but impossible for years on end now.
5
I'm a retired sixty-seven year-old veteran and I can tell you something about Mr. Kasich and a bunch of other republicans: no one ever took him outside and "adjusted his attitude."
I speak from experience when I say that logic and reason are not the only avenues by which one might be "enlightened." There comes a time when the only way to teach a man humility is by humiliating him.
I speak from experience when I say that logic and reason are not the only avenues by which one might be "enlightened." There comes a time when the only way to teach a man humility is by humiliating him.
2
For those who love to claim the NY Times is even-handed, or middle of the road--in other words, for those who deny this publication leans left--holy cow, just look at these 2 endorsements today.
Hillary--top right corner
Kasich---half the space and below Hillary.
But it's not just the space. The endorsement of Hillary is glowing. The endorsement of Kasich is grudgingly given--after bashing all the others, the Times reaches the conclusion that he's the best of all evils.
Such blatant partisanship.
Hillary--top right corner
Kasich---half the space and below Hillary.
But it's not just the space. The endorsement of Hillary is glowing. The endorsement of Kasich is grudgingly given--after bashing all the others, the Times reaches the conclusion that he's the best of all evils.
Such blatant partisanship.
6
Such a poor candidate. What can you say good about Kasich? Nothing.
Well you had to pick someone and the pickings were slim. The Republican choices are bad but the two most evil are Rubio and Cruz who seek to triple defense spending and start a war. I don't like Donald Trump the person but he does speak the truth. He is not a warmonger and knows Iraq and Afghanistan were disasters. Our system is so broke we need change that neither of the regulars of both parties can change. Trump is the next President bank on it.
1
trump speak the truth? 99% of what he says is empty, simple 3-5 word monosyllabic sentences devoid of content.
G'd forbid, Jack from Middletown, Connecticut! G'd forbid! Trump is a dangerous clown, a buffoon, a political ignoramus and a racist!! That's the man you want for President of this country, and arguably the most powerful man in the world? For shame!
I don't agree with the Times Editorial Board often but this is one of those times. I prefer a governor to move on to the presidency. Of the three governors running for the GOP slot Kasich has the best experience. I can only hope he makes it through enough hurdles that I can vote for him in the primary here in Florida and in the general election. Thank you to the Times Editorial Board for this endorsement.
8
The insanity is so deep and pervasive among the Right they won't elect a sane candidate standing right in front of them. They prefer fire breathers and circus performers than a sensible leader to lead them to the White House. The heart and soul of the GOP has been hijacked by a clown in the fat suit with a bad hair piece.
13
The GOP circus may end up being the product of a big media show. So let's give republicans the benefit of the doubt until the polls that matter, i.e. those compiled in the voting booth, show us all what they really think.
I agree that Gov Kasich's would be the best Republican candidate for the general election - both on policy and on electability. He has a Reagan "morning in America" optimism. Along with Senator Paul, he is the strongest fiscal conservative. And he has 16 years experience in the Armed Services Committee so he knows how to keep Americans safe.
His issue is winning the primary. On one hand, I understand the voters not wanting another RINO who cannot inspire the troops (e.g. Romney, McCain, etc.) As the article states, "Mr. Kasich is no moderate." Moreover, Trump is not really conservative having supported higher taxes and single-payer healthcare. The exception is immigration where Trump (and Cruz) are trying to make the party into the brown-and-black hating image that every liberal depicts. It's not helpful. And it's not accurate. How much do the people of Iowa really worry about Hispanics who are less than 6% of their population ? It's also irrelevant since no Republican (including Kasich) will go near immigration reform given how inflamed an issue it has become.
Most importantly, none of this matters unless a Republican occupies the White House. Remember that only about 7 states matter in the general election. No Republican has become President without winning OH - where Kasich has a 60% approval rate. He's already a strong 2nd in NH. And if he picked Rubio for VP, Republicans would have a good shot at FL. And that's the ball game, folks.
His issue is winning the primary. On one hand, I understand the voters not wanting another RINO who cannot inspire the troops (e.g. Romney, McCain, etc.) As the article states, "Mr. Kasich is no moderate." Moreover, Trump is not really conservative having supported higher taxes and single-payer healthcare. The exception is immigration where Trump (and Cruz) are trying to make the party into the brown-and-black hating image that every liberal depicts. It's not helpful. And it's not accurate. How much do the people of Iowa really worry about Hispanics who are less than 6% of their population ? It's also irrelevant since no Republican (including Kasich) will go near immigration reform given how inflamed an issue it has become.
Most importantly, none of this matters unless a Republican occupies the White House. Remember that only about 7 states matter in the general election. No Republican has become President without winning OH - where Kasich has a 60% approval rate. He's already a strong 2nd in NH. And if he picked Rubio for VP, Republicans would have a good shot at FL. And that's the ball game, folks.
10
Sure, Kasich is great if you ignore the human rights of over half of the population.
3
A number of Republicans have become president without winning Ohio: to wit, Chester Arthur, Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge and Gerald Ford. Did you mean "elected president"?
"Even unemployment figures, which he’s pegged at 23 or 42 percent (the correct number is 5 percent) "
The NYT is as wrong as Trump about that. The correct figure of U-6 total unemployment is double what the NYT gives here.
That real figure represents the cost and suffering of the prolonged Great Recession which has never ended for Main Street America.
Sanders knows that, with correct figures. Trump at least acknowledges it, with his error on the side of acknowledging that Americans are suffering. The other Republicans just ignore it, and the other Democrats pretend Obama has fixed it.
We need the focus of Trump vs Sanders, and a Sanders win.
The NYT is as wrong as Trump about that. The correct figure of U-6 total unemployment is double what the NYT gives here.
That real figure represents the cost and suffering of the prolonged Great Recession which has never ended for Main Street America.
Sanders knows that, with correct figures. Trump at least acknowledges it, with his error on the side of acknowledging that Americans are suffering. The other Republicans just ignore it, and the other Democrats pretend Obama has fixed it.
We need the focus of Trump vs Sanders, and a Sanders win.
9
Nice try, but Kasich hasn't a whisper of a chance.
If he had the personality of Sanders, he'd probably be in the lead.
If he had the personality of Sanders, he'd probably be in the lead.
4
Correct. But the danger is that Kasich would be the most successful rival to Hillary nationally, while either Trump and Cruz would be too repulsive for a national electorate.
And Kasich paired up with Rubio as VP could take their home states of Ohio and Florida. That's the end.
Even if Kasich won and lost it would be terrible, giving Republican extremists the argument to go even farther into the land of destruction.
The best hope for a Democratic President and Senate is one of the ogres currently running for the Republican nomination. They would lose, and the party might then finally repudiate the politics of ignorance. So, go Trump! Go Cruz!
And Kasich paired up with Rubio as VP could take their home states of Ohio and Florida. That's the end.
Even if Kasich won and lost it would be terrible, giving Republican extremists the argument to go even farther into the land of destruction.
The best hope for a Democratic President and Senate is one of the ogres currently running for the Republican nomination. They would lose, and the party might then finally repudiate the politics of ignorance. So, go Trump! Go Cruz!
I've gotten the impression that Kasich was the most reasonable of the candidates, but it has not been easy to determine how reasonable because no news outlets, including the NY Times seems to say anything about his policies. They are too busy reporting on the last outlandish thing Trump said or Republican hand-wringing over the popularity of Trump and Cruz. The political "analysis" normally relates to how good a given campaign strategy is, rather than how good a policy is, and if it does talk about policy, it just presents various people's opinions, without presenting any of the reasoning supporting those opinions. Then in the end, the Times gives their opinion of who is the least bad, with very little indication of what that person stands for. Certainly every candidate is doing something nearly every day that could be construed as news worthy of reporting on, but even the most respected newspaper in the country feels its readers would not be interested in getting substantive information about candidates and their policy proposals.
2
Alice Tay is absolutely correct. The coverage, including both of the NYTimes endorsement editorials, are all about tactics and presentation and say virtually nothing about the policies that the candidates favor. How many news articles have said anything about Kasich's attacks on the rights of women, about Trump's tax proposals which would increase the federal debt by $ ten trillion over ten years, or Ted Cruz's carpet bomb proposals which are not only illegal under international law and US law and would kill hundreds of thousands of the people he would be pretending to protect and his flat out lies about the results of Obamacare.
Come on, NYTimes, take a lead in giving us more facts, real information.
Come on, NYTimes, take a lead in giving us more facts, real information.
Not entirely true, guys. The NYTImes DID give us some info on the candidates' actual policies- they had articles along the line of The Candidates and their positions on the issues, so you could compare. That they did not give you DT's positions is because he barely has any! He just screams, insults, and clowns around. And if it wasn't such a serious situation that we are in, I could barely contain my laughter when Ted Cruz pulls his facial features into his "sincere and affable mask" again- I have never seen a bigger hypocrite and as for affability-even his fellow Senators and other GOP politicians LOATHE the guy! Why anyone would take him seriously, let alone vote for him, is beyond me! The thought that one of these two crazies could become president scares the devil out of me. HRC and Kasich are the best choice-but I'm starting to think that ANYONE would be a better President than Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. Beyond scary!
Well said. The only republican candidate willing to compromise with democrats is, indeed, Kasich, if it will advance the agenda to help the least among us. He is a pragmatist, even if one may disagree with his somewhat rigid ideology. And the only one respectful of the political process. without outlandish remarks to inflame a knowledge-deficient group of folks, folks that feel disenfranchised and left behind in a too-fast-moving train of change.
3
Yours' is a reasonable assessment of the situation, but perhaps it would be best if Trump, Cruz or even Carson got the nomination so they can complete the demolition of the Republican Party as a national political organization. This might help clear the way for the construction of a new party that is much less infected with the cancerous stupidity that has infected the GOP.
4
The real problem is that the American electorate is so ignorant and ill informed and becoming more so by the day that we may end up with one of these nutcases, and the whole world will have to suffer.
8
I really don't know what to say. Has the NYT editorial staff never read Jefferson, Adams, Franklin or Paine? Did they not watch the last GOP debate? John Kasich is an extremist! I cannot imagine anything more extreme than throwing out the constitution.
It is 2016 not 1776 and the need to modify the constitution and add amendments is self evident but the constitution made clear the United States of America was to be a construct of its people. The framers made it clear above all else that neither the Creator nor the God of Heaven and Earth was to be in charge. Their USA is the country of you its people.
John Kasich is no more plausible than any of the other GOP candidates save Donald Trump who may be the worst possible choice. John Kasich may be the best possible choice but his United States of America is not the United States of America.
None of the above should have been the message sent out by the editorial board.
It is 2016 not 1776 and the need to modify the constitution and add amendments is self evident but the constitution made clear the United States of America was to be a construct of its people. The framers made it clear above all else that neither the Creator nor the God of Heaven and Earth was to be in charge. Their USA is the country of you its people.
John Kasich is no more plausible than any of the other GOP candidates save Donald Trump who may be the worst possible choice. John Kasich may be the best possible choice but his United States of America is not the United States of America.
None of the above should have been the message sent out by the editorial board.
14
I have an advanced degree from Stanford (and was also admitted to MIT). I have lived and worked in China, India and all over the United States. I speak 3 languages fluently.
If Donald Trump wins Iowa, and makes this state irrelevant in the selection of candidates --- that would be "yuge."
Lets be clear, a nunch of conservative, gun toting farmers who have never traveled outside their County line do not speak for the rest of us.
If Donald Trump wins Iowa, and makes this state irrelevant in the selection of candidates --- that would be "yuge."
Lets be clear, a nunch of conservative, gun toting farmers who have never traveled outside their County line do not speak for the rest of us.
7
No, but as much as I disagree with them, they do speak for themselves. Maybe if we made more of an effort to address them respectfully, we might get further in terms of influencing their thinking.
1
I don't need a degree from Stanford to tell you Trump's more likely to win in New Hampshire and South Carolina, than Iowa, but he will probably win all three. I warn you, I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.
1
My second choice to Mike Bloomberg. Kasich is not charismatic, but he is pragmatic, gets things done with a lot of balance and common sense. He has experience in Washington where he championed fiscal responsibility, in the private sector and as an executive, successful Governor of Ohio. So, agree. Hope New Hampshire will give him a much needed boost. Not sure his demeanor can trump the others.
4
Other GOP candidates believe the old marketing slogan of " sell the sizzle, not the steak". Plain speaking Kasich believes it better to skip the sizzle. Trust us with stark facts.
I don't agree with him on every position as governor--including a couple big ones. But despite the slick promises of others, isn't that reality?
His competence and astounding honesty as a politician have made me as an Independent in his state a huge fan. Even though I voted against him his first term for governor.
I don't agree with him on every position as governor--including a couple big ones. But despite the slick promises of others, isn't that reality?
His competence and astounding honesty as a politician have made me as an Independent in his state a huge fan. Even though I voted against him his first term for governor.
2
The Democratic nominee will have to run against some Republican. At least with Mr. Kasich issues will be discussed-- better than going through the national embarrassment of a preadolescent food fight like the recent Republican "debates." That said, I would not want ANY Republican appointing a successor to Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
8
Why RBG? Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are also getting on.......just sayin'. Of course, we will still be stuck with Samuel Alito.
Clever talking and public speaking is about all Cruz has ever done. He mistakes having mastered that art form, his endless platitudes for purposes of manipulation, is all he needs to know or so he and most of his followers think.
6
Being the most sane man in that race is hardly worthy of an endorsement. His personality may be charming but his policies have hurt working men and women more than they help.
13
if the GOP has to select from the declared candidates Kasich is far and away the best. His election would put the brakes on progress but it would not be a national calamity as would the election of Trump or worse Cruz. At least he is sane and competent.
6
As a New Yorker from Ohio who is still very enmeshed in the politics back home, please understand that Kasich sounds moderate but is a moral extremist on social issues. And he doesn't just hold extreme beliefs, he takes systematic action to achieve what he deems a Christan vision. He has nearly destroyed the women's health infrastructure in our state, closing half of the abortion clinics with more on the way -- leaving none in some of the state's largest cities. An attorney on his staff by the name of Diane Brey is dedicated to clinic closures. This coordinated effort, involving the legislature, activists, and multiple state agencies, is as organized as it is frightening.
I encourage the Times to request communications between Kasich's office -- particularly his attorneys -- and the Ohio Right to Life as well as the Ohio Department of Health. To this day they refuse to release the latter, but the former begins to open the curtain on an ugly truth -- and the types of people who will be part of a John Kasich administration. I also encourage you to interview Roy Croy, the former head of licensing at ODH.
Let me be clear: No one else on that stage is a greater danger to women's health than John Kasich.
I encourage the Times to request communications between Kasich's office -- particularly his attorneys -- and the Ohio Right to Life as well as the Ohio Department of Health. To this day they refuse to release the latter, but the former begins to open the curtain on an ugly truth -- and the types of people who will be part of a John Kasich administration. I also encourage you to interview Roy Croy, the former head of licensing at ODH.
Let me be clear: No one else on that stage is a greater danger to women's health than John Kasich.
49
John H. is correct. I would only add that Kasich has appointed Mike Gonidakis, who has absolutely no medical credentials to the previously non-partisan Ohio State Medical Board. Gonidakis is President of Ohio Right to Life. Very sad. Ohio's Attorney General, Mike DeWine, also has a vendetta against abortion rights and Planned Parenthood, wasting state resources on witch hunts. Women are not faring well under Kasich's administration.
20
I blame this whole year's political mess on Baskin Robbins, and their giving our nation the belief that ice cream can really come in 31 more flavors than just chocolate and vanilla, when those are really the only two that satisfy. The same thing happened after Techicolor came out and the same old black and white world suddenly got shown in color. Life didn't change, just the picture of it looked like it did. So what was there really to be gained, other than making our own real lives just look that much drabber?
Thanks Hollywood.
Either Kasich or Clinton will both keep the car on the road just fine, considering the route we're on. Roads probably don't even exist yet for the way all the other drivers are talking, so why talk about them? And maybe the road we're on now is as good as any road can get, considering what we drive on them. No matter how many switches and amounts of chrome they've ever put on a car since they first came out, all of them still have only four wheels. Gravity and physics are such pesky realities.
Thanks Hollywood.
Either Kasich or Clinton will both keep the car on the road just fine, considering the route we're on. Roads probably don't even exist yet for the way all the other drivers are talking, so why talk about them? And maybe the road we're on now is as good as any road can get, considering what we drive on them. No matter how many switches and amounts of chrome they've ever put on a car since they first came out, all of them still have only four wheels. Gravity and physics are such pesky realities.
5
I guess when the establishment paper of record selects the Democratic Party establishment candidate, it makes sense to endorse one of the weakest candidates of the opposing party. Yet both endorsements are merely a desperate attempt to cling to the status quo.
1
The problem with Kasich is that the other candidates are so far off the deep end that it makes him appear to be sane when he is no such thing. But ultimately, the bigger problem is not with the Republican candidates but with the Republican Voters. That they believe any of these candidates - or the ideas they express - should be in the White House is the really, really scary part.
29
I agree with this endorsement. I dislike Kasich tremendously; yet, uniquely among the surviving Republican candidates, he doesn't make me shudder in fear or want to vomit. So I hope he does well; I doubt he will.
I will not vote for a Republican in the presidential election of 2016. However if John Kasich became the Republican nomination for president and won, I would respect and support him as our president of the United States. I cannot say that about any other Republican candidate. I once thought that Jeb Bush would be an honorable Republican candidate, but his trash-talking about President Obama sickens me. Pundits, who think they know everything, usually say that that's all a part of politics. It seems to be okay for political candidates to go around saying that our public servants are "stupid" and "the worst ever" and "disrespectful" when none of these accusations are true.
I wonder whether honesty, integrity, sincerity, thoughtfulness, empathy, and compassion will ever again be valued by the American public?
I wonder whether honesty, integrity, sincerity, thoughtfulness, empathy, and compassion will ever again be valued by the American public?
2
Yes, Kasich for sure over the rest of that sorry lot - executive experience in govt., not a crook, no demagoguery, no bellicose chest thumping, and realistic about the need to compromise with the opposite party - in other words, the adult in the red room.
1
If the trending of current pools is remotely accurate the Republican Party will nominate Donald Trump for President. Those same pools tell us that his base is largely white folks without college degrees. They also tell us that his supporters don't want information or policies as much as they want an authority figure who will just make everything "ok." What Vance Packard called, "A Nation of Sheep."
Hillary Clinton is also a flawed candidate but she clearly understands the world as it is and has the depth of experience to lead our nation forward. She is not the candidate of no-information voters nor a demagogue who campaigns by fear and intimidation.
This is more than an election as it will determine whether our country is led by an angry narcissist with his itchy finger on the button or a person with the gravitas and knowledge to navigate through ever-troubled waters.
Were I a believer in Armageddon, I would frame Mr. Trump as the end of days. His contempt for all of us is obvious - wake up out there all of you who just want someone to make it better - it doesn't work that way and you know it.
Hillary Clinton is also a flawed candidate but she clearly understands the world as it is and has the depth of experience to lead our nation forward. She is not the candidate of no-information voters nor a demagogue who campaigns by fear and intimidation.
This is more than an election as it will determine whether our country is led by an angry narcissist with his itchy finger on the button or a person with the gravitas and knowledge to navigate through ever-troubled waters.
Were I a believer in Armageddon, I would frame Mr. Trump as the end of days. His contempt for all of us is obvious - wake up out there all of you who just want someone to make it better - it doesn't work that way and you know it.
3
If I'm an GOP voter of acceptably good conscience, how is it possible that I could use my ballot in favour of any one of the current GOP front runners without recognizing at the same time that I've decided to hand over the reins of first world power to a prototypical kleptocrat?
How could one ignore that his or her political party was in need of a comprehensive reorg while in the same moment contribute to a certain fatal blow to their country's hard-won prominence?
Why would they invite almost certain doom from putting a full-on quack at the head of the decision making chain? A few reasons why:
A) The voter is a One Percenter for whom finance has become a loaded crapshoot that always comes up sevens for themselves, the rest be damned? To destroy the very thing that bestows your riches?
B) The voter has shut out all semblance of an adult's sense of consequence? I.e. Low information = not knowing any better = spoiled ballot? The voter assumes a right without an iota of responsibility?
C) The voter can't bring him/herself to voting Democrat? The fate of the entire entreprise reduced to an infantile us-vs-them calculus?
In a healthy democracy none of the above makes any sense whatsoever. Relatively more sensible to stay home on election day.
How could one ignore that his or her political party was in need of a comprehensive reorg while in the same moment contribute to a certain fatal blow to their country's hard-won prominence?
Why would they invite almost certain doom from putting a full-on quack at the head of the decision making chain? A few reasons why:
A) The voter is a One Percenter for whom finance has become a loaded crapshoot that always comes up sevens for themselves, the rest be damned? To destroy the very thing that bestows your riches?
B) The voter has shut out all semblance of an adult's sense of consequence? I.e. Low information = not knowing any better = spoiled ballot? The voter assumes a right without an iota of responsibility?
C) The voter can't bring him/herself to voting Democrat? The fate of the entire entreprise reduced to an infantile us-vs-them calculus?
In a healthy democracy none of the above makes any sense whatsoever. Relatively more sensible to stay home on election day.
2
Our political process has become so polarized that dichotomous thinking dominates both the media and the general citizenry. In this atmosphere, and especially in the primary season, this leads to witch hunts in the supposed defense of someone's narrow definition of party orthodoxy. That is why a candidate like Governor Kasich can poll so low for the GOP nomination, and yet be the very type of candidate capable of winning the general election. As a resident of Ohio, I laugh at the so-called conservatives in the Republican Party who see Kasich as too "liberal" based on his decision to expand Medicaid in the state. If one looks at the big picture, the Governor is clearly and significantly right of center politically. That said, he is also a pragmatist who understands that mature governance in a complex society requires less shouting and more genuine dialogue, and that sometimes you do the right thing simply because it's the right thing, even if it's not politically expedient. I haven't always agreed with the Governor's decisions in Ohio (in what grownup world would this ever be the case), but I have always trusted that he leads with maturity, integrity, and faith in what we can do when we work together. And that is Mr. Kasich's trump card.
3
Interesting! The NYTimes is recommending a potential candidate whose positions they have barely, if ever, given any coverage. Maybe they're just hedging their bets in the event that one of the many better funded nutcase republicans wins the nomination, they wont be seen as playing a significant role in the outcome, one way or another. If Kasich is such a viable candidate, how about giving the public more info about him and his point of view. Also, as an Afro-american, I'd like to see more on his, and the other candidates thoughts regarding the disgraceful and frightening rise in the police executions of unarmed Black civilians- the most serious indicator of the impending death of our democracy.
3
Kasich is less toxic than the other GOP candidates and likely would be less of a disaster than Bush Cheney, but that is faint praise. He made his millions as a lobbyist for Lehman just before the mortgage bond financial collapse. As a congressman, he opposed Bush -1 's and Clinton's budget deals to raise taxes, in fact, called them both disasters but this is what balanced the federal budget. Oh, he showed up in 2007 to claim credit for the balanced budget ammendment, but by then, all of the hard work and sacrifice and difficult votes had been taken. Which he vociferously opposed. And he is way too socially conservative for mainstream America. Still he would not be the disaster of Bush Rubio , Trump, Cruz, Christie, Fiorina etc. I hope he gets the nomination, because then Americans would actually have a choice on both sides. Clinton or Sanders, , whoever wins will govern sanely. Very few GOP candidates can make that claim.
2
Agreed. Kasich is the best GOP candidate for president this election year.
Unfortunately I don't agree with the NYT endorsement of Clinton. While I like Bernie, I greatly respect how he has run his campaign, and I appreciate that he has raised many important issues, I don't agree with the majority of his solutions. So I don't as of yet have a favorite on the Democrat side.
That being said if Cruz, Trump or Rubio are the GOP nominees, I will reconsider and vote for any of the Democrat candidates.
Unfortunately I don't agree with the NYT endorsement of Clinton. While I like Bernie, I greatly respect how he has run his campaign, and I appreciate that he has raised many important issues, I don't agree with the majority of his solutions. So I don't as of yet have a favorite on the Democrat side.
That being said if Cruz, Trump or Rubio are the GOP nominees, I will reconsider and vote for any of the Democrat candidates.
2
I'm a Democrat but I want a Republican with brains, experience and civility to run in opposition. The only one I'd remotely consider is Kasich. The country is not well served by a GOP failing to field top grade candidates equipped with realistic ideas and more pride in their country than personal ambition.
2
The ever increasing ease of mass communication, the ever shortening news cycle, coupled with the ever increasing degree of direct democracy -- the latter strongly resisted by the founding fathers, has finally led to this national crisis in which not a single candidate is both plausible and possessive of integrity. The only remaining hope is that Michael Bloomberg will run and succeed -- a very slim proposition.
2
I am quite positive this will not help Kasich, because if he does manage to get traction in being the responsible alternative this endorsement will be thrown in his face. Yet just like Huntsman four years before him, his credentials are impeccable. A Governor who knows how to run a state with admirable fiscal accomplishments and very popular with his voters. But the train has left the station for this type of Republican. Carnival barkers and extreme right wingers are now drawing the cheers.
6
I'm a died in the wool Democrat. Kasich has been a good governor for our state of OH. I will not vote for him - I will vote for whatever Democrat is nominated - Bernie or Hillary. But he does not scare me. I want the best Republican candidate out there to run. He may - God forbid - win.
2
Um, no. As someone living in Ohio, no. He's been awful for the state - anti-woman, anti-environment, anti-middle class. Wolf in sheep's clothing.
1
Given America's two party system, the ideal is that each party nominates the best among its contenders so as to provide the American electorate two reasonable options in the general election. In this sense, the question is not who is best absolutely speaking but who is best in comparison to the other aspirants in each party.
Good job, NYT, in providing your readers with a thougthful deliberation about who is best suited for the presidency in the GOP field.
Good job, NYT, in providing your readers with a thougthful deliberation about who is best suited for the presidency in the GOP field.
Although not a Republican and having never in my more than 50 years of voting supported a Republican presidential candidate, I think you get it right about John Kasich.
I especially like the fact that Kasich jettisoned the Republican ideology when it came to "Obamacare" and embraced Medicaid expansion. Am sure many Republicans want to burn him at the stake for his heresy, but he is the only one that has manifested any good sense and offers any hope for bipartisanship in dealing with issues.
Just wish we had a few Republicans like him in the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate, legislative chambers controlled by benighted Republicans that continue to reject Medicaid expansion and deny medical coverage to 400,000 Virginians, mostly working poor folks.
I especially like the fact that Kasich jettisoned the Republican ideology when it came to "Obamacare" and embraced Medicaid expansion. Am sure many Republicans want to burn him at the stake for his heresy, but he is the only one that has manifested any good sense and offers any hope for bipartisanship in dealing with issues.
Just wish we had a few Republicans like him in the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate, legislative chambers controlled by benighted Republicans that continue to reject Medicaid expansion and deny medical coverage to 400,000 Virginians, mostly working poor folks.
3
No, you don't. He's a right-wing extremist who is just better at camouflaging his actions. Not someone you want running anything...
2
The "the only plausible choice" for our country is to avoid the GOP field entirely. What they offer is nothing but xenophobia and war. It's a sad spectacle and one that undermines our democracy. We should have choices that give people options as to how to move forward...the operative term word being "forward," not backward. The GOP field, even Kasich (given what's he's done to education in Ohio, etc.) leave little choice to anyone who cares about the future for our children and our nation.
9
Regrettably, as we've observed during the GOP debates, John Kasich is a rational GOP voice "crying in the wilderness." A wilderness dominated by those of our fellow citizens who sadly have one thing on their mind. Namely returning to a world dominated by white Anglo Saxon Christians where abortion is illegal, war is preferable to diplomacy, only heterogeneous marriage is okay, there are no restrictions on guns, and immigrants, as well as, the LGBT community remain in the closet or in the shadows.
Those who fit that restrictive return to the "glories" of the past bill go by the names of Ted, Donald, Marco and their ideological partisan cousins.
It remain inconceivable to me at least that someone who by comparison has greater insight and level of awareness and who sports an open ethical mind and way of thinking still claims that red is his favorite color rather than blue.
Those who fit that restrictive return to the "glories" of the past bill go by the names of Ted, Donald, Marco and their ideological partisan cousins.
It remain inconceivable to me at least that someone who by comparison has greater insight and level of awareness and who sports an open ethical mind and way of thinking still claims that red is his favorite color rather than blue.
4
John Kasich boasts of creating a surplus and a bloated rainy day fund by slashing taxes on the wealthy and drastically cutting school funding causing local school boards to ask for levies that homeowners can not afford, but are passed in order to keep their schools functioning. He has let the operators of charter schools steal money that is sorely needed for public eduction. He pretends to be a moderate, but the chances are if he were elected president he could be as bad as Tump or Cruz.
19
Reading some of the cogent comments here by going further than Kasich's selective election banter, from Koch Bros support and bashing public unions, to his pro-life conditions precedent and anti-middle class tax positions...least objectionable Kasich is not an endorsement. It is MORE a NONDORSEMENT.
1
The next President most likely will have at least one Supreme Court nomination to make. As governor, Kasich has a record of appointing right wing extremists to placate the Tea Party wing of his party. For example, he appointed Mike Gonidakis to the usually non-partisan Ohio State Medical Board. Gonidakis has absolutely no medical qualifications, but is President of Ohio Right to Life. Kasich appointed Debe Tehrar to the Ohio State Board of Education. The wife of a Republican state legislator, she tried to censor Toni Morrison's books in Ohio high schools, saying she wouldn't want her grandchildren to read them, and she also posted an item on her Facebook page that compared President Obama to Hitler. Kasich has also appointed a creationist, Cathye Flory, to the State Board of Education. In considering whom to support for President, there is perhaps no more important long-term consideration than the likely Supreme Court nominee(s) that would be selected by the candidate. Given his record here in Ohio, Kasich does not inspire any confidence.
14
Play fair. Trump charged that TRUE unemployment was far higher than the 5% official rate because it doesn’t factor in a labor force participation rate lower than it’s been since 1977, at about 63%. And this participation rate isn’t so low because of boomers on the verge of retiring – it includes an immense number of people of all ages but particularly 45-60 with practically no savings and whose skills are no longer in the demand they were a decade ago.
Unlike the predictable but sensible endorsement of Hillary, I’m astonished at the Times’s chutzpah in endorsing John Kasich on the Republican side. Gov. Kasich is a good man who would make both an acceptable and competent president, but he will not be nominated unless he emerges as the only compromise nominee at a convention hopelessly deadlocked over other candidates. What’s more, among the rational alternatives on the right (Bush, Rubio, Christie, Kasich), he is the candidate least likely to present Hillary with any trouble in November. So, this also appears to be an ideologically self-interested endorsement.
Consider that the Republican candidate who would force Hillary into the most productive national conversation about priorities, domestically and in the world, is Jeb Bush, who clearly has the most practicable programmatic offerings and priorities. If the Times is intent on endorsing a Republican currently polling as an underdog, it should highlight the one likely to give Hillary the most consequential fight.
Unlike the predictable but sensible endorsement of Hillary, I’m astonished at the Times’s chutzpah in endorsing John Kasich on the Republican side. Gov. Kasich is a good man who would make both an acceptable and competent president, but he will not be nominated unless he emerges as the only compromise nominee at a convention hopelessly deadlocked over other candidates. What’s more, among the rational alternatives on the right (Bush, Rubio, Christie, Kasich), he is the candidate least likely to present Hillary with any trouble in November. So, this also appears to be an ideologically self-interested endorsement.
Consider that the Republican candidate who would force Hillary into the most productive national conversation about priorities, domestically and in the world, is Jeb Bush, who clearly has the most practicable programmatic offerings and priorities. If the Times is intent on endorsing a Republican currently polling as an underdog, it should highlight the one likely to give Hillary the most consequential fight.
3
How odd. I had no idea that an imperative in making a primary endorsement was either (1) trying to pick an "equal fight" between two parties or (2) using polling numbers in any fashion, such as limiting oneself to current poll leaders. My conception was always that one looks at any given race individually (here each respective primary) and identifies the best candidate according to one's criteria. That seems to be exactly what the NYT has done. It's one thing to say that you don't agree with the choice and to outline your reasons another candidate is better based on policy, etc. but to say your reasons are the candidate isn't polling well enough or hasn't polled well enough yet against a putative front-runner in the other primary is loony.
For my part, I think Kasich (compared to Bush) could force just as productive a conversation on priorities, and his economic plans aren't based (as much) on fantasies like greatly reducing taxes on the super-rich and expecting magical growth to cover for it. What you call chutzpah I would call principled spine.
For my part, I think Kasich (compared to Bush) could force just as productive a conversation on priorities, and his economic plans aren't based (as much) on fantasies like greatly reducing taxes on the super-rich and expecting magical growth to cover for it. What you call chutzpah I would call principled spine.
Nice try, but John Kasich will beat Hillary, or any democrat in this race. Why?..Because the votes that elect the President in purple electoral college States will be moderates who honor trust over gender, or party. John Kasich will be a breath of fresh air to all the others carrying grudge matches into this election.
Analysis of the LFPR from the man who only a week ago made it clear he didn't know what it actually was, claiming in a comment that it is "the percentage of workers who wish to work and are capable of working who actually do have a job". How ironic....
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/why-donald-trump-keeps-ly...
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/why-donald-trump-keeps-ly...
1
John Kasich 2016
A reasonable man.....when he's not signing Forced Pregnancy Laws in his spare Christian time.
A reasonable man.....when he's not signing Forced Pregnancy Laws in his spare Christian time.
323
.....and when he's not union busting. I'll say this for him, though; when he tried and Ohio's people rebuffed him 61 to 39%, he didn't go back and try again. But there's no guarantee he wouldn't try the same as president, and there are no federal referenda.
As the editors say, Kasich is not a moderate. He just plays one in TV debates. At least I can see the Times' endorsement of Hillary Clinton, flawed as it is. But why would it endorse any of the candidates that represent an extremist party? The Editorial Board should have just sat this one out.
As the editors say, Kasich is not a moderate. He just plays one in TV debates. At least I can see the Times' endorsement of Hillary Clinton, flawed as it is. But why would it endorse any of the candidates that represent an extremist party? The Editorial Board should have just sat this one out.
20
or when he refuses to seek food stamp waivers from the federal government for Ohio cities with high (black) unemployment rates while seeking waivers for rural (white) areas with similar unemployment rates.
1
Hey..he only wants to take us back to 1930, many of the rest of the republicans like Cruz, Huck et all want to take us back to 1830....
1
Just wait, America. We haven't seen the REAL republican candidates yet. This is just a BIG democracy-destroying money masters media circus to keep the masses entertained. Watch what happens at the republican convention and beware,
6
Ever hear of a guy named Don Quixote?
3
Sure have, BobR...his real name is Bernie Sanders
2
Wait, who's this guy?
7
*Recharge
Fixed that for you, NYT.
Fixed that for you, NYT.
I understand the journalistic need for balance - Dem. H. Clinton Repub. Kasich. But really - Kasich is just the least rotten of all the apples falling from that self-serving, big business republican tree. He is not a friend to the working person and woe to us if he is - somehow - elected president.
84
You've recognized a sheep in wolf's clothing. You are spot on.
1
It is quite telling that only two paragraphs of this editorial establish why Kasich earned the endorsement, while the crux established the process of elimination. Kasich will not be the Republican nominee, but this should be a wakeup call to the GOP how far from the mainstream their endless list of candidates are.
24
This article along with the HRC article are very much in concert with my thoughts.
While Gov. Kasich is very conservative, he is policy oriented and has and would continue to work with both sides of the isle. He is a reasonable person on many occasions. He is too conservative for me, but I would not be too frightened if he was POTUS. I would not worry about the nuclear football, that we would stop all immigration of Muslims and go off into many new wars without some serious consideration. And, I would like to see a serious debate between him and HRC. I understand that Gov. Kasich and HRC are friendly and have worked together in the past. I like that! And, Gov. Kasich is the only one of the GOP candidates that is not completely nuts! I believe that HRC will become POTUS and think she will do a pretty good job, I will vote for her if she is the nominee.
Comments?
While Gov. Kasich is very conservative, he is policy oriented and has and would continue to work with both sides of the isle. He is a reasonable person on many occasions. He is too conservative for me, but I would not be too frightened if he was POTUS. I would not worry about the nuclear football, that we would stop all immigration of Muslims and go off into many new wars without some serious consideration. And, I would like to see a serious debate between him and HRC. I understand that Gov. Kasich and HRC are friendly and have worked together in the past. I like that! And, Gov. Kasich is the only one of the GOP candidates that is not completely nuts! I believe that HRC will become POTUS and think she will do a pretty good job, I will vote for her if she is the nominee.
Comments?
78
I would think that the NYTimes editorial board would pick Donald Trump. The board must know that most republican and independent voters will likely do the opposite of what the NYTimes editorial board thinks. The NYTimes has little credibility with most Americans, and it's well known as a very biased publication that can't be trusted, just like Mrs. Clinton.
18
NYT not having credibility with "most" Americans is a fantasy spoon fed to you by Fox News. The Times doesn't hide it's liberal slant, but still does what conservative fake news organizations do not: report fact based news. Similarly, the editorial board cannot worry about blind, knee-jerk reactions to their selection of a Republican nominee. Kasich, who I disagree with on most policy issues, is the only sane, serious candidate in a broad Republican field. It is not hard to envision Mr. Kasich as a dignified statesman representing this country and all it's citizens. It is impossible to envision that with any other candidate.
The nytimes is one of the only respectable papers in existence. People who say otherwise just don't like the facts.
Quantumtangles,
I'm forwarding this message to you from the NY Times editorial board: they do not. repeat Do NOT, want you to shut your pie hole. Think about it.
On a personal note, you obviously feel the same way regarding the Times' endorsement of Kasich as I and many other Americans feel about the Donald getting the thumbs up from Vladimir Putin and Sarah Palin. Wow. A murderous ex-KGB thug and an imbecilic mama grizzly endorse your party's frontrunner. Why do I suspect that any expert or organization that doesn't support your favorite candidate would strike you as horribly biased?
You can go to Wikipedia for a long list of other Trump supporters and it reads like a hit parade of whack-jobs, wash-outs, dead-enders, has-beens and never-have- beens. Dennis Rodman? Yeah! Ted Nugent? Yeah! Gary Busey? Sure! Charlie Sheen? Hell yes! And assorted obscure low-end politicians. And this motley crew looks absolutely stellar compared to Ted Cruz's endorsers. Wait, I almost forgot. This year the Republicans think things like experience, judgement and rational proposals to help our country move ahead (not backwards) are reasons for a candidate to be Un-qualified for office. When you look at it like that, Mike Tyson's endorsement of Trump makes perfect sense.
I'm forwarding this message to you from the NY Times editorial board: they do not. repeat Do NOT, want you to shut your pie hole. Think about it.
On a personal note, you obviously feel the same way regarding the Times' endorsement of Kasich as I and many other Americans feel about the Donald getting the thumbs up from Vladimir Putin and Sarah Palin. Wow. A murderous ex-KGB thug and an imbecilic mama grizzly endorse your party's frontrunner. Why do I suspect that any expert or organization that doesn't support your favorite candidate would strike you as horribly biased?
You can go to Wikipedia for a long list of other Trump supporters and it reads like a hit parade of whack-jobs, wash-outs, dead-enders, has-beens and never-have- beens. Dennis Rodman? Yeah! Ted Nugent? Yeah! Gary Busey? Sure! Charlie Sheen? Hell yes! And assorted obscure low-end politicians. And this motley crew looks absolutely stellar compared to Ted Cruz's endorsers. Wait, I almost forgot. This year the Republicans think things like experience, judgement and rational proposals to help our country move ahead (not backwards) are reasons for a candidate to be Un-qualified for office. When you look at it like that, Mike Tyson's endorsement of Trump makes perfect sense.
1
Mr. Kasich brags about his success with the Ohio economy. How good would the Ohio economy be if President Obama had not saved the auto industry?
238
Oh so true. He was against it but accepts the good results of it as if it was his policy.
1
Readers of this editorial might want to check out Gail Collin's op-ed . Her humour and irony help ease the pain
5
A New York Times endorsement for John Kasich? For Republican primary voters, a Times endorsement is surely Kasich's kiss of death.
5
To all you...
"I'm a democrat/independent but will vote for Kasich... anyone but Hillary" frauds out there.... News Flash.... fewer and fewer are fooled by your right-wing treachery/strategy....
1. I don't believe you're a democrat or an independent .
2. The sane among us are turning on your disingenuous comments....
3. We KNOW why you fear her.... she's way tougher than you...
You aren't trying to beat her, you're trying to beat democracy itself....
"I'm a democrat/independent but will vote for Kasich... anyone but Hillary" frauds out there.... News Flash.... fewer and fewer are fooled by your right-wing treachery/strategy....
1. I don't believe you're a democrat or an independent .
2. The sane among us are turning on your disingenuous comments....
3. We KNOW why you fear her.... she's way tougher than you...
You aren't trying to beat her, you're trying to beat democracy itself....
30
Your privilege. I also don't believe the commenters who say they are "lifelong Republicans" and so offended by Cruz/Trump/their own shadow that they will leave the party and never go back.
I'm reading a bunch of mildly complimentary comments regarding Kasich's sanity vs. the rest of the GOP field, and I agree with that.
UNFORTUNATELY...
A GOP President comes with a GOP cabinet, GOP advisers, etc etc etc. One person of moderate sanity makes almost zero difference when they drag the whole clown car with them into the oval office.
Stay away from the radioactive Republican party, they're worse than they were during the W Bush years. Don't give them the chance to demonstrate how.
UNFORTUNATELY...
A GOP President comes with a GOP cabinet, GOP advisers, etc etc etc. One person of moderate sanity makes almost zero difference when they drag the whole clown car with them into the oval office.
Stay away from the radioactive Republican party, they're worse than they were during the W Bush years. Don't give them the chance to demonstrate how.
59
Well, that did it for Kasich. An endorsement from the NYT for a Republican takes him out of the race.
11
Right,,NYT should have endorsed Cruz.
1
This EDITORIAL is way too sophisticated to be helpful to the NYT reader (i.e. the voter for our next President). Simplicity in thought and selfish assessment of "what is best for me" will decide who our next President is: The Donald. Very sad.
3
At least you got the Republican endorsement correct.
7
The NYT Editorial Board just gave the death knell to Kasich. Some how I don`t see his bunch jumping up and down in joy over this endorsement. If they are jumping up and down it is to stomp on this endorsement. Hope they bought the paper because laptops are expensive to replace.
4
G.P. At the very least, Gov. Kasich's name will be out there and hopefully the media will give him some air time as a result of this endorsement.
Donald Trump has been correct so many times this gets really embarrassing when reporters, who obviously are slanting their OPINIONS don't keep up with the facts at hand. In my own city we know unemployment is much higher than the Feds are admitting. Just count the number of people on the streets begging!
Donald Trump is right: America's real unemployment rate is 40%
http://fortune.com/2015/09/14/donald-trump-unemployment-rate-jobs/
Donald Trump is right: America's real unemployment rate is 40%
http://fortune.com/2015/09/14/donald-trump-unemployment-rate-jobs/
5
Why not "Clinton/Kasich, 2016" Go ahead, make my day!
7
It says something when Ohio's idiot governor, who's anti-environment, anti-woman, and anti-middle class, is the best of a lot of fools...
216
I'm an ex-Ohioan. I've been disappointed in my home state. Ohio went for Bush, although I believe in the 2004 election that Kerry beat Bush, but that the voting in Ohio was tampered with.
2
Like Hillary...vote time phony conversion on the pipeline, smearing the women Bill assaulted and vote time conversion on TPP which she helped put together.
Hillary and Kasich are awful choices...it is just more of them same.
Hillary and Kasich are awful choices...it is just more of them same.
1
I agree, Steve.
1
What the media, NYT, Wapo, still do not get in that there is a REVOLUTION going on, after 8 years of Bush and 8 years of Obama gross mismanagement.
The American people NO longer trust Congress, Obama, the media whom the American people lump into what is called 'the establishment'.
We think the establishment is corrupt, inept, and lied to us.
Hence the appeal of Bernie and the Donald.
The American people NO longer trust Congress, Obama, the media whom the American people lump into what is called 'the establishment'.
We think the establishment is corrupt, inept, and lied to us.
Hence the appeal of Bernie and the Donald.
11
Yes the people are right to be sick of the corruption and/or incompetence. Voting in The Donald, however, is not a solution. Removing all power from government and giving it to the presidency, going to war with the free press, and spreading your own false propaganda (he ranks behind only Ben Carson in number of debate lies) is what dictators do. How ironic the same people who call Obama a dictator over Obamacare will be voting for trump.
3
Hillary's the most moderate republican running...why not endorse her for the Republican nomination as well? NYT endorsement of her for Democratic nomination was specious and thin, why stop there?
47
She is pro-choice. A Republican candidate has to "claim to be" pro-life, on abortion that is.
But she is certainly hawkish and tied to money so perhaps the Republicans would accept her as one of them.
But she is certainly hawkish and tied to money so perhaps the Republicans would accept her as one of them.
Genius.
Beware America. None of the "billionaire-backed" republican/libertarian/tea party supposed candidates will be the party's choice. This is just a smoke-screen. BIG democracy-destroying money masters always have a plan the public doesn't see and my money is on a republican convention that will miraculously select "Young Gun" Paul Ryan - with his new Lincoln look-alike beard - as their nominee with Ms. Nikki Haley as his running mate. Ask yourselves, "Why did John Boehner suddenly give up his cherished Speaker of the House job? Why did Kevin McCarthy pass on it? Why did Paul Ryan, who originally said he did not want the job, capitulate to "save America"?" Why did Nikki Haley suddenly get the confederate flag taken down and give the "reasonable" republican response" to President Obama's final State of the Union speech? Because it was part of a bigger plan by BIG democracy-destroying money masters to get one of their operatives into the White House to give us more financial inequality and further destroy OUR social safety net. Virginia voters got rid of Eric Cantor. Now California and Wisconsin need to get rid of Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan - the supposed "young guns" with American democracy in their cross-hairs. DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY REPUBLICAN/LIBERTARIAN/TEA PARTY candidate for any office in the land. They are all owned by the same democracy-destroying money masters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Republican_Congressional_Committe...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Republican_Congressional_Committe...
11
While Kasich is the best of a bad lot, people should do their homework before throwing their support to him. Although he balanced our State's budget, he did so at the expense of already struggling local governments by taking away funds that had long been the backbone of their budgets. He basically robbed Peter to pay Paul. His administration's sorry role in corrupt charter schools, which siphon millions annually away from higher performing regular public schools, is scandalous. Moreover, he has supported numerous legislative measures that undermine women's equality and rights. He also has done virtually nothing to address child poverty, which in Cincinnati stands at nearly 50%, second only to Detroit's child poverty level. Although he did give Ohio the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare, I sometimes cynically wonder if he did that to beef up his"compassionate" conservative credentials.
I will happily support Hillary Clinton over Gov. Kasich any day.
I will happily support Hillary Clinton over Gov. Kasich any day.
19
it is refreshing that The Times champions experience and intelligence as the qualifications for bring elected leader of the worlds most influential, powerful and economically strong nation.
during the race to the bottom we have been witness to thus far, the discourse has been centered around entertainment and ignorance. Most of all it has been centered around anger.
Anger is terrific for 10 seconds. get it off your chest. now address the underlying problem . we can then alleviate the anger. unless we follow such a path I am deeply afraid of the potential outcome
during the race to the bottom we have been witness to thus far, the discourse has been centered around entertainment and ignorance. Most of all it has been centered around anger.
Anger is terrific for 10 seconds. get it off your chest. now address the underlying problem . we can then alleviate the anger. unless we follow such a path I am deeply afraid of the potential outcome
8
I think Governor Kasich would be terrible for America, but he is the only sane option for the GOP.
Feel the Bern. Sanders 2016.
Feel the Bern. Sanders 2016.
10
Well that's the final nail in the Kasich coffin.
The NYT endorsement is probably not welcomed by his corner. Watch the slinging arrows with the usual invective.
The NYT endorsement is probably not welcomed by his corner. Watch the slinging arrows with the usual invective.
3
Kasich is the only Republican candidate who is even halfway sane. For that reason alone, he doesn't stand a chance of getting the nomination.
5
"And Mr. Kasich is no moderate."
That's putting it moderately. Kasich is by your own admission the lesser of many evils. It's a sad commentary on both the "Times" and our times when a politician such as Kasich is merited an endorsement.
"None of the above" would have shown far more character and moral strength, Editorial Board...
That's putting it moderately. Kasich is by your own admission the lesser of many evils. It's a sad commentary on both the "Times" and our times when a politician such as Kasich is merited an endorsement.
"None of the above" would have shown far more character and moral strength, Editorial Board...
4
The 6th paragraph sounds like it was taken out of a campaign ad.
There are no moderates in the GOP race, only varying degrees of extreme.
There are no moderates in the GOP race, only varying degrees of extreme.
8
That Kasich is the least objectionable candidate is simply not good enough. He is scarily conservative and waaaay to religious to occupy the secular office of the presidency. I believe I read yesterday that the Ohio legislature has voted to defund Planned Parenthood and that he will sign it. Yet Republicans pretend there is no war on women. Let the GOP nominate one of the truly crazy guys, they'll be that much more sure to lose in November, and it will at least be more entertaining (albeit in a scary way).
10
The best anyone can say about John Kasich is that he may, just may, not be the serially-tendentious lunatic that characterizes the remaining clowns in the cavalcade of calamity. If, however, in the highly unlikely event that he were to become the GOP presidential nominee, he would head a Party rooted in mean-spirited, balefully destructive lunacy.
No thanks!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
No thanks!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
8
Kasich's first act as governor was to reject federal funding to restore Amtrak service from Cincinnati to Cleveland, something his predecessor and President Obama had worked hard to secure. His act was one of pure spite, designed to taunt the president and made in concert with Gov. Scott Walker, who killed rail service from Chicago to Madison. Creating alternatives to the automobile would hurt the Koch Bros' bottom line, and by removing that possibility, Kasich set the tone for his tenure by setting Ohio back.
17
It was actually based on traffic projections that did not justify the expenditure. How many people go from Downtown Cleveland to Downtown Cincinnati? Most people can drive it in three hours and want their car with them.
3
Cincinnati and Cleveland are a lot farther apart than three hours. It's Ohio's refusal to ever look beyond a 1950s worldview that has kept it down. Many could and would still drive the six hours from Cleveland to Cincinnati. But many others would have escaped the traffic congestion with the train, and the center cities could have redeveloped much like their East Coast counterparts instead of being the sad ghost towns that Kasich has helped them keep. I grew up in Ohio and like much of my generation who has left, I hope never to return. Kasich vision is a sad Ohio for the rest of the country.
2
Six hours? Really? Ohio is basically a 220 mile square, with a very fast interstate between the cities.
Kasich is the only reasonable choice - the only moderate conservative who can grab enough centrist Democrats and Independents to actually win - the only option that combines levelheadedness with executive experience at both city and state levels, while serving many years in the federal government. Like Jon Huntsman in the prior election (the best option to beat Obama), if the GOP doesn't start moving towards the center, they will never win another election. GOP: stop listening to the likes of Reince Prebius and Karl Rove, start listening to the electorate - all of the electorate - if you ever want to win another election that is. Of course, the Democrats will still likely win because of the way they have been able to connect with women and minorities while helping to define progressive values, but Kasich would give them a run for the money.
1
Everything said about the Republican candidates in this editorial is true. Still, it is the kiss of political death for Kasich. Wouldn't be surprised if he denounces the Times for endorsing him. You may be certain that his opponents will never let him forget it.
4
Won't happen. Mr. Kasich, while moderate compared to the froathers on the stage, hasn't the appeal or the message to elevate himself. He would lose in a massive Hillary landslide.
5
I also believe Gov. Kasich is the least objectionable Republican candidate.
6
While I did not support the EB's endorsement of Mrs. Clinton to be the Democrat's standard bearer, I do believe the Board 'got it right' on its support for Mr. Kasich. Of all the suitors of the Republican nomination, Mr. Kasich brings the best of an historical record as well as one who does not allow his integrity to be compromised. Deep, steady, thoughtful, is the way I see Mr. Kasich. Now, if it's possible for me to accept and support his ideas on how he thinks we, as a nation, should behave...
1
Mr Balanced Budget, Kasich, is better than the Shutdown Czar Cruz or the Gold-Standard posse but his economic plan would also bring on a Depression. The Herbert Hoover choir is singing a dirge.
I am going to have to go with...none of the above.
I am going to have to go with...none of the above.
13
Yes. Kasich vs. Clinton. That would be an election over actual realistic alternatives for governing the country. We'd like a debate over ideas, but not just wishful ideas (like having the Mexicans pay for a wall or Medicare for All). Clinton obviously has uncontested experience of different types at all levels of government (state, Senate, White House, international). Many have and will protest her ties to moneyed interests and her votes supporting the Bush military disaster. And of course she comes with the baggage of established GOP vitriol regarding Whitewater, Benghazi, emailgate.
Kasich will push to the right, but he won't try to ban abortions, bar Muslims from entering the country, or gut Medicare/Obamacare.
In the final analysis, Clinton and Kasich are moderate wrinkles on the status quo. Many Americans will feel that the status quo is anathema -- for social or economic reasons. However, given the remarkable set of challenges our country and world faces -- including climate change, ISIS, economic displacement -- marked shifts promulgated by less experienced or more dogmatic executives may not be advisable. Incremental change (along Obama lines) is preferable to revolutionary shifts.
I could live with either of these two patriotic Americans. We're not about to establish A City on the Hill or a socialist utopia. Let's get through the next 4 years without attempting cataclysmic change.
Kasich will push to the right, but he won't try to ban abortions, bar Muslims from entering the country, or gut Medicare/Obamacare.
In the final analysis, Clinton and Kasich are moderate wrinkles on the status quo. Many Americans will feel that the status quo is anathema -- for social or economic reasons. However, given the remarkable set of challenges our country and world faces -- including climate change, ISIS, economic displacement -- marked shifts promulgated by less experienced or more dogmatic executives may not be advisable. Incremental change (along Obama lines) is preferable to revolutionary shifts.
I could live with either of these two patriotic Americans. We're not about to establish A City on the Hill or a socialist utopia. Let's get through the next 4 years without attempting cataclysmic change.
5
Actually BEn, Kasich will almost certainly continue to make every effort to ban abortion, whether he remains in his current role or moves on (heaven forfend) to Washington.
He is on record as supporting a bill proposed in Ohio that would prohibit abortion for any woman who is carrying a foetus with Down's syndrome - I see it as far from a "moderate" position to force a woman to bear a child for whom she and her partner may be unable or unwilling to provide appropriate emotional, educational and medical care.
And as reported in the national press, the proposed bill would actually criminalize such abortions: any doctor performing one would not only lose his/her license but would also be subject to up to 18 months of incarceration.
So I'd argue that he's far from a mere "moderate wrinkle on the status quo" on the important issue of reproductive rights.
And you may want to look more closely at his other positions as well before deciding that you want to trust him on climate change, economic policy/workers' rights, Medicare, and Supreme Court nominations.
He is on record as supporting a bill proposed in Ohio that would prohibit abortion for any woman who is carrying a foetus with Down's syndrome - I see it as far from a "moderate" position to force a woman to bear a child for whom she and her partner may be unable or unwilling to provide appropriate emotional, educational and medical care.
And as reported in the national press, the proposed bill would actually criminalize such abortions: any doctor performing one would not only lose his/her license but would also be subject to up to 18 months of incarceration.
So I'd argue that he's far from a mere "moderate wrinkle on the status quo" on the important issue of reproductive rights.
And you may want to look more closely at his other positions as well before deciding that you want to trust him on climate change, economic policy/workers' rights, Medicare, and Supreme Court nominations.
4
I seriously don't even know where to start with your synopsis.
"That would be an election over actual realistic alternatives for governing the country."
Perhaps on social issues. I think you'd be extremely hard pressed to find differences in opinions between Hillary and Kasich on the economy and foreign policy. (Actually, I think Hillary would be more likely to start another war than Kasich).
"Kasich will push to the right, but he won't try to ban abortions..."
Why do you say that? It's been attempted here in Ohio, so why would he not support it nationally?
"In the final analysis, Clinton and Kasich are moderate wrinkles on the status quo."
What? They ARE the status quo.
You seem to tout experience a lot. So I assume you would vote for Dick Cheney. He has PLENTY of experience.
We've had incremental change for the past 40+ years: to the RIGHT. Don't forget that REAGAN - the patron Saint of the Right - passed gun control measures, an amnesty bill, raised taxes, increased the size of the government, increased the debt, AND was involved in a scandal (Iran-Contra). He would be considered a liberal by the GOP today. (Assuming they actually take into account the facts about Reagan and not the myths they believe.)
But you're allowed to have your opinion. Even if your opinion is to vote for the "NO WE CAN'T!" candidate over the "YES WE CAN".
"That would be an election over actual realistic alternatives for governing the country."
Perhaps on social issues. I think you'd be extremely hard pressed to find differences in opinions between Hillary and Kasich on the economy and foreign policy. (Actually, I think Hillary would be more likely to start another war than Kasich).
"Kasich will push to the right, but he won't try to ban abortions..."
Why do you say that? It's been attempted here in Ohio, so why would he not support it nationally?
"In the final analysis, Clinton and Kasich are moderate wrinkles on the status quo."
What? They ARE the status quo.
You seem to tout experience a lot. So I assume you would vote for Dick Cheney. He has PLENTY of experience.
We've had incremental change for the past 40+ years: to the RIGHT. Don't forget that REAGAN - the patron Saint of the Right - passed gun control measures, an amnesty bill, raised taxes, increased the size of the government, increased the debt, AND was involved in a scandal (Iran-Contra). He would be considered a liberal by the GOP today. (Assuming they actually take into account the facts about Reagan and not the myths they believe.)
But you're allowed to have your opinion. Even if your opinion is to vote for the "NO WE CAN'T!" candidate over the "YES WE CAN".
1
Donald Trump exposed the foibles and corruption of the Republican party in the same manner that Dorothy brought down the Wizard of OZ.
We are grateful for that but for absolutely nothing else about Donald.
We suspect he is at minute 14 of his 15 minutes of fame.
Buh bye.
We are grateful for that but for absolutely nothing else about Donald.
We suspect he is at minute 14 of his 15 minutes of fame.
Buh bye.
10
Do not be too"smug"......that one minute could be a changing and election point for the "Donald". We once got a George W. Bush, didn't we??????
wanna bet?
Only the Radical Republicans that fill the Clown Car could make Kasich appear "moderate".
I guess he is the least evil and objectionable of the Clowns. Is that the criteria for President of the United States now?
Either Sanders of Clinton would be a huge improvement for Americans. If only people get out and vote in the election, it would be a landslide.
I guess he is the least evil and objectionable of the Clowns. Is that the criteria for President of the United States now?
Either Sanders of Clinton would be a huge improvement for Americans. If only people get out and vote in the election, it would be a landslide.
35
A lot of good comments. It looks as through Kasich is similar to our governor (Michigan) and Wisconsin's in that they balanced state budgets hurting all state employees in about every way possible. Then each of allowed insurance companies to buy hospitals.
Then supported additional restrictions on women reproductive health and blocked same sex marriage. Overall spending on education is down in 3 states. If Kasich is indeed the best of the worst- I'm not sold on voting Republican yet. It seems like all the candidates are pushing the narrative of what we don't want, & what they are gonna deconstruct to make things better..
Cue the applause and cheering!
Meanwhile, no facts, fiscal plans, or Foreign policy agendas check out.
Sarah Palin as an endorsement?
Sorry got off track- Kasich not good enough. When did this editorial piece get written? It waited for the Saturday before Iowa to print? Ummm..
Then supported additional restrictions on women reproductive health and blocked same sex marriage. Overall spending on education is down in 3 states. If Kasich is indeed the best of the worst- I'm not sold on voting Republican yet. It seems like all the candidates are pushing the narrative of what we don't want, & what they are gonna deconstruct to make things better..
Cue the applause and cheering!
Meanwhile, no facts, fiscal plans, or Foreign policy agendas check out.
Sarah Palin as an endorsement?
Sorry got off track- Kasich not good enough. When did this editorial piece get written? It waited for the Saturday before Iowa to print? Ummm..
5
No, Kasich is not 'nuts' but his record as Ohio's governor on education, environment and the rights of women is abysmal.
160
Welcome to the "Abysmal Club". We have one here in Florida, too. Probably more exist in all our other states. Difficult to identify and "nail down"..............
5
It's a testament to how far the the right the political center has moved when Newt Gingrich's right-hand man is viewed as a centrist.
41
Kasich, the serving governor with Washington experience and a firm understanding of how a state can bring back its fiscal situation and economy, who avoid tirades against the president and knows that there is little he could do on social issues: the best choice. Unlike Bush, he has not mismanaged his campaign or squandered donated money. I think he lets his folksy style show more religiosity than appropriate, but it is a minor flaw.
5
"“I am so tired of my colleagues out here on the stage spending all their time talking about Barack Obama,” he told a town hall crowd in New Hampshire. “His term is over.” Mr. Kasich said recently that he had “raised the bar in this election. I’ve talked about hope and the future and positive things.” In this race, how rare that is.""
Well, if a Republican were to win, let it be Kasich. At least I wouldn't be embarrassed, frightened, alienated, or perpetually angry for the duration of his term. The man may be conservative, but he's not crazy: how many GOP candidates can merit the same description? He also has a track record both at home and on the debate stage of calling out the idiocies of his fellow candidates.
Of course, I hope our next President is a Democrat. That solves the entire problem of "resetting" a party that might not be possible to reset.
Well, if a Republican were to win, let it be Kasich. At least I wouldn't be embarrassed, frightened, alienated, or perpetually angry for the duration of his term. The man may be conservative, but he's not crazy: how many GOP candidates can merit the same description? He also has a track record both at home and on the debate stage of calling out the idiocies of his fellow candidates.
Of course, I hope our next President is a Democrat. That solves the entire problem of "resetting" a party that might not be possible to reset.
28
I posted a few days ago that for the GOP to remain viable into the next generation, short term pain is the way to long term survival. As presently constituted- and given the trend fom Bush to McCain/Palin to the 2012 debacle to now- you tend to think the GOP couldn't get any worse. But it does- spectacularly! And if it gets implausibly worse in 2020, how would that look? Egad.
The best thing for the GOP - and certainly the USA - would be a good trouncing come November. Fumigate the Tea Party infestation and seek a more viable way to 21st century policy development.
Or they could pray as they're prone to do that the craziness will right itself. But I'm believing they're all out of miracles. God turned his back on the GOP decades ago.
The best thing for the GOP - and certainly the USA - would be a good trouncing come November. Fumigate the Tea Party infestation and seek a more viable way to 21st century policy development.
Or they could pray as they're prone to do that the craziness will right itself. But I'm believing they're all out of miracles. God turned his back on the GOP decades ago.
I disagree. The best thing for the Democratic Party is defeat in November. In opposition, they can decide if the traditionally liberal or the politically correct wing will rule.
You wouldn't be frightened or alienated? Are you of chid-bearing age? Do you have daughters? Gay friends or family members? Poor friends or family members? Do you believe global climate change is a real, pressing issue? If the answer to any of these is yes, you ought to be afraid indeed.
2
I liked Kasich from the beginning and I think that this is a wise choice from the NY Times.
Christie would have been a good choice, too, except that he has now become a Republican puppet. His latest new low is the "mop" comment. Yes, Chris, you DO need to go to Cape May with a mop at the very least because the optics are better there, as a fixer-upper caring about ALL of New Jersey (like Cory Booker deftly does) than running around in New Hampshire on the campaign trail.
Christie had his turn in 2012 and should have taken it. He may have beaten Obama -- and he definitely would have been better than Romney.
Since professing my interest in Kasich on the Times comment pages weeks ago, I've been told that he is definitely not a good choice. He's against women's rights and teachers. That is a problem. And it's why I will vote Democratic no matter what. I've had to hold my nose to vote for Kerry and I suppose that I'll do that for Hillary, too.
And really -- will Kasich actually be the nominee? No -- but a NY Times endorsement is a big deal.
Trump saved us from President Jeb Bush and I will always be thankful to the carnival barker for that.
Christie would have been a good choice, too, except that he has now become a Republican puppet. His latest new low is the "mop" comment. Yes, Chris, you DO need to go to Cape May with a mop at the very least because the optics are better there, as a fixer-upper caring about ALL of New Jersey (like Cory Booker deftly does) than running around in New Hampshire on the campaign trail.
Christie had his turn in 2012 and should have taken it. He may have beaten Obama -- and he definitely would have been better than Romney.
Since professing my interest in Kasich on the Times comment pages weeks ago, I've been told that he is definitely not a good choice. He's against women's rights and teachers. That is a problem. And it's why I will vote Democratic no matter what. I've had to hold my nose to vote for Kerry and I suppose that I'll do that for Hillary, too.
And really -- will Kasich actually be the nominee? No -- but a NY Times endorsement is a big deal.
Trump saved us from President Jeb Bush and I will always be thankful to the carnival barker for that.
7
Did the NY tImes consider the possibility of endorsing "none of the above" for the GOP race?
I mean was Kasich the least bad, and that's why he gets endorsed? Is it fair to say that no GOP candidate in the race should become president?
I remember Kasich throwing his arms up in victory after a congressional budget negotiation that didn't appear to resolve anything. There's no reality with any of these people.
I can hear the other non-Kasich GOP candidates crowing about this endorsement.
I mean was Kasich the least bad, and that's why he gets endorsed? Is it fair to say that no GOP candidate in the race should become president?
I remember Kasich throwing his arms up in victory after a congressional budget negotiation that didn't appear to resolve anything. There's no reality with any of these people.
I can hear the other non-Kasich GOP candidates crowing about this endorsement.
6
It will be sad if Ms. Clinton or Mr. Sanders goes up against Mr. Trump or Mr. Cruz. Trump will use his considerable entertainer's expertise to manipulate minds unpersuaded by facts and experience. Mr. Cruz will stir the witches brew of politics with his brand of religious rhetoric and Princeton-honed debating skills. Kasich on the other hand would argue with meaningful ideas, his own experience and make the race for president worth watching.
3
A rarity on the Republican side. Willing to compromise to get things done. Willing to modify positions when information changes. As a Clinton supporter, I won't be voting for Mr. Kasich. I do feel I could argue policy, work out a deal and still respect him the next day. If he doesn't break out of the field and win, any elected Republican or Democrat should consider offering him an appropriate cabinet post. His example serves as an important lesson to how future conservatives should conduct themselves in the public sphere.
5
This is quite a shock to hear the NYY would recommend a Republican candidate for the presidency. Wonders never cease and miracles do happen. As a Republican, I would not hesitate voting for Kasich if put on the ticket. He would certainly give Hillary Clinton a run for the money. I trust Kasich but not Clinton. I like that he has integrity and he shares my values. Good luck Mr. Kasich and you have my vote if you are nominated.
1
The GOP has gone insane with hate, rage and denial. Bob Dole was the last Republican for whom I voted, he would be run out of the GOP today.
11
The last Republican I voted for was Richard Nixon, and we all know how that turned out.
1
I just tried to call my mom who lives in Columbus. She is a big supporter of her state's governor, John Kasich, and I wanted to tell her that there is good news and bad news. The good news is the NY Times endorsed her candidate. The bad news is the NY Times endorsed her candidate. He is probably the best of the bunch, but among his positions is his commitment to a balanced budget amendment, which if in force would almost certainly have led to a much longer recession (see Germany, etc.).
4
Even if Gov. Kasich does not win the Republican Nomination, he will go on a high note because he did not stoop down to the level of his snarling, venomous, outrageous peers on the Republican stage. Hopefully, his sanity stays intact. The other morons cannot hold a candle to him but these days, it is very hard for good guys to win.
13
I am a resident of Ohio and did note vote for Kasich when he ran for Governor.
I am now a fan of Mr. Kasich because he has has proven himself to be an excellent leader for these times. I think he should be President.
I am now a fan of Mr. Kasich because he has has proven himself to be an excellent leader for these times. I think he should be President.
6
"Reset the Republican Race" offers a faint echo of Mrs. Clinton's memorable "Reset With Russia." And with the same odds of success. Well, here's to wishful thinking, anyway.
1
"He favors a path to citizenship" is all you need to know. Kasich would be a disaster.
Whether you like his personality or not, Donald Trump is by far the most intelligent candidate from either party. He thinks big and creatively. He cuts to the chase - no nonsense. He is 100% correct about immigration.
Trump will be our next president, and there is nothing the New York Times can do about it.
Whether you like his personality or not, Donald Trump is by far the most intelligent candidate from either party. He thinks big and creatively. He cuts to the chase - no nonsense. He is 100% correct about immigration.
Trump will be our next president, and there is nothing the New York Times can do about it.
2
"By far the most intelligent candidate from either party." Also, the richest, the strongest and the most handsome. Where have we heard those words before? Oh, right. Building a wall, bombing ISIS and "make America great again" isn't an agenda or even a plan. It's simply a mantra. Perhaps he'll come up with something else next time he opens a fortune cookie.
13
He's as detailed as most of the other candidates, often more detailed. What do you want him to do? Publish a blueprint for the wall or something? Building a wall, along with other things, would definitely work, and we should have done it decades ago.
A marble in an empty barrel makes a huge sound when shaken; a man wrapped up in himself makes a small gift; the man IS most intelligent - just let him tell you!
Oh some dreams die hard. But die they will.
Oh some dreams die hard. But die they will.
1
What a shame that this endorsement will probably hurt Gov. Kasich's chances of winning the primary election.
6
While I do not agree with many of Kasich's positions, I admit he is an experienced, reasonable and qualified public official. That's why he doesn't have a chance of securing the GOP presidential nomination, because the lunatic base of that party will utterly reject such a candidate.
12
There do not seem to be any Republicans left who are not openly or stealthily working to undermine the separation of church and state in the US.
32
Wow, that was not an endorsement. That was and anti-trump/anti-cruz (which I fully support and normally enjoy reading) tear-down. It's not an endorsement to list a few accomplishments at the end of an article and attempt to make him seem only like the lesser of 3 (or 18) evils. How hard was it to find someone to say something nice about the man?
3
Traditional Republicans should vote Democrat this cycle, sweep out the Tea Stains and reconstitute the Party of Lincoln Teddy Roosevelt and Ike during the off years. Seriously. A choice between constitutional democracy and a new-fangled form of moneyed aristocracy should be no choice at all.
128
As an Ohio resident since 1982, I've been able to follow John Kasich's career from Congress, through private sector work at Lehman Borthers, and now as Governor.
Kasich is by far the most rational and pragmatic of the lineup of GOP candidates. However, I believe he can at times suffer from an inconsistency that creates needless havoc. Nowhere has this been more in evidence than in Kasich's handling of the Republican-controlled "Taliban" General Assembly. On many occasions, he has spoken out against some of the that less-than-august body's more extreme positions. Yet on other occasions, he has stood by silently, or actually enabled perfidy -- such as signing legislation that greatly curtails a woman's reproductive rights. He seems to favor government harrassment of women (and will likely sign a pending bill in Columbus to totally defund Planned Parenthood), and the question with Kasich is always "why?" especially when he can be so positive and forthright concerning helping the mentally ill.
As President, Kasich would be (IMO) a bridge strattler -- backing progressive ideas and legislation in some areas, but also giving in to the darker nightmares of the GOP-dominated Congress on social issues. For that reason, I think women voters ought to evaluate whether to cast a Kasich vote very carefully.
Kasich is by far the most rational and pragmatic of the lineup of GOP candidates. However, I believe he can at times suffer from an inconsistency that creates needless havoc. Nowhere has this been more in evidence than in Kasich's handling of the Republican-controlled "Taliban" General Assembly. On many occasions, he has spoken out against some of the that less-than-august body's more extreme positions. Yet on other occasions, he has stood by silently, or actually enabled perfidy -- such as signing legislation that greatly curtails a woman's reproductive rights. He seems to favor government harrassment of women (and will likely sign a pending bill in Columbus to totally defund Planned Parenthood), and the question with Kasich is always "why?" especially when he can be so positive and forthright concerning helping the mentally ill.
As President, Kasich would be (IMO) a bridge strattler -- backing progressive ideas and legislation in some areas, but also giving in to the darker nightmares of the GOP-dominated Congress on social issues. For that reason, I think women voters ought to evaluate whether to cast a Kasich vote very carefully.
31
This is almost a reversed endorsement. After eliminating all other options only one name remains. As a matter of fact the name of the endorsed candidate does not appear until the sixth paragraph. Why endorse anybody?
4
I think that's the point. The subtext throughout the article is that none of them is worth endorsing except Kasich. Yet, a number of the are garnering huge popularity. A frightening prospect.
3
It's called journalistic balance. NYT, always accused of being a liberal rag, is doing what should be done - laying the facts out for readers to make sound choices.
1
The Times recommendation to Republicans is to throw away their votes. It is irresponsible to advise millions of readers to abstain from an election that could well shape the future of America. Newspapers should address real world questions. My father loved Adlai Stevenson. He kept voting for him after Stevenson died. Maybe the Times should have endorsed Abraham Lincoln.
4
No need to throw away their votes. They can simply vote for a Democrat come November.
37
Actually, the recommendation is to vote for somebody who's not nuts, knows what he's doing, and has at least some record of working out reasonable compromises.
5
Looks like lots of Union "Dems" are voting Republican this November. The establishment is going up in flames on both sides of the aisle.
1
Unfortunately, of the entire GOP field, only two have successfully resisted the Tea Party drag to the far right, and that's Kasich and Rand Paul. Rand Paul because he is basically a Libertarian, Kasich because he's the only representative of a positive tradition of moderate Republicans who has the integrity to remain so.
I applaud this endorsement. But, would that there be more real choices, in that deep but not wide GOP field, other than Kasich. He's solid, but not really outstanding in a way that would assure us that he's Presidential. But he may save me from rolling my eyes, holding my nose, and voting for Clinton.
I applaud this endorsement. But, would that there be more real choices, in that deep but not wide GOP field, other than Kasich. He's solid, but not really outstanding in a way that would assure us that he's Presidential. But he may save me from rolling my eyes, holding my nose, and voting for Clinton.
2
Kasich is the only Republican who candidate who's not nuts.
That apparently brands him as something special in this election.
That apparently brands him as something special in this election.
40
In twenty words, this comment has summed this up completely.
4
C'mon....he can represent the rest of us "nuts". We vote, you don't,,,,,,,,,,
This editorial, of course, will be a big help to Donald Trump. I expect it will begin appearing very soon in his campaign ads and literature.
8
The biggest help to Donald Trump is the desperation and stupidity of rank-and-file Republicans. But you may be on to something.
13
Like Trump's supporters read the New York Times (or anything else for that matter).
2
It's about time this was said. While I am a die-hard democrat and full throttle Clinton supporter, this crop of republican candidates (aside from Kasich, and Kasich alone) have done everything to convince us how pathetically unsuited they are for the most powerful position on earth. The lies are unfathomable (and yes, I can list dozens of them if provided more space). The gloom and doom sales pitch is deplorably unpatriotic. The lack of knowledge is chilling (aside from a few ... Bush, Rubio, Paul all of whom possess other formidable problems). The blowhard rhetoric is dangerous ... and not just from the used car salesman.
Sorry, in most elections I can at least appreciate that those who disagree with me ideologically have good reason to support a candidate I would never vote for. This go-around they have one and only one such choice. And, sadly, Kasich will likely bow out sometime over the next few weeks.
Sorry, in most elections I can at least appreciate that those who disagree with me ideologically have good reason to support a candidate I would never vote for. This go-around they have one and only one such choice. And, sadly, Kasich will likely bow out sometime over the next few weeks.
54
WOW! The NYT at least got the best fit Republican candidate right, 50% is not bad.
12
Trump did what no one could have dreamt possible - he upended the Super PACs and changed the political landscape. Everyone knew the PACs were ready to spend endless amounts of money on Jeb Bush. Trump ended their dream. Is a Trump presidency a nightmare? Yes. That's why America likes him. He points towards doom. We all know that modern politics has become a bought and paid that infects our society. Trump is an end of times candidate ever reminding us that there is an abyss looming ahead. The Times is taking us there . . . Kasich and Clinton both have enough self-interest in them not to care about us or that looming abyss. Beware the vested interests and heed not what Trump says, but what he does . . . he points to our worst open wounds. Go Bernie . . .
5
Well, you are right, of course: he could shift the Republican race. But then, who would want him as our President? Not me. And few others......Hello, Hillary!
7
Mr. Kasich would make a great VP but the GOP ticket should be led by someone that can beat Hillary Clinton - a factor which the NY Times Editorial Board has understandably ignored. Ted Cruz, especially a Ted Cruz that selected Kasich as a running mate, would be formidable and effective. Cruz will soon take down the mighty Trump, gain some respect and a few more political friends. The Clinton machine won’t be able to contain all those skeletons in the closet as the competition continues.
4
Eugene - Cruz has a few skeletons in his own closet as well. And even though a NY Times article stated he is liked by many, no one around me in my climes can stand him. He is far too rigid to make it well in the generals. Clintons have already overcome their skeletons, no matter if they are regurgitated once again 2 decades later.
4
Well done/said, NYT Editorial Board.
Is it possible that the “Republican conspiracy” advocated by David Brooks is simply the “reset” outlined here?
Is it possible that the “Republican conspiracy” advocated by David Brooks is simply the “reset” outlined here?
2
Kasich is a Theocrat. He's extreme in this. He should not be anywhere near the White House. Forcing a woman to bear a Downs Syndrome child, as they are trying to do in Ohio, is the kind of thing he'd like to impose on our country. And this idea of having a 'Judeo-Christian Voice of America' imposing Christian views on the world is absolutely ridiculous.
A very big NO to Kasich. No to Theocracy.
A very big NO to Kasich. No to Theocracy.
172
Apologies that more of us cannot recommend your comment. It's just that it oversimplifies all on which it touches.
That is, it fails: (i) to consider that its the role of a Gov. to prompt legislative action (lead), and then execute those laws, and that all laws are a government's attempt at "forcing" someone to make a choice they might not otherwise—including via the laws that "force" individuals not to mutilate their daughter's genitalia, or not to bear or use firearms in the vicinity of schools. (Or, for that matter, to not end the gestation of an otherwise healthy girl, when its gender does not meet the parent's hope for a boy.)
And, it fails (ii) to appreciate that all candidates are theocrats, including any that you might support. They just differ in the extent to which their "theo-", that which they elevate above all, and attempt submission to—whether self, a perceived deity, an idea, or another human being—is defined and on display for all to understand, and accept or reject.
No, the substance and particulars of each matter you touch on are important, and you do not even begin to communicate substance, either about the challenge of balancing an individual's rights with the rights of others, or ones submission to things higher. Perhaps you view the need to be thoughtful and rigorous about such things, the job of others?
In any case, your opinion on this particular candidate is clear, and noted; perhaps that self-expression is all that you were really attempting.
That is, it fails: (i) to consider that its the role of a Gov. to prompt legislative action (lead), and then execute those laws, and that all laws are a government's attempt at "forcing" someone to make a choice they might not otherwise—including via the laws that "force" individuals not to mutilate their daughter's genitalia, or not to bear or use firearms in the vicinity of schools. (Or, for that matter, to not end the gestation of an otherwise healthy girl, when its gender does not meet the parent's hope for a boy.)
And, it fails (ii) to appreciate that all candidates are theocrats, including any that you might support. They just differ in the extent to which their "theo-", that which they elevate above all, and attempt submission to—whether self, a perceived deity, an idea, or another human being—is defined and on display for all to understand, and accept or reject.
No, the substance and particulars of each matter you touch on are important, and you do not even begin to communicate substance, either about the challenge of balancing an individual's rights with the rights of others, or ones submission to things higher. Perhaps you view the need to be thoughtful and rigorous about such things, the job of others?
In any case, your opinion on this particular candidate is clear, and noted; perhaps that self-expression is all that you were really attempting.
Gov. Kasich has shown signs of being both lucid and rational. So The Times's endorsement notwithstanding, there's clear evidence that he's in the wrong party.
14
Dotconnector - except that he is far too conservative on women's rights, gay rights, and worker's rights. Although I agree he has a great deal of experience in the House for more than a decade and is in his 2nd term of governor.
2
Though I do not agree with most of Kashch's politics, he is the ONLY Republican candidate that I can bear listening to--the ONLY one of the bunch (with the possible exception of Jeb Bush) who not an angry, arrogant buffoon.
20
Ben Carson?
Among all the candidates I feel the most comfortable with Kasich and support him 100%. He has a ton of both legislative and executive experience with fiscal conservatism being his core. He's a practical man who knows what is possible and what is just nonsense (i.e. a waste of time). I would dearly love to see him and Paul Ryan working together on the budgetary process.
4
Gerald Vimont, Kasich is the most logical candidate in the GOP to be nominated and I suppose that is why he lingers at the bottom this entire time due to the trajectory of the GOP demise and extremism. He's too conservative on social issues in today's country however. Too many folks 45 and under believe women have privacy rights over their own bodies and gay marriage is the law of the land.
1
Kasich will wind up as Trump's VP.
4
I don't think Kasich will agree to that. At least I hope he wouldn't.
Brad, that would be too logical for Trump. Trump would select REP Steve King - you know the one about Mexican illegals coming in with tons of THC with thighs as huge as cantaloupes.
1
When Kasich went all out from his Super PAC to defeat Trump? He wouldn't be made dogcatcher in a Trump administration.
If the Republican party wanted a chance to win the election in November it would nominate Kasich for President and Rubio for Vice-President. This would give the party a chance to win two of the three major swing states -- Ohio and Florida -- which they must in order to have a chance of winning -- and put them in position to win the third, Pennsylvania -- where someone like Kasich would run strong. Of course, this is a little too much sense for the Party at the moment...
14
I'd like to see Kasich as the GOP nominee for president and someone else for VP (not a Rubio fan). That being said I think it's more likely that Kasich will get tapped for VP than president. Unfortunately.
1
Soneday, a nomination for veep will be based on ability, NOT on whether the candidate can bring in electoral votes.
1
jhbev - I admire your optimism and wish I shared it.
Several other Buckeyes have already weighed in, but let me repeat that Kasich is not a person who you would want as President. He does look less crazy than the other Republican candidates (except maybe Gilmour, if he is still a candidate, who I know nothing about), and he is less crazy that the Republicans in the Ohio legislature. But he is still opposed to reproductive rights, renewable energy, education spending, labor, progressive taxation, etc.
In short, he is not a person you would want to wake up on November 9 to learn that we would be inflicted with four years of him in charge of the country.
In short, he is not a person you would want to wake up on November 9 to learn that we would be inflicted with four years of him in charge of the country.
52
Disgusting - these are two of the most establishment, more of the same, help the rich (big money NYT folk) that you could have endorsed. A former investment banker and a do-anything to get to the top cheater that has none but the interests of themselves in mind.
3
Bill - any other candidate does not have the protection of YOU in mind - the constituent, the regular everyday citizen this country was created for.
Having lived in Ohio my entire life I have had the opportunity to follow Kasich's career. The best one word description of him is pragmatic. He is a against abortion and attempted to limit bargaining rights of union workers. On the other hand, he expanded Medicaid despite the protests of Ohio Republicans. He also wants to increase state taxes on energy production. Thus ,there are reasons for both Democrat and Repunlican ideologues not to like him. That's probably why he is the best Republican in a general election.
7
Sue, Kasich is the most reasonable of GOP candidates out of a sea of very dangerous clowns, but please do not dismiss the importance of women's rights, gay rights, and workers rights. That's the majority of America!
8
Bravo to the Times for its endorsements of both Governor Kasich and Secretary Clinton! I will vote for Clinton, just as I would vote for either Senator Sanders or Governor O'Malley if either were nominated, but Governor Kasich is a fine man, a patriotic American, and a humane and rational adult. No other Republican candidate fits this description. If Kasich were nominated and elected, I wouldn't feel that I needed to leave my country for the sake of principle and safety. May God give our people discernment in these very anxious times!
9
Agreed. Although Kasich is unacceptably theological in my view, he at least appears to be sane which is more than can be said for the rest of the Republican candidates.
1
Richardhgreenwood - I agree that Kasich is sane and rational except when it comes to democracy vs. theocracy. Women, gays, and workers deserve to have equal rights in this country also. It's off to the Dem's I go but I appreciate your point.
2
No interest in these candidates one way or the other but it's not surprising that the NYT has published an editorial urging voters to abandon the two front runners that may actually beat Mrs. Clinton and asking them to support a candidate with no chance of being elected....
3
I'm not so sure about that. I see Kasich as the best candidate of all of them Democrat and Republican alike.
It's unfortunate that parties want to choose candidates based on who they think will beat the other, rather than who is best able to lead the country.
It's unfortunate that parties want to choose candidates based on who they think will beat the other, rather than who is best able to lead the country.
1
No kids in NY - Clinton is highly electable but hold on to your phony dreams if that is what gets you through each day.
1
CL: then why has her support been slowly bleeding away over the email scandal and other matters?
Many "establishment Republicans" are backing Rubio. I don't know why since he is untested and extremely conservative. Kasich would bring the extremist GOP back to the center and that would be a good thing for everyone, no matter how they vote.
7
Abel Fernandez: the most logical place to land in GOP land is Kasich, but as far as "reaching between the aisles" Kasich is way too conservative on social issues for progressives. We will vote against him simply to "reset" the Supreme Court that needs to represent the majority of us who are "resetting" ourselves toward FREEDOM FOR ALL, not simply the religious few. Christian Left.
2
I am quite pleased to see NYT endorsing Kasich as the GOP nominee. He is the only republican candidate with quality experience in a swing state (Jeb was more or less mediocre in Florida). I may not agree with all of his policies and Wall Street salaries will always seem egregious to those of us who are not working in the finance sector (or in the 1%) but he knows how large cooperations work and the why behind motivating people on forward thinking policies, making him better able to bring about more effective change while promoting economic growth.
His work expanding Medicaid has been tremendous for his star and he has shown that conservative governance can be successful in improving the lives of citizens. His work to enhance the lives of the mentally ill is commendable as well.
In watching the GOP debates for this election he is the ONLY candidate who actually answers the questions and is knowledgeable on the breadth and depth of these topics.
The Republican Party's only chance against Hillary is Kasich.
His work expanding Medicaid has been tremendous for his star and he has shown that conservative governance can be successful in improving the lives of citizens. His work to enhance the lives of the mentally ill is commendable as well.
In watching the GOP debates for this election he is the ONLY candidate who actually answers the questions and is knowledgeable on the breadth and depth of these topics.
The Republican Party's only chance against Hillary is Kasich.
4
He is also the only candidate I've heard calling to reduce divisiveness.
Moderate Fan: Agreed. That is always why I have been afraid of him (Kasich) - many months ago. I am a reasonable, rational Dem and I could see it way back then. He is just far too socially conservative for younger Americans (and myself, late 50's boomer). In the generals, he would have to go far to the center to even allow progressives to consider him seriously. As for this boomer, I would never vote for a Republican for president because we don't need another Scalia or Alito to the Supreme Court. Too many damned conservative Catholics already!
5
I would like very much to see Mike Bloomberg throw his hat in the ring – the sooner the better! Republicans for Michael Bloomberg – RFMB!
2
Agreed. Everyone for Michael Bloomberg!
migraneur in NJ - why not another megalomaniac in this year's race??? Would only help the Dem's, so why not?
1
Sure, a loan shark for Lehman Brothers.
Whatever could go wrong?
Whatever could go wrong?
19
I am an independent and will probably vote for Bernie, but if Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, Kasich is the only guy I'd vote for from the Republican field. (I give honorable mention to Rand Paul whom I also like on the Republican side!)
6
Cliff,
The last election I voted in was for Obama in 2008, by the end of his first term I realized I was too stupid to pick the President or even participate in the process. You might consider sitting this election out.
The last election I voted in was for Obama in 2008, by the end of his first term I realized I was too stupid to pick the President or even participate in the process. You might consider sitting this election out.
2
I like Kasich too.
I am a life long democrat and have been carefully watching the Republican
Debates. Governors make good presidents and Kasich appears to have
been a good governor.
Even tempered and experienced.
Also no republican has ever won the WH without winning Ohio.
Unlikely to get nomination but really think running for VP.
Smart move if republicans smart enough to see his light.
I am a life long democrat and have been carefully watching the Republican
Debates. Governors make good presidents and Kasich appears to have
been a good governor.
Even tempered and experienced.
Also no republican has ever won the WH without winning Ohio.
Unlikely to get nomination but really think running for VP.
Smart move if republicans smart enough to see his light.
2
Nobody did more to make the Obama presidency ineffectual than the people who voted for him in 2008 and then sat out the census year election of 2010, which let the Republicans gerrymander the country for the whole decade.
10