Scott Powers
Two days before the Iowa caucuses, The New York Times has weighed in with endorsements of Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton and Republican long shot John Kasich, calling the Ohio governor “the only plausible choice for Republicans.”
The Times’ endorsement of Clinton was hardly a surprise, given that the Times has endorsed the former U.S. Senator from New York thrice before, including in her failed 2008 run for the Democratic nomination for president.
With the Kasich endorsement, A Chance to Reset the Republican Race, The Times picked Kasich almost by default, after dismissing almost all the other top Republican candidates in an editorial published this morning.
Kasich’s polling numbers in the Iowa Republican field have barely shown a heartbeat, averaging 2.7 percent in recent polls, according to RealClearPolitics.com, which tracks polling. Clinton, on the other hand, has polled 47.3 percent in the Democratic field, giving her a 3.3 percent lead over Vermont’s U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.
“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,” the Times editorial stated.
It cited his nearly two decades in the House of Representatives and a record of conservatism as governor, going after public-sector unions and limiting abortion rights, and his less conservative views, speaking of “government’s duty to protect the poor, the mentally ill and others ‘in the shadows.'”
The Times blistered New York’s Donald Trump, who leads the pack, saying he has “neither experience nor interest in learning about” major issues, and said Texas’ U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz‘s campaign is all about his ambition. The editorial praised Jeb Bush for criticizing Trump’s and Cruz’s more extreme positions, but said he has “failed to ignite much support.” Of Florida’s U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, the Times said he is “currently embracing the alarmist views of the front-runners “and seems to have forgotten his own “more positive ‘New American Century’ campaign.”
The Times called Clinton “one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.” Sanders, the editorial said, has less experience and has plans that “aren’t realistic.”
