Personal Score
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars.
- A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles.
- A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.
Economic Score
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.
- A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.
- A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program.
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.
How We Score Candidates
How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question:
- We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table.
- We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example.
- We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2.
- If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor.
- If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor.
- If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral.
- If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose.
- If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose.
- When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage.
- To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations.
- The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other).
- The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below.
Examples
The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy. The candidate's answers are on the left.
- A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention.
- A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement.
- A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement.
- A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.
|
Final Notes
To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions.
There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics.
Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales.
VoteMatch - LIBERTARIAN PARTY
Candidate's Political Philosophy
The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions. It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt!
 Personal Questions: Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.
Economic Questions: Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.
Candidate's Score
The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:
|
| Personal Score | 83% | |
| Economic Score | 95% | |
Where the Candidate Fits In
Where the candidate's Personal score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy. Based on the above score, the candidate is a Hard-Core Libertarian.
|
Personal Score
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars.
- A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles.
- A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.
Economic Score
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.
- A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.
- A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program.
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.
How We Score Candidates
How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question:
- We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table.
- We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example.
- We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2.
- If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor.
- If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor.
- If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral.
- If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose.
- If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose.
- When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage.
- To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations.
- The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other).
- The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below.
Examples
The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy. The candidate's answers are on the left.
- A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention.
- A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement.
- A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement.
- A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.
|
 = Strongly Support  = Support  = No Opinion  = Oppose  = Strongly Oppose
|
| Personal Issues | The candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
Abortion Is A Woman's Right
| | | | | |
Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law
| | | | | |
Organized Prayer In Public Schools
| | | | | |
Death Penalty
| | | | | |
Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws
| | | | | |
Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It
| | | | | |
Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services
| | | | | |
Link Human Rights To Trade With China
| | | | | |
|
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
| Economic Issues | The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
Require Companies To Hire More Women/Minorities
| | | | | |
More Federal Funding For Health Coverage
| | | | | |
Privatize Social Security
| | | | | |
Spend Resources To Stop Global Warming
| | | | | |
Make Income Tax Flatter And Lower
| | | | | |
Immigration Helps Our Economy - Encourage It
| | | | | |
Support and Expand Free Trade
| | | | | |
Continue Foreign Aid to Russia, Israel, Others
| | | | | |
| The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
|
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
| Issues Not Counted In Philosophy | The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
Absolute Right To Gun Ownership
| | | | | |
Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers
| | | | | |
More Spending On Armed Forces Personnel
| | | | | |
Reduce Spending on Missile Defense ("Star Wars")
| | | | | |
| The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
|
Final Notes
To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions.
There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics.
Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales.
|
VoteMatch - DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM
Candidate's Political Philosophy
The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions. It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt!
Personal Questions: Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.
Economic Questions: Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.
Candidate's Score
The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:
|
| Personal Score | 60% | |
| Economic Score | 15% | |
Where the Candidate Fits In
Where the candidate's Personal score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy. Based on the above score, the candidate is a Populist-Leaning Liberal.
|
Personal Score
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars.
- A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles.
- A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.
Economic Score
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.
- A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.
- A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program.
This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.
How We Score Candidates
How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question:
- We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table.
- We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example.
- We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2.
- If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor.
- If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor.
- If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral.
- If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose.
- If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose.
- When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage.
- To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations.
- The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other).
- The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below.
Examples
The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy. The candidate's answers are on the left.
- A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention.
- A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement.
- A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement.
- A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.
|
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
| Personal Issues | The candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
Abortion Is A Woman's Right
| | | | | |
Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law
| | | | | |
Organized Prayer In Public Schools
| | | | | |
Death Penalty
| | | | | |
Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws
| | | | | |
Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It
| | | | | |
Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services
| | | | | |
Link Human Rights To Trade With China
| | | | | |
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
| Economic Issues | The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
Require Companies To Hire More Women/Minorities
| | | | | |
More Federal Funding For Health Coverage
| | | | | |
Privatize Social Security
| | | | | |
Spend Resources To Stop Global Warming
| | | | | |
Make Income Tax Flatter And Lower
| | | | | |
Immigration Helps Our Economy - Encourage It
| | | | | |
Support and Expand Free Trade
| | | | | |
Continue Foreign Aid to Russia, Israel, Others
| | | | | |
| The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
| Issues Not Counted In Philosophy | The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
Absolute Right To Gun Ownership
| | | | | |
Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers
| | | | | |
More Spending On Armed Forces Personnel
| | | | | |
Reduce Spending on Missile Defense ("Star Wars")
| | | | | |
| The Candidate | Hard-core Liberal | Hard-core Libertarian | Hard-Core Conservative | Hard-Core Authoritarian |
= Strongly Support = Support = No Opinion = Oppose = Strongly Oppose
|
Final Notes
To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions.
There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics.
Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales.
VoteMatch - GREEN PARTY
Candidate's Political Philosophy
The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions. It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt!
Personal Questions: Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.
Economic Questions: Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.
Candidate's Score
The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:
|
| Personal Score | 98% | |
| Economic Score | 0% | |
|
from the American Presidency Project:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/2012_newspaper_endorsements.php
2012 General Election Editorial Endorsements by Major Newspapers
Top 100 Newspapers Based on Daily Circulation
Click on Link to Read Each Editorial - Changed Party Endorsements Indicated in Bold Italics
Last Updated on November 5 @ 22:15 GMT (Final Update)
| Scorecard |  | SPLIT
or
"undecided" |  | NO
ENDORSEMENT |
 |
| Total Endorsements | 41 | 1 | 35 | 23 |
| Total Circulation | 10,014,980 | 78,819 | 6,475,815 | 7,028,874 |
|
| Endorsed Obama in 2008 | 39 | 1 | 12 | 11 |
| Endorsed McCain in 2008 | 1 | 0 | 22 | 3 |
| Did not endorse in 2008 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| SPLIT in 2008 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| view 2008 editorial endorsements page |
|
| Newspaper | Circulation | Endorsee | Published | 2008 Endorsee |
| The Wall Street Journal | 2,118,315 | Generally does not endorse candidates |
| USA Today | 1,817,446 | Does not endorse candidates |
| The New York Times | 1,586,757 | Obama | October 27 | Obama |
| Los Angeles Times | 616,575 | Obama | October 21 | Obama |
| The Daily News (New York) | 579,636 | Romney | November 4 | Obama |
| San Jose Mercury News | 575,786 | Obama | October 27 | Obama |
| New York Post | 555,327 | Romney | October 25 | McCain |
| The Washington Post | 507,615 | Obama | October 25 | Obama |
| Chicago Sun-Times | 422,335 | No longer endorses (1) | Obama |
| Chicago Tribune | 414,590 | Obama | October 26 | Obama |
| The Dallas Morning News | 405,349 | Romney | September 28 | McCain |
| The Denver Post | 401,120 | Obama | October 21 | Obama |
| Newsday (Long Island, NY) | 397,973 | Romney | November 3 | Obama |
| Houston Chronicle | 384,007 | Romney | October 21 | Obama |
| The Philadelphia Inquirer | 325,291 | Obama | October 14 | Obama |
| The Arizona Republic (Phoenix) | 321,600 | Romney | October 21 | McCain |
| Star Tribune (Minneapolis-St. Paul) | 300,330 | Obama | October 27 | Obama |
| Tampa Bay Times (Formerly St. Petersburg Times) | 299,497 | Obama | October 21 | Obama |
| The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH) | 286,405 | Obama | October 20 | Obama |
| The Orange County Register (CA) | 280,812 | Did not endorse (10) | none |
| The Star-Ledger (Newark, NJ) | 278,940 | Obama | October 21 | Obama |
| The Oregonian (Portland) | 247,833 | NONE | August 14 | Obama |
| The Seattle Times | 236,929 | Obama | September 28 | Obama |
| Detroit Free Press | 232,696 | Obama | October 28 | Obama |
| The San Diego Union-Tribune | 230,742 | Romney | November 3 | McCain |
| San Francisco Chronicle | 229,176 | Obama | October 26 | Obama |
| The Boston Globe | 225,482 | Obama | October 29 | Obama |
| Las Vegas Review-Journal | 220,619 | Romney | October 7 | McCain |
| Honolulu Star-Advertiser | 209,915 | Obama | November 4 | none |
| Pioneer Press (St. Paul, MN) | 205,171 | Does not endorse candidates (2) |
| Kansas City Star | 200,365 | Obama | October 27 | Obama |
| The Sacramento Bee | 196,667 | Obama | October 14 | Obama |
| Star-Telegram (Fort Worth, TX) | 195,455 | Romney | October 20 | Obama |
| Pittsburgh Post-Gazette | 188,545 | Obama | October 28 | Obama |
| Pittsburgh Tribune-Review | 188,405 | Romney | October 20 | McCain |
| St. Louis Post-Dispatch | 187,992 | Obama | October 7 | Obama |
| Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel | 185,710 | No longer endorses (3) | Obama |
| The Baltimore Sun | 179,574 | Obama | November 2 | Obama |
| Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock) | 179,258 | Romney | October 23 | McCain |
| The Atlanta Journal-Constitution | 174,251 | No longer endorses (4) | Obama |
| Orlando Sentinel | 173,576 | Romney | October 19 | Obama |
| Sun-Sentinel (Ft. Lauderdale, FL) | 165,974 | Romney | October 26 | Obama |
| The Indianapolis Star | 164,640 | NONE | August 19 | SPLIT |
| The Miami Herald | 160,988 | Obama | October 26 | Obama |
| Investor’s Business Daily (Los Angeles) | 156,269 | Romney | November 2 | McCain |
| The Record (Hackensack, NJ) | 155,236 | Obama | November 4 | Obama |
| The Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY) | 154,033 | Obama | November 4 | Obama |
| The Buffalo News | 147,085 | Obama | October 27 | Obama |
| Charlotte Observer | 146,511 | Obama | October 21 | Obama |
| The Tampa Tribune | 144,510 | Romney | October 21 | McCain |
| The Cincinnati Enquirer | 144,165 | Romney | October 27 | McCain |
| The Virginian Pilot | 142,476 | Does not endorse candidates (5) |
| San Antonio Express-News | 139,099 | Obama | October 19 | McCain |
| The Columbus (OH) Dispatch | 136,023 | Romney | October 21 | McCain |
| Omaha World-Herald | 135,223 | Romney | October 8 | McCain |
| The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, LA) | 133,557 | NONE | October 14 | Obama |
| The Detroit News | 133,508 | Romney | October 25 | McCain |
| The Hartford Courant | 132,006 | Obama | October 26 | Obama |
| The Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA) | 131,872 | Romney | October 28 | McCain |
| The Oklahoman (Oklahoma City, OK) | 130,177 | Romney | October 28 | McCain |
| News & Observer (Raleigh, NC) | 129,698 | Obama | October 28 | Obama |
| Austin American-Statesman | 125,305 | NONE | November 3 | Obama |
| The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN) | 118,978 | NONE | November 4 | Obama |
| The Tennessean (Nashville) | 118,589 | Romney | October 18 | Obama |
| Grand Rapids Press | 114,571 | Romney | October 24 | McCain |
| Democrat and Chronicle (Rochester, NY) | 114,502 | Obama | November 3 | Obama |
| The Providence (RI) Journal | 114,013 | Obama | October 28 | Obama |
| The Salt Lake Tribune | 110,546 | Obama | October 20 | Obama |
| The Palm Beach Post | 110,373 | NONE | October 29 | Obama |
| Richmond Times-Dispatch | 108,559 | Romney | October 27 | McCain |
| Boston Herald | 108,548 | Romney | October 23 | McCain |
| The Fresno Bee | 107,501 | Obama | October 31 | Obama |
| The Birmingham News | 103,729 | NONE | November 1 | McCain |
| The Des Moines Register | 101,915 | Romney | October 27 | Obama |
| The Morning Call (Allentown, PA) | 100,196 | Did not endorse (10) | none |
| Daily Herald (Arlington Heights, IL) | 99,670 | Romney | October 28 | Obama |
| The Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville, FL) | 98,580 | Romney | October 26 | SPLIT |
| Asbury Park Press | 98,032 | Obama | October 26 | Obama |
| Tulsa World | 97,725 | Romney | November 4 | McCain |
| Arizona Daily Star (Tucson, AZ) | 96,682 | Obama | October 21 | Obama |
| La Opinión | 95,148 | Obama | October 23 | Obama |
| The Blade (Toledo, OH) | 94,215 | Obama | October 28 | Obama |
| Daily News (Los Angeles) | 94,016 | Romney | October 26 | Obama |
| Dayton Daily News | 93,425 | Does not endorse candidates (6) | Obama |
| Lexington (KY) Herald Leader | 89,735 | Obama | October 28 | Obama |
| The Akron Beacon Journal | 88,040 | Obama | October 20 | Obama |
| The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC) | 87,817 | Romney | November 4 | McCain |
| Northwest Indiana Times | 85,692 | Romney | November 4 | McCain |
| Albuquerque Journal | 84,826 | Romney | November 4 | McCain |
| Deseret News (Salt Lake City, UT) | 83,719 | Does not endorse candidates |
| The News Journal (New Castle County, DE) | 83,210 | Obama | November 3 | Obama |
| Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) | 83,083 | Romney | November 4 | Obama |
| Press-Telegram (Los Angeles County, CA) | 82,556 | Romney | October 26 | Obama |
| Press-Register (Mobile, AL) | 82,088 | NONE | November 1 | McCain |
| Knoxville News Sentinel | 81,391 | No longer endorses (7) | McCain |
| Sarasota Herald-Tribune | 79,845 | No longer endorses (8) | Obama |
| Intelligencer Journal | Lancaster New Era | 78,819 | SPLIT (9) | November 2 | Obama |
| The Roanoke Times (Roanoke, VA) | 78,663 | NONE | October 21 | none |
| The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY) | 78,616 | "NEITHER" | November 2 | Obama |
| The News Tribune (Tacoma, WA) | 78,453 | Obama | October 24 | Obama |
Citation: Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, "2012 General Election Editorial Endorsements by Major Newspapers."
The American Presidency Project. Ed. John T. Woolley and Gerhard Peters. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California. 1999-2012. Available from the World Wide Web: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/2012_newspaper_endorsements.php.
Data compiled by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley after reviewing original editorials of the listed newspapers.
(1) On January 22, 2012, The Chicago Sun-Times announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/10174893-474/editorial-why-we-will-no-longer-endorse-in-elections.html
(2) The Pioneer Press (St. Paul, MN) does not endorse candidates. See:
http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_21928764/regarding-our-editorial-minnesotas-proposed-marriage-amendment
(3) On October 26, 2012, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/why-we-wont-make-endorsements-1b7bd30-175955471.html
(4) On October 10, 2009, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/opinion/to-our-readers-ajc-takes-new-approach-on-election/nQYCp/
(5) In October 2007, The Virginian Pilot announced that it would no longer endorse political candidates.
(6) On October 31, 2012, The Dayton Daily News announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/local-govt-politics/why-were-not-endorsing/nSspX/
(7) On October 14, 2012, The Knoxville News Sentinel announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/oct/14/jack-mcelroy-news-sentinel-ends-long-tradition/
(8) On October 26, 2012, The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reiterated that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20121026/OPINION/310269996/2198/OPINION?Title=Election-recommendations
(9) The Intelligencer Journal/Lancaster New Era has two editorial boards. The Intelligencer Journal endorsed Barack Obama and theLancaster New Era endorsed Mitt Romney in separate editorials on November 2, 2012.
(10) As of 22:00 GMT November 5, 2012, neither the Orange County Register nor the Morning Call (Lehigh, PA) endorsed a candidate. This is consistent with each paper's decision not to endorse in 2008.
It is standard policy that USA Today does not endorse political candidates
• The Deseret News does not endorse as a matter of policy
• Top 100 Newspapers determined by circulation data available from BurrellesLuce athttp://www.burrellesluce.com/sites/default/files/TopMedia_updatedMay2012.pdf
|
No comments:
Post a Comment