Posted on Thursday, 10/15/2009 - 8:36 p.m. PDT — by WCwatch
Since everyone knows the Times will never endorse a Republican, how do you think they will justify backing Garamendi? After many editorials critical of our broken state (politically and financially) how they try and sell the number TWO guy running our down and out state will be interesting. It may start something like this: "While far from perfect, Garamendi is the more experencied canidate....". In the end it will come down to pushing a liberal agenda. A Republican win in a special election would look bad for Obama who the Times has been backing without regard to objectivity. A sad state indeed for the print media.
Joined: Mar 2009
Current Posts: 92
I was hoping for a true conservative candidate for Congress, someone who has sense. But, when I received my ballot, I found that Harmer did not even have the sense to include a candidate statement. What kind of idiot move was that? If he is going to make this kind of mistake now, what other mistakes will he make in the future? (And no, I do not buy Harmer's excuse that the $6200 candidate statement printing fee was better spent elsewhere in his campaign.) Harmer has made for a very disappointing candidate, although I don't think Garamendi is any better. I just don't think I can vote for Harmer after this bone-headed decision. Ugh.
Joined: Aug 2008
Current Posts: 363
<Since everyone knows the Times will never endorse a Republican, how do you think they will justify backing Garamendi? After many editorials critical of our broken state (politically and financially) how they try and sell the number TWO guy running our down and out state will be interesting. It may start something like this: "While far from perfect, Garamendi is the more experencied canidate....".>
Harmer's views/positions on taxes, size and role of the government, social issues, etc. will be deemed "out of the mainstream" by the editorial board and therefore Garamendi would be the only acceptable choice.
Joined: Jul 2008
Current Posts: 81
Garamendi recently sent out mailers containing negative comments attributed to Harmer. It turns out the quotes were pulled from the internet and came from another guy named David Harmer. Nice fact checking. If the two were reversed I'm sure you would see a front page piece or at least an editorial attacking Harmer's integrity.
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
The CCTime will justify its endorsent of Garamendi (if indeed it does endorse him) on the fact that Garamendi is the only candidate with a record of accomplishment in public office. Harmer has no record. Why assume that Harmer has the capacity to actually get anything done in the highly parisan and polarized atmosphere that permeates Washington these days?
Joined: Oct 2009
Current Posts: 9
With the endorsement of Garamendi who is a proven and incontrovertable liar (oops, dissed the wrong David Harmer and will not apologize for it), an out and out idiot ("higher taxes do no harm to the economy", "California does not have a spending problem, it has a revenue problem"), and a carpetbagger (he doesn't even live in the district!)--the Contra Costa Times has seriously besmirched itself. I dunno, I just don't understand why long time experience running California into the ground would be an asset.
--Doc