Many newspapers will endorse presidential candidates this year. It’s not that those who publish newspapers think they have all of the answers, but we do deal with facts surrounding the campaigns on an almost daily basis.
It’s the consideration of those facts that leads editorial board to prefer one candidate more than another.
Except this year. This year, we will not make an endorsement in the presidential race. Neither candidate, in our opinion, offers the nation an opportunity to remedy its fiscal problems and make progress on a national scale.
President Barack Obama decided to expend a great deal of political capital and energy during his first year or so in office to win approval of health care reform. The plan, despite attempts to paint it otherwise, does hold promise.
However, health care was not the most pressing issue facing the country at the time. The economy was — and continues to be — the greatest challenge to the nation’s future.
Former Gov. Mitt Romney, Obama’s challenger, talks a lot about the economy. But his proposal carry little hope of erasing the federal deficit.
Romney wants to retain low tax rates for wealthier Americans, saying more money in their hands, and in the coffers of corporations, will yield more jobs.
Yet experts say corporations and investors have billions in cash reserves on hand.
Those stacks of cash are not creating any jobs because jobs follow demand. If the demand for goods is not there — demand led by Americans considered to be far from any definition of wealthy — no company will add jobs. The demand must grow from the bottom up.
In addition, Romney’s pledge not to reduce defense spending simply ignores global politics. Tomorrow’s wars won’t be fought with big machines, even though defense contracts for those big machines keep campaign contributors happy.
Do your own research. Weigh answers from mom-partisan sources. Make up your own mind. But be sure to vote Nov. 6.