(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . The Economist backs Kamala Harris [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2024-10-31 At a time when some major American newspapers have sold their craven souls to Mammon, a highly regarded British economic Bible has declared that Harris is the better choice for President of the world’s largest economy — and publicly supported her. The Economist has taken a stand where the plutocrat-owned Washington Post and LA Times have sacrificed their reputations on the altar of appeasement, hoping their subscribers will ignore or forgive their ignominy. I cannot link to the editorial as the Economist’s paywall is robust. And they do not grant day passes. But here is their summary of their reasons for backing Harris and rejecting Trump. They start by noting the dereliction of duty of some of their media cousins. And state plainly their position While some newspapers refused to back a presidential candidate this year, today The Economist is endorsing Kamala Harris. The magazine continues by pointing out that Trump has millions of supporters. Some of them lost to the MAGA cult, others merely still willfully deluded about Trump’s true nature. Tens of millions of Americans will vote for Mr Trump next week. Some will be true believers. But many will take a calculated risk that in office his worst instincts would be constrained. The Economist then drops the hammer. We see that as recklessly complacent. They then point out why a vote for Trump is political, legal, and economic Russian roulette By making Mr Trump leader of the free world, Americans would be gambling with the economy, the rule of law and international peace. The Economist’s opinionators then stick the landing. They may quibble with some of her positions. But the differences are in degree. Harris they say, unlike Trump, is not a threat to the future prosperity and freedom of the world’s democracies. Ms Harris’s shortcomings, by contrast, are ordinary. And none of them are disqualifying. If The Economist had a vote, we would cast it for her. I realize that a British media outlet, no matter how authoritative, will directly sway few voters. But it is more grist for Harris’s eleventh-hour PR mill. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/10/31/2281295/-The-Economist-backs-Kamala-Harris?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=latest_community&pm_medium=web Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/