New York Times "enthusiastic" for Obama

The most influential newspaper in North America, some say, around the world, the New York Times, in an editorial yesterday of the title " Barack Obama for Re-Election advocates "in a remarkable way for re-election of the incumbent of the US presidency.

The article concludes, after various policy fields processed and Romney each judged to be the worse, Obama's successes out painted (sometimes one would have wished for more of it), thus:

"For synthesis and many other Reasons, we enthusiastically endorse President Barack Obama for a second term, and express the hope did his victory will be Accompanied By a new Congress willing to work for policies did Americans need."

(For these and many other reasons, we support President Barack Obama excited for a second term, expressing the hope that this victory will be accompanied by a new Congress, for the policy the Americans needed to work willing.)

Now, while it is tradition that the NYT is clearly pronounce shortly before the election for a presidential candidate (see box at left in the original article, where each supported candidates are listed), and yet the word jump "enthusiastically" (enthusiastic, excited) in the last Set in the eye.

Since in the NYT in such a case certainly every word, especially at the end of editorials such weight (the most important every four years!), Is put on the gold scale, it takes me but wonder, why not get one "'strongly', ' CLEARLY, "I care" has absolutely "elected prints of definiteness, but such an emotionally charged adjective.

Imagine times before, the world or the FAZ professed shortly before the election to support Chancellor Merkel, a long, though unilaterally applied, but otherwise kept objective argumentative editorial closing "enthusiastic" and "excited" to the hinwiederum Süddeutsche Zeitung or the time her challenger Steinbrück.

Since you arrived nevertheless at the Rüsel.

Obama can, should he lose it, at least not about a lack or only tepid support from the US East Coast establishment complain.

- Advertisement -

Share this post with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages with others.
  • Facebook
  • Technorati
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Webnews
  • Wikio DE

Tags: , , ,

One Response to "New York Times" enthusiastic "for Obama"

  1. Hummingbird says:

    The word "enthusiastic" hits the nail on the head.
    Now that I have ever asked the question in a previous blog, why always been certain candidate wins the elections in the US, I am now found it.

    The "Shoup Voting Machine Company" by Exxon, automatic voting machines are perfectly suited to zuklauen votes, 2.75 million voters are registered in multiple states, also the funniest, 1.8 million "corpses" are registered in the US electoral rolls.
    So, what if this were not "enthusiastic" is ... ..?
    The election date also fits now to Halloween, at the right time where all these corpses arrive to cast their votes simply inspiring.
    Everything well organized, yet also with the two-meter high mega killer waves, where the president has ever met precautions and around the Financial District, the Fed was Hurricane Sandy evacuate all
    (Maybe they were just a couple of German in the US, which indeed could not fly out because of the storm, and the agenda had to take the gold in security facing)
    in order afterwards as a present by the people "Worried".
    (Probably people can there not bring himself to safety before a storm, a bit weird, but it does not have to understand everything)
    Seen in this way but all is well enthusiastic and inspiring in everything.

Leave a Reply