It's been a terrible year for mainstream establishment newspapers. They have faced endorsement options of death by hanging or by firing squad (Trump, Cruz) or by a happy wanderer (Kasich) who is the son of a mailman who has been trying to part the waters with his vision of the Pearly Gates.
So with Tuesday's Ohio primaries approaching, the Beacon Journal and Plain
Dealer (as well as a majority of the other Buckeye papers) urged Republican voters to support Gov. Kasich with hospitable home state praise while ignoring many of his warts.
I know. They will argue that they had little choice, which, in this instance ignored the option of endorsing nobody. The PD editorial writers described their man as "an experienced leader who understands the art of compromise" and a "compassionate conservative".
Not really. Particularly for things that matter the most to women, gays, Planned Parenthood, schools, urban budgets and climate change. Etc.
The BJ was a tad testier.
Although conceding that the governor's hyper-self serving vision of his state "departs in many ways from reality," it credits him with being "more the problem solver" and concludes that he would be the "best candidate now in the mix to emerge in July at the national party convention".
Aside from his squishy attitude toward climate change, moving back and forth on the topic, there's also his absurd views on public education. He has said that since Ohio's charter schools, which are among the worst in the nation, have worked so well, we might consider "charter universities".
Please. The University of Akron already has more problems than it is willing to admit.
Now I ask: Should "no endorsement" be an option rather than trying to create something from nothing?