Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Arizona Republic fka The Arizona Republican back in the day has been living up to its namessake with its endorsements. As several of you have pointed out, The Arizona Republic(an) only endorses Republican candidates unless there is only a Democrat running for the office or the Republican candidate is so godawful, i.e., Crazy Uncle Joe Arpaio for example, that they are compelled to endorse the Democrat.
Columnist Laurie Roberts has been pushing her "Operation Dekookification" of the GOP in the mistaken belief that her father's GOP still exists — it disappeared years ago. As I have suggested before, The Arizona Republic(an) should start with an "Operation Dekookification" of its editorial board (you know who you are) which serves as the mouthpiece for the Arizona Republican Party.
With this caveat in mind, here is The Arizona Republic(an) editorial board meeting with U.S. Senate candidates Dr. Richard Carmona and Rep. Jeff Flake. Videos below the fold.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
TypePad HTML Email
Admittedly, that endorsement is harder to reconcile with my model, because it’s thought to be a close race. I think they may not be all that keen on Parker because of how he groveled for Arpaio’s endorsement in 2010 in the CD3 race. The Republic ed board genuinely hates Arpaio, for good reasons. It also could be that the race is not as close as it appears. The district tilts D and has a substantial Latino component, where Kyrsten will poll really well. And Kyrsten’s the far stronger of the two candidates on every measure. Heck, Parker won’t even debate her. I’ve heard of incumbents not debating. I suppose non-incumbents with huge leads might not debate. But it’s hard to understand a guy down in the polls in an open seat race not being willing to debate. And the ed board interview essentially is a debate. If Parker had done well, he’d want to do a televised debate, but he still doesn’t, so that indicates he didn’t perform that well in the ed board interview.
I think we are describing the same process, only you have added some additional clarity to their thought process. Thank you. I am confused about why the Republic endorsed Kyrsten Sinema. Is there something about Vernon Parker you guys in Phoenix have not posted about?
My take on how the Republic endorses is along the same lines, but slightly different. First, the ed board is not a democracy. Some members have much more voting power than others. Second, I think they endorse differently when their endorsement actually could swing a race. In those races, they tilt overwhelmingly R. For example, they endorsed Quayle and Brewer the last time around. In these races, they act as an arm of the Repbulican party, with the only exceptions being races where the R candidate truly offends them (Arpaio in the last few cycles, Hayworth in 2006, Horne in 2010). They work differently, however, where their endorsement is unlikely to mean something. In those races, they like to endorse D’s whenever it’s reasonable to do so, thereby enhancing their credibility as being unbiased in their endorsement process. For example, they’ll endorse Pastor each cycle, regardless of who his challenger is.
The best illustration of how they work would be the Mitchell / Schweikert contests of 2008 and 2010. In 2008, Mitchell was a lock, so they endorsed him. In 2010, it was a close race and their endorsement had a chance of meaning somehting, so they endorsed Schweikert.
Actually Laurie’s dad was a long-time Phoenix Bureau Chief for the Associated Press.
I don’t think he had a deep love for the Republic, and like all good journalists he always seemed fairly apolitical….