Influence

No influence to see here. Move along. MOVE ALONG!
No influence to see here. Move along. MOVE ALONG!

Some action this Monday morning…

The OWH has issued their endorsement of Hillary Clinton for President. They bend over backwards to point out that while this is the first Democrat they’ve endorsed since FDR (the didn’t endorse in Johnson v. Goldwater — apparently at Johnson’s behest) it has NOTHING to do with Warren Buffett.

As you may know, Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway own’s the OWH. And of course you know, Buffett not only endorses Hillary, but their relationship goes back much farther than his stumping for her at North High this summer.

I’ve told before how my then fiancee and I went into Borsheims one evening back in 2000, to check on our wedding registry. As we walked through the doors, just before closing, I noticed the bemuscled dudes at the door with tubes coming out of their ears. Then upon entering, we noticed the fully-staffed store, and only two customers there (other than my future wife and me) : Hillary Clinton and Warren Buffett.

They later went up to a private fundraiser in Regency. But if there was any doubt as to whom Warren had close ties to, that was my personal signal.

So the OWH’s Terry Kroeger wrote up an extra message with the editorial that said, OH, Warren had NOTHING to do with this endorsement! Why, he NEVER says anything to us! He tells us to be INDEPENDENT!

And no one should have any reason to think that Buffett tries to strong arm the OWH’s editorial staff.

He’s smarter than that.

But to insist that there is NO influence from Buffett is silliness on wheels.

Here is the OWH’s boss’s closest political ally at the door of the White House.
Here is the boss personally stumping for his candidate in his home town.
Here is the boss offering to personally drive voters to the polls in Omaha for his candidate.

Think of the embarrassment if the hometown newspaper, which Buffett used to deliver as a paperboy, which he now OWNS, which has a running column called “Warren Watch“, did not endorse the candidate whom he could not have been tighter with for at least the past 15-20 years.

And here’s the thing: their endorsement wasn’t anything special. It was what every Democrat on TV, pretty much every media source (but I repeat myself) has been saying for the past six to nine months. It wasn’t as if they came up with some new line of attack on Donald Trump.

So better if Terry Kroeger simply wrote up the little endorsement, and leave out the, “oh, my we could never be influenced by our boss, the richest man in America, who is also a close personal friend of Hillary! Never!

That’s why you have the funny pages.

 

Stothert for Bacon

Speaking of endorsements, Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert endorsed General Don Bacon for Congress this morning:

“I am proud to endorse Don Bacon for the United States Congress. As an Air Force General, Don has the national security expertise that is needed during a time when this country faces threats from every corner of the globe.

I am confident that when Don is elected, he will tackle Washington’s out of control government spending and fight to reduce taxes so that Nebraskans can keep more of their hard earned money. General Bacon was a strong leader in the military and I have no doubt he will be a strong leader in Congress.”

And Bacon responded…

“I’ve studied leadership my whole adult life, and worked with many superb leaders during my three decades in the Air Force. Jean Stothert leads with character, strong vision, and a tremendous work ethic. Omaha is the best place to live in our nation and she continues to make it even better.”

 

Scrambling…

Stothert’s endorsement comes after a weekend of more and more outlets claiming that the election for President is over, and that Hillary has already won.

As that is happening, others are looking at the Congressional map and coming to another conclusion:

cu5x2u3usaeypnv

If the media is going to start talking about “landslides”, they better start talking about the effects of one in this unusual year…

 

More later!
Follow @LeavenworthSt on the Twitter and Like Leavenworth St. on The Facebook because that’s how you stay up to date on the talk of Nebraska politics.

21 comments

  1. Sparkles says:

    From this morning’s Politico –
    Obama, Holder to lead post-Trump redistricting campaign
    “The former attorney general heads up a new Democratic effort to challenge the GOP’s supremacy in state legislatures and the U.S. House.

    The new group, called the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, was developed in close consultation with the White House. President Barack Obama himself has now identified the group—which will coordinate campaign strategy, direct fundraising, organize ballot initiatives and put together legal challenges to state redistricting maps—as the main focus of his political activity once he leaves office.”

    The gloves are off. A new Democratic party has arrived.

    Also, there’s not a prayer in hell HRC will make the same mistake President Obama did in his first years in office – to attempt to deal in good faith with a party of ill-faith, a party beyond reason, a party whose singular mission was to inflict failure upon a sitting President in order to score political points and regain power – country be damned.
    HRC is far too savvy to allow herself, or the country, to be victimized by a malevolent, do-nothing GOP.

    And as if Trump has done enough damage to the Republican party, President HRC, Obama and Holder will have the Donald still aiding their cause as they carry out their separate missions to reclaim a government – of the people, by the people, for the people.
    For it is certain that the newly formed grifters guild of Trump, Bannon (Breitbart), Ailes (Fox), Alex ‘FreakShow’ Jones and Sean ‘DunderHead’ Hannity and Ann ‘I’m a Man’ Coulter will soon be launching their new TeeVee Empire-O’-Hate. A toxic bullhorn that will serve as a daily reminder that roughly one third of the GOP is a party of hate and incapacity.

    Thank you Donald Trump, for it is your extraordinary offensiveness that will ultimately serve to Make America Great Again.

  2. Pat McPherson (and proud to speak out) says:

    There is no question that Buffett’s ownership influences the editorial board and Kroeger. To think otherwise is simply stupid. The truth is that even the reporters of the OWH are influenced by not only Buffett but the thought processes of the editorial board. While the best use of the paper is for bird cage liner, sadly we have to subject ourselves to reading it just to see what it is preaching to the other readers who in many cases are less discerning.

  3. NE Voter says:

    Pretty weak tea, Sweeper.

    Does anyone honestly believe that Warren Buffett gives a rip about the political endorsements of the Omaha World-Herald?

    Say it to yourself this time — “Omaha World-Herald.” A daily newspaper whose influence extends for tens of miles outside the Omaha-Council Bulffs area.

    Now consider this — BRK purchased the Omaha World-Herald on November 30, 2011. By then, the Great Recession had reduced the OW-H and many other newspapers to the status of a Graham-esque “cigar butts;” so Warren was able to pick it up with a little of BRK’s pocket lint for a pretty pitiful $135 million or so.

    And then — Wait for it — In October of 2012, after capturing this crown jewel of journalistic excellence, the mighty, globe-bestriding Warren Buffett used his newfound status as a media colossus to demand that the Omaha World-Herald trumpet the endorsement of . . .

    Willard (“Mitt”) Romney.

    Wake up, people.

    • anonymous says:

      It wasn’t recession that was the downturn of newspapers, them and magazines are fossils of communication and have been sliding, because they also suck. You can try to convince your paper reading self that Buffet has no influence, regardless of who they endorse is laughable.

  4. Millennial voter says:

    “And here’s the thing: their endorsement wasn’t anything special. It was what every Democrat on TV, pretty much every media source (but I repeat myself) has been saying for the past six to nine months. It wasn’t as if they came up with some new line of attack on Donald Trump.”

    So, to Sweeper, it’s completely impossible the OWH editorial board independently arrived at the same conclusion as everyone else who has not performed Simone Biles-level mental gymnastics to convince themselves Donald Trump would in any way, shape or form be more presidential or a better leader on the world stage than Clinton.

    No, because he is so sure that the absence of evidence to some grand conspiracy between OWH and Buffett is, in fact, evidence, that Warren Buffett is directing newspaper endorsements all across this great land…

  5. Sparkles says:

    Oct 13 – Dow Jones Newswires –
    “U.S. unemployment claims at lowest level since 1973”

    Oct. 17 – Christian Science Monitor –
    “More high school students across the nation received their diplomas last year than ever before, with a record 83 percent of students graduating on time”

    Sept 13 – Washington Post
    “Middle class incomes had their fastest growth on record last year”
    Middle-class Americans and the poor enjoyed their best year of economic improvement in decades..

    President Obama has now presided over the longest streak of job creation in recorded history – 78 months.

    Teen pregnancy. birth and abortions rates have fallen to an all time low during President Obama’s tenure.

    Wake up, people.

  6. Bluejay says:

    No endorsement would have been smarter considering that Trump will carry NE by 20 points.

    Dallas Morning News has seen a wave of cancellations after it endorsed HRC.

    • Sparkles says:

      The Dallas Morning News editor Mike Wilson:
      “Certainly we’ve paid a price for our presidential recommendation, but then, we write our editorials based on principle and sometimes principle comes at a cost,”

      principle
      noun prin·ci·ple \ˈprin(t)-s(ə-)pəl, -sə-bəl\
      : a moral rule or belief that helps you know what is right and wrong and that influences your actions

      Oct 16 – CNN (referring to the Arizona Republic)
      “Conservative newspaper that endorsed Clinton details death threats”

    • Anonymous says:

      “No endorsement would have been smarter considering that Trump will carry NE by 20 points.” Which says what, exactly, about Nebraska voters? That they’ll take the continuous, rancid fart that is Trump over the the evil witchinations of HRC? Is that ALL? SMH.

  7. SInce no newspaper, to my knowledge, has endorsed Trump (more have endorsed Johnson), and the vast majority have endorsed Clinton, isn’t it a bit ‘silly’ to try to imply Buffett would have had any influence on this? Lots of papers he doesn’t own have endorsed Hillary.

    At this point, the only people left in the Trump camp are his angry redneck core.

    • Anonymous says:

      The San Francisco Chronicle had an article last week titled, “Trump strikes out on newspaper endorsements”. At that time Trump had not received the endorsement of any major newspaper. From the article:

      “The Atlantic magazine endorsed Clinton, just the third time in its 160-year history that it made a presidential recommendation. The others? Abraham Lincoln over Stephen Douglas in 1860 and President Lyndon Johnson over Barry Goldwater in 1964.”

      “San Diego Union-Tribune
      History: Has not endorsed Democrat since Union was founded in 1868
      2016 choice: Hillary Clinton”

      “Detroit News
      History: Endorsed every Republican presidential nominee since its 1873 founding
      2016 choice: Gary Johnson”

      “Arizona Republic
      History: Endorsed every Republican presidential nominee since its 1890 founding
      2016 choice: Hillary Clinton”

      “Cincinnati Enquirer
      History: Endorsed every Republican presidential nominee since 1916
      2016 choice: Hillary Clinton”

      “Dallas Morning News
      History: Endorsed every Republican nominee since 1940 (except 1964, when it was neutral on Goldwater-Johnson)
      2016 choice: Hillary Clinton”

      And the list continues to grow, so OBVIOUSLY the Omaha World Herald was unduly influenced and is a part of this “rigged” election!

    • Bluejay says:

      My view is that in 2016 what difference does a newspaper endorsement make? Mostly virtue signaling.

      If editorials could be outsourced to China or India I bet they all would be backing Trump.

  8. Interesting piece correlating the percentage of non-college-educated whites with how well Trump is doing in battleground states. I was stunned to find out that almost two-thirds of the population of Iowa are whites who haven’t been to college. The other battleground state where he’s barely above water is Ohio (big majority of whites are not college-educated there). States where a high percentage of whites have a college education, such as Colorado, are firmly in Clinton’s camp.

    I also see that Evan McMullin is now tied with Trump in Utah, and ahead of Hillary.

  9. Ratings matter says:

    I see there are rumours of Trump starting a TV network after the election. Is there a chance this has been the biggest promotional stunt in recent history? If Trump does start a TV network, will it be to the right of “Fair and Balanced” fox news? I know Roger Ailes is looking for a job.

    On a different note, if the OWH endorse a republican candidate will SS proudly state how the editorial board fought off dictator Buffett? Or will the argument be that the Dem candidate was just terrible?

  10. Oracle says:

    I want to thank SS for providing a very important public service through his many posts lately. It’s been fascinating seeing how the mind of a partisan hack operates, placing party before country at all times.

  11. Sparkles says:

    Hours ago –
    “I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up,” McCain said on WPHT Philadelphia radio..

    The Republican party has been infected a brain wasting disease that knows no bounds.

    • The Grundle King says:

      Advice AND Consent. Congress is under no obligation to consent to any SCOTUS nominee. While I disagree that preemptively rejecting ANY nominee is a bit overboard…as a justice comparable with Scalia should certainly be confirmed…Congressional Republicans are within their rights.

      That pesky ol’ “checks and balances” bit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.