Union Leader Endorsement

Four years ago the largest newspaper in New Hampshire endorsed a Republican for president in 2012:

The eventual outcome of that 2012 New Hampshire primary:

  • Mitt Romney 95,669 votes – 39.4%
  • Ron Paul 55,455 – 22.8%.
  • Jon Huntsman 40,903 16.8%
  • Rick Santorum 23,432 9.5%
  • Newt Gingrich 23,421 9.4%
  • Rick Perry 1,709 0.7%
  • Michele Bachmann 343 0.1%
  • Other 2,628 1.4%

Today with the same publisher, rhetoric, and muddled rationale the Union Leader picked their horse in 2016 who is very likely to supply them with (in addition to ad revenue) a similar result.

20 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by skip3house on November 29, 2015 at 1:09 pm

    We all get confused now and then


  2. Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 1:25 pm

    The union endorsement should be based on the candidate stance on union issues not on the union presidents’ personal agenda. Ask the police and firefighters about CC’ s pledge of support. I think many times the union executives look the other way or intentionally overlook the obvious.


    • Though I am not much of a reader of the New Hampshire Union Leader I get the impression that the are ‘union’ in their name does indicate sympathy with the labor movement, especially for public employees. Christie’s defunding of the New Jersey pension system is likely a positive for his candidacy in their view.


    • Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 1:43 pm

      That type of stuff doesn’t happen in the local unions where all members are involved, have a say and their vote counts.
      That’s why, in this whole pension issue, there should be clear cut lines between the local and state! It’s an entirely different animal. The funding is different, the payouts different, and the structure different. To say all of NJ pensions are standing on a cliff is inaccurate.
      The state plans are….. Not the local plans.


      • Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 1:58 pm

        While somewhat true IF you extract TPAF from the State’s responsibility (even with no Local obligation for the accrued liability) the property taxes would rise exponentially to fund the normal cost IF, at a munimum, significant health care coverage reforms including retiree premium share isn’t implemented.


      • Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 3:24 pm

        But the final decisions are made at the state level, therein lies the accountability void. Who watches the union executives?


  3. Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 2:10 pm

    Mystery solved. The Gov gave them one of his if you endorse me I won’t say or do anything against you letters. Which NJ’s teachers and first responders found out the hard way, it don’t mean ……


  4. Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 3:00 pm

    Pity. Your saying NJs largest newspaper was a typo. Their endorsing NJs largest ass was not.


  5. Posted by S Moderation Douglas on November 29, 2015 at 4:27 pm

    Looks like I’m not the only one confused. At first read, I assumed this was the leader of some union endorsing Christie, not the editor of a conservative newspaper called “Union Leader” (a New Hampshire paper, not New Jersey.)

    It all makes sense now, in a weird way. When Christie drops out, I don’t think it will be because of this papers endorsement, but if I was him, I would look at this as a bad omen.

    As if he cares. Maybe Christie should be more compared to Herman Cain than Newt Gingrich. At one of his primary events, Herman said he said some people claimed he entered the race just to get publicity and advance his personal career and fortune. He said no, “I’m in it to win it. By the way, as you leave the building, there are signed copies of my book for sale.”

    Maybe in 2017, Chris Christie will have his own national radio show, too.


    • Sorry about that the typo but New Jersey’s largest newspaper did endorse Christie last time:

      likely for the same self-serving reasons.

      Though I don’t see Christie as cashing in through the media because (a) he is not at all entertaining (was Christie Whitman invited to dance with Letterman as an ex-governor?) and (b) come 2017 when the pension/benefit/tax/debt/bridgegate issues become even more obvious as crises than they are and with a democrat governor at the bully pulpit looking for a scapegoat Christie will have trouble getting a booking on Uncle Floyd.


      • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on November 29, 2015 at 6:27 pm

        It was the “union leader” that threw me. I didn’t know that was the name of a paper. Wondered which union would endorse Christie.


        • Easy to find in a state where unions rely on politicians building things, regardless of whether taxpayers need them or not. Here is one:


          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on November 29, 2015 at 7:38 pm

            And at top dollar, even if they are needed?

            I was having a uh …discussion with Tough Love about union (private sector) pay and pensions.

            It made me look. I had no idea how lucrative they (seem) to be. There may be extenuating circumstances there. IDK

            I actually was waiting for TL to come back with charges that their pay was due to government collusion. I’ve heard that before. In California we have laws to require “prevailing wages” for all government contracts. Due to the size and number of govt. contracts, those requirements may raise the rates for ALL union work. At any rate, I figured long ago that CalTRANS total budget ($10-12 B) is less than ten percent of the state total budget. And only abut ten percent of that is actually for CalTRANS employees. Most of the budget goes to contractors.

            CalTRANS probably pays the wages (and pensions) for more private sector employees than public sector. And apparently they ain’t cheap.

            On a side note, the director of CalTRANS has an engineering degree and is in charge of a $10-12B budget. Made $165,000 in 2014, with an average total compensation over the last four years of less than $200,000. I think that’s less than the average police chief in California. WTH

            But with road, bridge, school, office construction, I wonder how many “private sector” worker pay and pensions are all, or mostly all, “public sector” money? AND, their “taxes” (recycled) are paying my pension?

            Not that I’m complaining, I admire irony. As I often like to say,

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on November 29, 2015 at 7:56 pm

            The good thing, apparently, is that California (and New Jersey) are actually paying for defined benefit pensions for a lot of private sector workers, but the states don’t have to worry about unfunded liabilities there, since the payments are at the time of delivery, then the liability is with the MEP.

            That’s not always the case, though.

            “However, many companies that contract with the federal government have continued to offer defined benefit plans, in part because the investment risks are absorbed by the taxpayers through reimbursements for pension shortfalls.”


            As I understand, the govt. not only pays pensions as a pass through on the original contract; if the company pension fund falls short due to market losses, the taxpayer ponies up extra money to cover the losses.


          • Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 9:03 pm

            SMD rest easy, TL is busy scouring sources for a rebuttal! That’s in the expectation it will actually be substantive, not the rhetorical same old same old?

          • Posted by Anonymous on November 30, 2015 at 8:54 am

            They’re running out of right wing conservative data sources OR like The Donald they’re proven to be wrong!

        • Posted by Anonymous on November 29, 2015 at 7:04 pm

          That’s easy, The Fraternal Order of Private Sector Goons – TL Inc.!


          • Posted by skip3house on November 29, 2015 at 7:41 pm

            My polite comment, as the first here now looks out of place since NJ was replaced with NH. Least you can do is remove my comment, please…..

  6. Posted by Anonymous on November 30, 2015 at 4:48 pm

    The Giants loss isn’t the end of the world just their season – see ya next year.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: