Two of Vermont’s most influential newspapers endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Sunday, delivering a tough blow to hometown hero Bernie Sanders.
The Rutland Herald and the Barre-Montpelier Times Argus, which are owned by the same family and share an editorial board, hailed the “serious and substantive challenge” the Vermont senator has mounted against the former secretary of state, calling his contribution to the debate “of historic importance.” The papers credited the insurgent candidate with leading a progressive “awakening” that would continue long after the election is over.
“But outsider status, which Sanders has always enjoyed, does not automatically confer wisdom or ability,” they wrote. “As the leader of a movement he has been a great success. As president of all the people, he is not the best choice.”
Clinton, the papers argued, is the candidate with the “thorough and realistic understanding” of policy and the “breadth of experience” to implement a progressive vision. And in a “scary” election season featuring Republican frontrunner Donald Trump, they wrote, “The Democrats must be prepared to turn back that threat with the best possible candidate.”
The Herald‘s and Times Argus‘ editorial may fall on deaf ears. A Castleton Polling Institute survey commissioned by Vermont Public Radio and released last week showed the Burlington resident leading Clinton 78 to 13 percent among likely voters in Vermont’s Democratic primary, which takes place Tuesday.
Newspaper endorsements no longer have the cachet they once did, and the Herald‘s and Times Argus‘ circulation have dropped precipitously in recent years. But thanks to the strong and persuasive writing of editorial page editor and 2001 Pulitzer Prize winner David Moats, the papers do retain influence.
Though the Burlington Free Press often endorses political candidates, it will not do so in the presidential primaries, publisher Al Getler said Sunday. Seven Days does not endorse political candidates.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Hillary is the Donald Trump of the Democratic party. Nothing more than an establishment candidate taking big money who has lied and sold what ever soul she once had.
Won’t be reading those papers anymore.
Considering that both of those papers are no longer fit to line bird cages, that’s not saying much. Just as Shumlin and Leahy support him, only shows you how corrupt they are.
Another reason the Times Argus and Rutland Herald as an institution is heading downhill. This once formidable agent of the 4th estate is tragically out of step with Vermonters.
The sour grapes comments on here are pathetic.
Completely out of touch with their own readers and Vermont as a whole. Clinton will likely not even reach the 15% needed to a delegate from the people. The superdelegates are another story!
I like to support my hometown newspaper, but this is disappointing to say the least. Their circulation will take a hit.
I guess I need to cancel my subscription with the Rutland Herald. Has gotten to the point where there is nothing worth reading in their paper anyways.
It is my considered view that the US should abolish both Congress and the Presidency and bring back the monarchy. Send a delegation over to Windsor and apologize for that nasty revolution stuff (done by hotheads, to be sure) and ask nicely if we could borrow Will and Kate to be King and Queen for a few decades, while the Succession over in England sorts itself out. Wouldn’t they make an elegant couple to run things? No more Mitch McConnell.
If Will and Kate turn us down, then try one of the other Royal Houses in Europe. Maybe Denmark can spare us someone. Sure beats dealing with Joe Wilson (South Carolina 2nd Cong. Distr., shouting “You Lie!” during the State of the Union address; remember him? Just lovely.).
The fix is in for Hilary to get the nomination. Then she’ll lose to Trump, which will be inevitable since one of the “Republicans” will surely run as an independent. Ugh, what an embarrassment.
shame on the times-argus and the rutland herald. shame, shame, shame.
“shame on the times-argus and the rutland herald. shame, shame, shame.”
Good for the Times-Argus and the Rutland Herald. Good, good, good.
Neither Vermont’s newspapers, nor Vermont’s current and former high elected officials (Leahy, Kunin, etc.), are required to support Bernie merely because the majority of Vermonters like him. They are free to exercise their own informed judgment as to which candidate they believe is more qualified to be President. We don’t believe in mob rule here, even if it’s left wing mob rule. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Vermont’s current and former high elected officials (Leahy, Kunin, etc.), are not required to support Bernie merely because the majority of Vermonters like him and the majority of the people are not required to re-elect them if they do not align themselves with what the people want.
Then by all means go ahead and unelect Leahy, the longest serving, most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, with huge seniority and influence. Go ahead. That would make just so much sense. Just because he didn’t do one thing that you wanted. Cut off your nose to spite your face. Very good idea. Go for it.
You’re jumping the gun a little in your trolling. For starters, I did not call for anyone to be unelected. I simply said people are not obligated to vote for anyone no matter how long they might have served prior. People might not want to support Leahy for a re-election bid in light of his decision which to you, might be an “unsophisticated” reason to vote but the prerogative of the people all the same.
Whatever you say. You seem a little confused in what you’re saying.
Assumptions, Philo is correct. 1. You are a troll and 2. The people don’t have to re-elect a politician, really for whatever reason, but in this case if the politician is not representing the voice of the people. I’m not even sure what un-elect is. I suppose Philo seems confused because he is correct and you have run out of troll material to use on him/her.
Whatever you say. You’ve demonstrated yourself to be ridiculous in your Bernie-zealotry. Like your recent post suggesting that blacks were too dumb to realize that they should vote for Bernie instead of Hillary. Nice job there fella.
You are reaching for straws now. I’ve never made that claim. I didn’t even refer to a specific race of people. I simply took a quotation from someone interviewed in the story and commented that I thought it was sadly ironic. I feel that way for many reasons none of which centers on being too dumb to vote.