The Economist has just issued its endorsement in the US Presidential Election - for President Obama. You will find it here
> Mr Obama’s first term has been patchy. On the economy, the most powerful argument in his favour is simply that he stopped it all being a lot worse. Two other things count, on balance, in his favour. One is foreign policy, where he was also left with a daunting inheritance. The other qualified achievement is health reform. Even to a newspaper with no love for big government, the fact that over 40m people had no health coverage in a country as rich as America was a scandal. “Obamacare” will correct that.
> Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.
What a fabulous endorsement from a magazine which tends to lean free enterprise/Adam Smith/Capitalism/Ayn Rand.
Please share.