New York Times Endorses Clinton and Kasich

44 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. LeftCoastTeacher says:

   January 30, 2016 at 5:59 pm

   Do not take a drink of water right befor you read that the Times supports Clinton and Ka-sick. You’ll get your screen wet when you expel the water out of flabbergastery.

   Reply
   • joan says:

     January 31, 2016 at 1:38 pm

     Bloomberg or anyone else….where are YOU?

     Reply
     • dianeravitch says:

       January 31, 2016 at 2:05 pm

       Joan, you don’t want Bloomberg.
       If he runs as an independent, he will elect Trump.

2. Ed Ciaccio says:

   January 30, 2016 at 6:01 pm

   Of course the NY Times endorsed Hillary Clinton. The Times was the most influential supporter of Bush’s illegal war of aggression on Iraq, publishing neocon propaganda about Saddam’s fictional weapons of mass destruction. Neocons stick together.

   The Times also will never support such a solid critic of Wall Street as Bernie Sanders, given its home town, NY City, where Wall Street reigns supreme.

   Any union leaders who also endorsed Hillary Clinton, such as teachers unions, should be ashamed of themselves for selling out their rank and file.

   Reply
3. Gordon Wilder says:

   January 30, 2016 at 6:17 pm

   Corporate controlled media promotes corporate agenda – period.
   Nuff Sed.

   Reply
   • Yvonne Siu-Runyan says:

     January 31, 2016 at 12:23 pm

     YUP! Hillary is for herself and will do anything to get her way. She’s spoiled and selfish, and devious. I don’t want her and I am a female.

     Reply
     • Lloyd Lofthouse says:

       January 31, 2016 at 12:38 pm

       This is the conundrum. If it comes down to Hillery or Trump, would you not vote and let Trump win the White House?

4. Lloyd Lofthouse says:

   January 30, 2016 at 6:29 pm

   That will kill John Kasich’s chance to become president of the U.S. and maybe another term as governor of Ohio. Hard Core conservatives hate and do not trust the New York Times because it is liberal. The NYT endorsement won’t hurt Hillary because the far right hated her before she was born just because she is a woman and today because her last name is Clinton. To the far right, facts and data are not important. Lies are. They love to be fooled.

   Reply
   • Barbara says:

     January 30, 2016 at 7:57 pm

     Kasich is already on his second term as my governor and two is the limit here — to which I can only say Whew! because he’s been awful for Ohio.

     The hard core right hates him already because he approved the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, the only truly decent thing he’s done.

     If he somehow does come from behind and wins the election, expet the third term of GW.

     Reply
5. sprawler47 says:

   January 30, 2016 at 7:01 pm

   Am I mistaken or is WALL STREET in New York?
   Doesn’t Hillary Clinton live in NY?
   Did the Times endorse her every run for office?
   Is Wall Street a major source of revenue for the NY area?
   Have the Clinton’s been particularly kind to the movers and shakers of Wall St and the major banks?

   None of things should automatically disqualify her for endorsement but they generally give her a boost over her only rival, the Senator from out of state.

   Reply
   • Lloyd Lofthouse says:

     January 30, 2016 at 7:09 pm

     Hillary and Bill Clinton have had a long working friendship with Eli Broad, who is public enemy #1 to many LA Unified teachers and children.

     http://laschoolreport.com/broads-support-of-clinton-raising-concerns-within-teacher-unions/

     Reply
6. Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

   January 30, 2016 at 7:08 pm

   You know, Diane, the NYT has done its endorsements.

   It would be really nice and critical if NPE were to endorse Bernie Sanders as of tomorrow. For the life of me, NPE has endorsed so many other types of politicians running for seats and offices, so why not endorse Bernie RIGHT NOW??????

   I don’t think, with all due respect, that supporting the candidate who wins is necessarily the right thing to do at this point, because we should be making both pragmatic and symbolic statements of endorsement.

   Hillary will not support us. It’s no longer, “If I rub your back, you will rub mine.”

   That model ONLY works primarily for very wealthy and powerful power players high up, and we are not on that level. We at NPE are the grassroots people and should be acting accordingly.

   Of course, it’s your organization and you founded it, so I will never be motivated to be alienated, but I think it is a HUGE mistake for NPE not to endorse Bernie at this point.

   From your endorsement logo designer for the NPE website,
   Rober Rendo

   Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     January 30, 2016 at 7:34 pm

     Thanks, Robert. The endorsement process is always time-consuming and slow. Whether rightly or wrongly, we never considered an endorsement in the Democratic primary. Most of our meager resources are allocated to state and local races. I expect we will endorse in the general election. I am only one vote on the c4 board, it is up to the board.

     Reply
   • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

     January 30, 2016 at 8:52 pm

     Diane and other Board members of NPE:

     I am not sure why it is time consuming for NPE.

     People get together online or in a room, and discuss, debate, and then come to a vote. Or NPE can poll its members.

     As for resources to endorse Bernie Sanders, I thought it was merely a matter of putting a huge banner up on the website that reads, “NPE hereby endorse Bernie Sanders”. That, and putting out a press release.

     Of course, NPE might consider this all too risky, but at this point and at this nadir in American history, I almost see nothing that we have to lose.

     You and the board are not, per se, accountable to me personally for why primaries are not endorsed, but these are merely my reflections.

     I still support NPE and will do almost anything to fight privatization and to fortify public schools and protections for children, families, and educators.

     Reply
   • Susan Lee Schwartz says:

     January 31, 2016 at 1:39 pm

     I grasp that change is slow.
     I grasp that playing safe in this nasty political climate is a strategy.
     I grasp that in the past, the young, new NPE did not back a candidate in the primary.

     I get it that… it would not be ‘healthy’ for the NPE to attract the enmity of the billionaire’s boy’s club, when it is a fledgling in the arena of education politics..
     BUT–>The NPE is the ONLY organization out there that can counter the PACs that are destroying education! It would be a disaster if it came under the assault that these powerful oligarchs wage on any organization they see as a threat to their agenda.

     I GET IT. I AM ONE OF THOSE BRAVE TEACHERS THAT STOOD UP AND SPOKE TRUTH TO POWER… and it ended my career.
     TAKING A STAND IS FRAUGHT WITH DANGER!

     BUT>>> I copied this from the NPE site, and HAVE USED IT AS part of the info I give to people about the NPE “the NPE Action Fund: It will endorse candidates and produce studies and engage in other activities and public information to support public education. ”

     http://npeaction.org/2015/10/24/newsletter-help-npe-action-candidates-in-your-district-city-or-state/

     BERNIE SANDERS IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE OUT THERE who offers anything. More important is his CHARACTER…because he can be trusted TO WORK FOR OUR PEOPLE, when he finds out the truth about the EIC https://greatschoolwars.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/eic-oct_11.pdf

     Still, I am SHOCKED at the reluctance to endorse this good and brilliant man of integrity and real character…ALONE in these things…BERNIE SANDERS!

     Reply
     • dianeravitch says:

       January 31, 2016 at 2:02 pm

       NPE has zero fear of the billionaires boys club. We laugh at them.

     • Susan Lee Schwartz says:

       January 31, 2016 at 2:18 pm

       HEE, HEE.
       And well you should, but they are not laughing at you, my dear, because they want education to end for our people, and you are our champion!

       I simply meant that their PACS are pouring zillions into this election, and it will unnerve them, if on the eve of the Iowa primary the NPE did as Robert suggested, and made it clear that there is A REAL candidate out there who will support public schools.

       it worries me (an obviously Robert and others) that BERNIE might not be the nominee.
       We cannot afford to be slow, when the money is pouring in to speed the process ‘their’ way.The EIC is real and determined. We must be ,too.

       Millions of teachers supporting a candidate could make an impact

       I really think that teachers just don’t know what he will do, and I blame his campaign for ignoring this segment of the voting population. They did a bang-up job bringing in money and getting out the young people so Bernie was no longer, “Bernie WHO?”

       But Bernie had but few words at the end of an hour long speech to cover education?Income equality is dependent on public schools, so all his talk about income Inequality should include this major cause.

       Anyway…all it takes for bad people to win is for good people to not to act…. pardon the paraphrase.

   • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

     January 31, 2016 at 2:27 pm

     Diane, I know timing can be everything.

     Is NPE concerned about the timing of their endorsement? Can you ask the Board members?

     Has NPE considered polling it members to see which candidate they think NPE should support?

     Diane, I hope you and NPE will consider Susan Schwartz being a presenter at the NPE conference this year. She is a textbook classic example of teacher competence and excellence that was squashed by the money-making, low-quality grabbing privatization mentality of public schools and profiteering destruction of the public commons.

     Hers would be a model parable for the rest of us . . . .

     Reply
7. Lisa Haver says:

   January 30, 2016 at 7:18 pm

   The NYT wants the guy who wants to “abolish all teachers’ lounges” so they won’t sit around and complain, or worse, organize, to be President of the United States. That’s why they are the paper of record.
   http://tinyurl.com/nhex8te

   Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     January 30, 2016 at 7:39 pm

     The Times editorial said:
     “Mr. Kasich is no moderate. As governor, he’s gone after public-sector unions, fought to limit abortion rights and opposed same-sex marriage.” They chose him because he was the least terrible. Knowing how he turned a blind eye to charter corruption in Ihio, I’d say he is plain terrible.

     Reply
   • Doug says:

     January 30, 2016 at 10:46 pm

     The Buckeyes in my house completely agree with you, Diane. I just can’t stand one more rocking chair story from Grandpa Kasich. Don’t get me wrong, I want him gone – but not to DC.

     Reply
8. Clifford Boldt says:

   January 30, 2016 at 8:01 pm

   This may be off topic, but here goes.

   About myself: I am a male, retired and currently serving as a school trustee in a public school district in the Comox Valley on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada.

   Our school board, for a variety of reasons, is looking at the possibility of changing from a 5 day school week to a 4 day week. I am looking for credible research information and data about a f 4 day week. I know it will save us money, but what about what happens for student learning?

   Can you point me to some credible research on this topic or individuals I could connect with about this issue?

   Thanks in Advance,

   Cliff Boldt, School Trustee Comox Valley School District #71. mcboldt@telus.net

   Reply
   • Dienne says:

     January 30, 2016 at 8:13 pm

     Don’t imagine it will ever happen. Parents will be in an uproar because they need their kids to be in school five days a week because they have to work five days a week.

     Of course, you could take that fifth day and just let the kids play and do what they want, supervised by low-wage monitors. Compared to the wall-to-wall seat time kids in this country are subject to now, I’m not sure I would object to such an arrangement for my own kids. It would be one day where they could do their own projects and learn what they want to learn and interact with their peers in their own way.

     BTW, if “learning” can be forgotten over a three-day weekend, it was never learning to begin with.

     Reply
     • Lloyd Lofthouse says:

       January 30, 2016 at 8:29 pm

       What Dienne says was true in the Southern California school district where I taught. When the district asked parents what they thought about doing away with the long summer break and having several two week breaks during the year instead, the uproar was enough the end that idea.

       The traditional school schedule ash been around for more than 100 years and our culture sets its clock by it. To change it from what it has been will disrupt what people are used to and that usually doesn’t sit well.

   • Montana teacher says:

     January 30, 2016 at 9:36 pm

     Hi, Cliff.
     More than 100 schools in Montana use the four-day schedule. These are typically rural schools which have half the students gone on Fridays traveling to sports and other school activities. There are mixed reviews, but it looks like the communities like this model. See the Great Falls Tribune at
     http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2015/12/06/day-school-week-success-varies-across-montana/76895876/

     This professor in the next article below used evidence from Colorado and discovered that four-day weeks did not hurt academic achievement:

     http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/EDFP_a_00165#.VgxBfZcXE6E

     Good luck with your decision. I can add that, as an experienced teacher in a Montana city, If the forced standardization in our urban districts drives me too crazy, that a four-day job in a rural district would appeal to me, as far as increased autonomy and also time to spend with my family on the weekends. I could live in a small town and then come back home for three days. It might help a financially struggling district attract teachers.

     Reply
   • Threatened out West says:

     January 30, 2016 at 10:30 pm

     Several rural Utah districts also have four day weeks. It makes it easier to get kids to sports and other extracurricular activities without missing class time, and saves a ton of money on transportation. It seems to work pretty well.

     I have never heard whether the outcomes are better; however, it does not seem to be hurting education.

     Reply
9. Chiara says:

   January 31, 2016 at 7:47 am

   John Kasich hasn’t done anything to benefit vast majority of working people in this state.

   He expanded Medicaid which definitely benefited people who are very low income and he has showered gifts on the top 10%, but he has not done one thing to support the vast majority in what is a PRIMARILY working and middle class state.

   He’s identical to the Obama Administration on public education- public schools have not fared well on his watch- which may be why he never mentions the public schools that 93% of children attend but instead talks only about charters and vouchers.

   Ed reform leaders in this state spent the last two years on yet another charter bill. They finally turned their attention to the public system, but only to put in yet another elaborate assessment system. The new assessment bill is unreadable. I challenge anyone outside Columbus ed reform lobbyist circles to decipher this thing they’re getting ready to impose. It seems to have a carve-out on “accountability” for high-churn schools which I suspect was put it in there to protect the charter sector, since it probably will apply only to charters.

   Reply
10. patriciahale says:

    January 31, 2016 at 7:54 am

    However the Readers’ Picks comments line up behind Bernie, with the top comment garnering over 2100 recommends for Bernie.

    Reply
    • Susan Lee Schwartz says:

      January 31, 2016 at 2:20 pm

      Of course!

      Reply
11. Thomas Cannon says:

    January 31, 2016 at 8:48 am

    One potential positive outcome from NPR and the NYT giving Bernie Sanders such lousy coverage is that perhaps readers will extrapolate such bias to other areas of coverage. What is happening to Bernie has been happening to public education for the past five years. As a physics teacher and a progressive, I at one time held the NYT and NPR in high esteem. In recent years I have seen how both of these institutions have gotten their analysis of education so very wrong and for the worst possible reason. I submit that they are being swayed by generous corporate interests. It is not surprising when the far right targets public education but when the New York Times and NPR do so, it falsely legitimizes the far right’s constant and well-rehearsed (via ALEC) narrative of austerity. Bernie Sanders is the one candidate who would put BIG MONEY and the “far right” on their heels instead of always being on the attack.

    Reply
    • artseagal says:

      January 31, 2016 at 10:06 am

      Walk quietly but carry a big stick. I think of this adage when all these groups give candidate endorsements to Clinton. Maybe the fact that the NYT endorsed Clinton will only backlash because Bernie is proving that many Americans are “walking quietly with big sticks”… they are sick of being “fed lies” in their supposed “best interest”. How long can you “snow job” a majority of a nation and actually get away with it? Certainly not forever! Why else would Sanders have amassed SO MUCH MONEY from People’s pocket change… NO CORPORATE PAC MONEY…. My hope is that there is honesty at the polls and no fixing the ballot boxes with “today’s equivalent” of “hanging chads”.. as in some computer glitch designed to favor the “favored” candidate… or whatever other corporate-led scheme could appear at the ballot box! I find it ironic that the US has policed elections around the world but we ignore the possibility of our own national risk at the ballot box. Has anyone forgotten the Gore fiasco! I think “We the People” can be a great force for change in this election BUT WE MUST BE MINDFUL OF THE FUZZINESS AT THE BALLOT BOX TOO!!!

      Reply
12. Chiara says:

    January 31, 2016 at 9:06 am

    I just love how there’s no examination of why people might be supporting Sanders.

    It’s just assumed they’re irrational or something 🙂

    I don’t think it’s irrational to say the government is heavily influenced to the point of complete capture by monied and/or powerful interests who are not at all representative of most people. In fact, I think it’s irrational to deny the huge piles of evidence that support that.

    It’s not about whether they’re “good” or “bad” people. We don’t know them personally or their innermost motives. We’re simply looking at what’s evident in campaign finance, who gets access, what comes out of DC, etc. That’s all we CAN do.

    Reply
    • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

      January 31, 2016 at 11:29 am

      Chiara,

      Yes that is always they case, but some voting records are really different than others, and if you look at Bernie’s, he has a different orientation than the rest, who are a bunch of blow up-dolls with no real paradigm change.

      Reply
    • Susan Lee Schwartz says:

      January 31, 2016 at 2:23 pm

      They know why people support him… The media just wants to characterize him as irrational or a socialist, or an old man, or un-electable… the media paints him as a loser, and thus anyone who supports him as not thinking clearly/

      Reply
13. SomeDAM Poet says:

    January 31, 2016 at 9:14 am

    It appears that everyone at the NY Times is getting on board the Clinton train.

    “Nobel*” economist Paul Krugman also effectively endorsed Clinton on the pages of the NY Times last week when he dismissed all of the experts who have signed on to Bernie’s Wall Street reforms as “un-Serious People” (and in the process, exposed himself as a political hack bent on a job in the Clinton administration)

    *Krugman revels in his “Nobel” laurels but there is just one minor problemThere is No Nobel Prize in Economics

    Reply
    • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

      January 31, 2016 at 10:16 am

      Krugman is a good guy, but the NYT signs his paycheck, so he will compromise his views big time. I am done with him for the most part. This is one time I am being a purist, and purism is becoming increasingly attractive to people in the trenches. It’s what this country needs, even as one balances that idea with not being a single issue voter.

      I am disappointed that NPE is not endorsing in the primaries and not endorsing Bernie. SO disappointed, but still, I am better off with Diane Ravitch and NPE in my life than without, I think. I hope.

      Funny how no one else commented on NPE endorsing Bernie at this point. No one except me . . . .

      But maybe that is how the sentiment is . . . . Maybe?

      Reply
    • SomeDAM Poet says:

      January 31, 2016 at 10:47 am

      Krugman might be a “good guy”, but like so many other mainstream economists (and perhaps even more so because he is also a columnist) he pretends (and might actually believe) that he knows everything about everything.

      Way back when Al Gore was running, Krugman wrote a piece called Al Gorithms that criticized Al Gore’s reliance on scientific advisers who worked on Chaos theory. The only problem was that , unbeknownst to krugman, Chaos theory, which krugman called “pop science” is a quite legitimate scientific field.

      The irony was that Krugman — a fellow who deals in pseudo-science (at best) — was criticizing real scientists (one who has been heavily involved in developing Chaos theory is actually a legitimate Nobel Prize winner, in physics: Murray-Gellman)

      Krugman has also belittled non-mainstream economists, ecologists and others who have the “audacity” to point out that the “eternal growth” model that mainstream economics is based upon is a myth.

      Anyone who knows the first thing about the real (resource and energy limited) world knows that nothing can grow ad infinitum. Physics simply does not allow it. Then again, krugman seems to have a poor understanding of physical laws.

      Krugman is basically a columnist who rides on his “Nobel” train and likes to consider himself among the “Very serious people” while dismissing everyone else as “un-serious” (which is also very ironic given krugman’s penchant for mocking the “very Serious People”)

      Reply
    • SomeDAM Poet says:

      January 31, 2016 at 11:01 am

      By the way.

      I also think Bernie would be hands down a better choice than Hillary for education based not only on his long term record, but also on his specific statements (eg, to MTA)

      When Sanders was speaking at the MTA bargaining summit back in October of last year on public education, he said something that seems to be very much in line with NPE’s working philosophy:

      “I believe in public education and I believe that public education is one o f the strongest democratic institutions in our country, that we’ve got to fight against the privatization of public education..and I intend to do that”

      If Hillary has made a similar statement, I am not aware of it.

      Reply
    • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

      January 31, 2016 at 11:05 am

      SDP,

      Please e-mail me at artwork88@aol.com

      Reply
    • SomeDAm Poet says:

      January 31, 2016 at 1:05 pm

      Paul Krugman’s 1998 prediction about the internet

      “The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in “Metcalfe’s law” – which states that the number of potential connections in a network is proportional to the square of the number of participants – becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.”

      “Economists are like psychics”

      Economists are like psychics,
      This cannot be denied.
      Cuz if, by chance, they get it right,
      It’s greatly AMPLIFIED!!

      But mostly, they just get it wrong,
      And utter not a word
      For them to somehow point this out
      Would really be unheard.

      And when their goof’s so blatant
      They really can’t ignore it,
      They simply claim they “found a flaw”
      And “markets will restore it”

      Reply
    • Susan Lee Schwartz says:

      January 31, 2016 at 2:25 pm

      Did you catch New Rules, by Bill maher this week. (Jan 29 016) I tis called “truth is dead” and the internet killed it.”

      So much for Paul!

      Reply
    • SomeDAm Poet says:

      January 31, 2016 at 3:49 pm

      “Truth is dead and the internet killed it” says the guy who broadcasts his stuff on the internet.

      ha ha ha ha .

      Reply
14. Ed Detective says:

    February 1, 2016 at 2:38 pm

    The 2016 endorsements will be like a “whose who” list of who serves the .1% and who serves the rest.

    Reply
    • Ed Detective says:

      February 1, 2016 at 2:39 pm

      who’s who, rather

      Reply