I concluded Good news for Michigan Democrats, bad news for proposals at Examiner.com by whining about not finishing all I wanted to do.
Had I not run out of time and energy last night, I would have written a fourth article about the polling in the Michigan Supreme Court contests. That's also good news for Democrats, as Connie Kelley and Bridget McCormack, the two candidates the Free Press endorsed, are both leading for the two eight-year terms on the ballot. That would be enough to swing control of the court to the Democrats.
It turned out that I got my opportunity after all. The Detroit News and Lansing State Journal both posted the summaries of their endorsements today, which made them newsworthy again. I also stumbled across an angle for the story, making Bridget Mary McCormack the star. After all, as you'll find out if you read the entire article, everything happened to her. Also, it seems that most everyone likes her.
A busy week for McCormack and others in Supreme Court contest
It's been a wild week for Bridget Mary McCormack's campaign for Michigan Supreme Court. The University of Michigan law professor earned the endorsement of one newspaper last Sunday, had two others reissue their earlier endorsements this Sunday, and received both an endorsement and free advertising from a prominent Detroit area attorney in between. On Tuesday, McCormack also came in second in a statewide poll for a contest in which there would be two victors.
That was the good news. The bad news was that she became the target for an attack ad from an outside group. In response, she defended herself on television Friday.
As for the other candidates for the state's highest court, they came along for the ride, with four candidates, Shelia Johnson, Connie Marie Kelley, Stephen Markman, and Brian Zahra, earning two endorsements each, Johnson and Kelley also being the beneficiaries of donated advertising, and Kelley and Zahra also leading in the polls.
It pleased me to find two sources who agreed with me on who to vote for. In case you haven't already figured out who, it's the three women I used to illustrate
Examiner.com article on Michigan Supreme Court nominees--Johnson, Kelley, and McCormack.
For more on state educational boards and proposals, follow over the jump.
Speaking of agreeing with endorsements, I disagreed with the opinions I described in Examiner.com article about Free Press referendum endorsements.
For what it's worth, this is not how I would vote. I'm voting no on Proposal 1, as I think the assault on democracy and local control is a cure worse than the disease. I'm also voting yes on Proposals 2, 3, and 4. I'll have more to say about Proposal 3 in particular.
...
However, I agree with the Detroit Free Press on the rest. I'm voting no on Proposals 5 and 6.
Lucky me, I managed to find some papers whose opinions I agree with and did so barely in time to write about them as newsworthy. That pleased me.
Proposal endorsements of alternative weeklies favor change over status quo
This past week, two of Michigan's alternative weeklies published their endorsements for the six proposals on the ballot. Unlike the Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, and Lansing State Journal, which favored the status quo by telling their readers to vote "yes on 1, no on the rest," the alternative weeklies recommended voters cast their ballots for change.
Last Sunday, City Pulse included its recommendations in a massive editorial covering offices at all levels as well as proposals. The Lansing weekly urged no votes on Proposals 1, 5, and 6 and yes votes on 2, 3, and 4.
On Friday, it was the Metro Times turn. The metro Detroit alternative paper agreed with City Pulse on voting no on Proposals 1, 5, and 6 and yes votes on 2 and 3. They had second thoughts about Proposal 4 and urged their readers to vote no.
I'm still voting yes on 4, but at least I'll listen to the Metro Times.
Finally, there's one bit of unfinished business to attend to. From the conclusion of Election news from campuses in the swing states:
Speaking of university governing boards, the Detroit Free Press endorsed six candidates, four Democrats and two Republicans, for the three elected university boards governing the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, and Wayne State University. I should write an article about that for Examiner.com, if I can figure out a newsworthy angle.
I have. Here it is.
Newspaper endorsements for State Board of Education, university governing boards
Many newspapers make endorsements for state and federal offices, ranging from President down to state representative. However, not many papers in Michigan issue their recommendations for the state Board of Education and the governing boards for the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, and Wayne State University. During the past week, four newspapers issued endorsements for some or all of these offices, beginning last Sunday with City Pulse of Lansing, which published its recommendations for all eight contested positions on the four boards.
On Wednesday, the Michigan Daily endorsed two candidates for University of Michigan Regent.
On Saturday, the Detroit Free Press joined City Pulse by publishing a summary of all its endorsements, including those for the three university governing boards, which it had originally issued in an earlier editorial.<
Finally, this Sunday, the Lansing State Journal joined the other two in summarizing its endorsements, including those for Michigan State University Trustee.
What I found both surprising and encouraging was how much agreement there was among all the endorsements. Three papers each published endorsements for the University of Michigan and Michigan State University governing boards, and both times all three recommended the same candidates. In U of M's case, they were both Democrats.
Finally, I recommend reading the City Pulse's endorsement editorial. It lists their favorite candidates from the top of the ticket to the bottom. The editorial writer is both mean and funny. I quoted some of the best lines both here and in Proposal endorsements of alternative weeklies favor change over status quo. They're both scathing and hilarious.