The Economist Issues 'Wholehearted' Endorsement Of Obama

Senator McCain; the Candidate McCain of the past six months has too often seemed the victim of political sorcery, his good features magically inverted, his bad ones exaggerated.

Since I received a spate of emails wondering how The Economist would come down with their Presidential endorsement, I figured I might as well end the suspense: it's Obama.
Released today, The Economist's endorsement is titled, "It's Time," and encourages America to "take a chance and make Barack Obama the next leader of the free world." That's the overall tenor of their support: the acknowledgment of a gamble, yet one they recommend with few misgivings:
The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America's self-confidence. But we acknowledge it is a gamble. Given Mr Obama's inexperience, the lack of clarity about some of his beliefs and the prospect of a stridently Democratic Congress, voting for him is a risk. Yet it is one America should take, given the steep road ahead.
The magazine does not take some dogmatic anti-McCain stance, saying that "selection of Mr McCain as the Republicans' candidate was a powerful reason to reconsider" voting to keep the GOP in charge of the Executive Branch, despite the "incompetence, cronyism and extremism of the Bush presidency." But the magazine makes their stance on McCain clear in a section that's titled, "If only the real John McCain had been running": LinkHere

McCain Undercuts Campaign, Admits Obama Not A Socialist

McCain Camp Pushes New ACORN Outrage Based On Unreliable Accuser

McCain Spokesman Wusses Out On CNN