The Boston Globe is a Democratic paper, owned by The New York Times. In a recent editorial the Globe endorses John Kasich in the GOP primary in neighboring New Hampshire. Make no mistake, the Globe believes he is the most Democrat-like Republican in the race, their reason for endorsing him.
To be sure, Kasich would be a better, which is to say, more moderate Democrat president than would either Sanders or Clinton. However, he'd be no Republican as we understand the term.
If you are a liberal NH voter, why would you vote for Democrat-lite Kasich when you can vote for a real Democrat? On the other hand, if you are conservative, why vote for someone found acceptable by the other side?
