One was headlined “It’s Obama” while another, folded inside, read “It’s Romney.” Both had profiles of the winner and analysis. By the time newspaper stands opened, readers knew the outcome and could remove the wrong one.
De Morgen cut its front page in half, with one side saying “Mitt Romney President”, and the other “Barack Obama President”.
On the Romney side it said: “Please turn quickly if Obama is the winner”.
Le Soir’s front page screamed “Obama”, followed on the left with “Has Lost — read page 2” and on the right “Has Won — read page 3.
Meanwhile The New York Times splashed with “Obama’s Night”. It had a large picture of a smiling President Obama. “The nation did unite, but the win was an endorsement of Obama’s policies,” its editorial read.
The Washington Post splashed its first edition with “Obama Wins”.
“Obama’s win secures real change for the nation,” wrote Ezra Klein.
“On their own, passing and implementing any of these laws [Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank, tax increases] would be a huge achievement for a presidency. The three of them together are a record and pace of domestic change unmatched by any recent administration. But they were an odd sort of change: Change that wouldn’t happen until — and arguably unless — Obama secured a second term... he did that.”
USA Today, America’s only national paper roared: “Obama Triumphs”.
Obama’s hometown Chicago Tribune had “re-elected” as its splash.
The Miami Herald, one of the main newspapers in the key battleground state of Florida, splashed with “It’s Obama”.
Republicans gambled in the extremes and lost, wrote Jonathan Chait for New York magazine. “Fed up though the voters may be with bitter partisanship in Washington, and angry though they may be with the painfully slow recovery, they were never eager to hand the keys back to the Republicans.”
Amy Davidson, writing in The New Yorker, said Republicans were caught in the past. “One argument now will be about which aspect of the Republican party’s agenda hurt it the most — that having to do with women, taxes, social programmes, inequality.”
Meanwhile, writing in The Daily Beast, Daniel Gross said the improving economy is what screwed Romney: “The [jobs] report was important: psychologically, economically, and politically.
“Most savvy pundits thought Ohio would be President Obama’s firewall. But it was really the unemployment data that turned out to be his impregnable fortress... In the end, the economy helped keep the race close. But I believe the steady, persistent improvement throughout 2012... helped President Obama.”