Obama gets the nod from ....

I know of no solid evidence that editorial endorsements have even the slightest effect on presidential campaigns. You might be able to find some correlations in some states, but that could easily be because the newspaper and magazine editors are good at following the general feeling of their readers, rather than the other way around.

But that doesn't mean editors should stop making the endorsements. And our overlords at SEED magazine are taking this first opportunity to officially sanction the candidacy of ...

Well, you know who. For a science-orientated publication, this was a no-brainer. Its readersare highly educated, love science, and almost certainly already committed to the only reasonable choice, so what else could it do? The full endorsement is here. And the money quote is:

Science is a way of governing, not just something to be governed. Science offers a methodology and philosophy rooted in evidence, kept in check by persistent inquiry, and bounded by the constraints of a self-critical and rigorous method. Science is a lens through which we can and should visualize and solve complex problems, organize government and multilateral bodies, establish international alliances, inspire national pride, restore positive feelings about America around the globe, embolden democracy, and ultimately, lead the world. More than anything, what this lens offers the next administration is a limitless capacity to handle all that comes its way, no matter how complex or unanticipated.

Sen. Obama's embrace of transparency and evidence-based decision-making, his intelligence and curiosity echo this new way of looking at the world. And that is what we should be weighing in the voting booth.

Can't disagree with that, although it is perhaps worth noting that Obama hasn't aways kept to the pro-science script. He once made a reference to "inconclusive" science on the long-discredited autism-vaccine link, and and he loves to pander to the Virginian penchant for the mythical "clean coal." But for the most part, SEED's editors are right. We're talking about a campaign in which the alternative chose someone who rejects the scientific point of view on climate change and wants to teach creationism alongside evolution in biology class.

For what it's worth, SEED is safely part of the majority. Nature also endorsed Obama this week, although not as enthusiastically:

The advice of experts is all the more valuable when it is diverse: 'groupthink' is a problem in any job. Obama seems to understands this. He tends to seek a range of opinions and analyses to ensure that his own opinion, when reached, has been well considered and exposed to alternatives. He also exhibits pragmatism -- for example in his proposals for health-care reform -- that suggests a keen sense for the tests reality can bring to bear on policy.

Some will find strengths in McCain that they value more highly than the commitment to reasoned assessment that appeals in Obama. But all the signs are that the former seeks a narrower range of advice.

And according to Editor and Publisher magazine, as of Oct. 29, the newspaper endorsement tally was 231-102 in Obama's favor.

(While I writing this post, I was interrupted by yet another robo-call from John McCain's minions. Something about Obama's already thoroughly hashed out and dismissed tenuous association with that Rezko guy. If that's all he's got at this late date, I almost feel sorry for McCain. Almost, but not quite.)