Last night the New York Times turned their primary season endorsement into a reality show of sorts:
The Times’s editorial board has endorsed presidential candidates for decades. But never before like this. Join us for a special episode of @TheWeekly on @FXNetworks at 10 p.m. ET to watch the most transparent endorsement process to date. #TheWeeklyNYT
— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) January 20, 2020
One thing became instantly clear:
The NYT has endorsed wide mockery of itself.
— Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) January 20, 2020
But first, here’s the Times’ double endorsement:
The @nytimes editorial board tonight announced we are endorsing Senators Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren for the Democratic nomination for president. We hope you’ll read our full endorsement. Here’s more on why we chose these two candidates. https://t.co/PdWYpnTG1W
— Kathleen Kingsbury (@katiekings) January 20, 2020
After sitting down with nine candidates, we found Senators @ElizabethWarren and @AmyKlobuchar to be the most effective advocates for these two different approaches. pic.twitter.com/x2JYAE5yFJ
— Kathleen Kingsbury (@katiekings) January 20, 2020
The editorial board’s decision to back not one but two candidates is a significant break with convention, one meant to address the "realist" and "radical" models being presented to voters by the 2020 Democratic field, the editorial says. https://t.co/3wmfdn7BXq
— The New York Times (@nytimes) January 20, 2020
May the best woman win. https://t.co/9fxkng6LZL
— Mara Gay (@MaraGay) January 20, 2020
Is anybody very surprised?
"everyone left is white so we picked teh wymynz"
— neontaster (@neontaster) January 20, 2020
It must have taken the editorial board an agonizing several minutes to decide to take that approach:
Warren had to settle for splitting the NY Times endorsement? lol
— BT (@back_ttys) January 20, 2020
Wait wait wait people actually sat up late watching a dramatic TV production to learn who the Times endorsed for president?
Are we sure it’s Trump who turned our politics into a reality show?
— Tim Alberta (@TimAlberta) January 20, 2020
The New York Times editorial board describes a "historic flood of migrants" coming to America. Do its editorials and reporting reflect that?
Either this is wildly racist and inaccurate, or the @nytimes owes @realDonaldTrump an apology. pic.twitter.com/BjRS5uODml
— Mikhael Smits (@mikhaelsmits) January 20, 2020
By choosing two Dems instead of just one, the Times helped make their endorsement history a little more diverse:
Best thing about NYT presidential endorsements is historically how much variety they have pic.twitter.com/jAWkqoXy0r
— Ben McDonald (@Bmac0507) January 20, 2020
We certainly can’t take issue with Times’ assessment of Warren:
?♂️ pic.twitter.com/LJlBFO6Pqb
— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) January 20, 2020
LOL. That she is. And Warren used the opportunity to remind voters that she’s undefeated:
So, I guess @AmyKlobuchar and I are now both undefeated in elections and undefeated in New York Times endorsements! https://t.co/8848fMGc16
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) January 20, 2020
A super-liberal who hasn’t lost an election in Massachusetts? No way!
Gonna be hilarious when Warren leaks to CNN tomorrow that Amy Klobuchar told her a woman couldn’t beat Trump.
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) January 20, 2020
Stay tuned!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member