New York Times’ Warren, Klobuchar endorsement jeered: ‘Hurts the credibility of the paper’
Morey: Voters are the boss in 2020, not NYT
Tezlyn Figaro and David Morey discusses the New York Times endorsing both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for president
The New York Times was criticized from both sides of the political aisle when it announced late Sunday that its editorial board had broken from convention and endorsed not one, but two Democratic candidates for president.
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren were both endorsed by the Gray Lady, a decision that quickly became a trending topic across social media.
CNN BLASTED OVER ‘CLEAR BIAS AGAINST BERNIE SANDERS’ AMID ONGOING ANYONE-BUT-TRUMP AGENDA
The Times’ endorsement has traditionally been one of the most coveted for a Democratic politician. The paper said it spent more than 12 hours with the candidates before coming to its decision. The editorial board wrote that in choosing these two candidates it recognizes that both «radical» and «realist» models should be considered.
“I mean, newspaper endorsements are silly and self-important to begin with,” Politico’s Tim Alberta wrote. “But this Times bit… good grief. Have these people zero self-awareness?”
Ian Bremmer, the political scientist and president of the Eurasia Group, criticized the paper’s decision to endorse two candidates with «completely different worldviews» in an «apparent effort to render the endorsement meaningless.»
The Times was swiftly mocked by journalists and political pundits on both sides of the aisle:
Media members weren’t the only people to criticize the decision to endorse two candidates:
The controversial decision was announced on the Times’ FX series “The Weekly,” which was also criticized.
