Click For Photo: https://cdn.newsbusters.org/images/klob_warren.png
The New York Times has endorsed not one but two, count them, two candidates for President. The beneficiaries of the Times split decision, after much self-important public soul searching, are Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.
As the result, the immediate winner is...comedic entertainment in the form of widespread mockery of this split decision. Even many liberal sources are brutally mocking the newspaper's inability to settle upon just one candidate to endorse.
Tone - Mockery - Nate - Silver - Blogger
The entertaining tone of mockery was set by Nate Silver -- a former blogger for The New York Times -- with a classic tweet:
Equally brutal in her assessment of the Times endorsement fail is Ashley Feinberg of Slate who characterized it as a "choke."
Weeks - Buildup - Trickle - Candidate - Q
After weeks of buildup, a slow trickle of candidate Q&A transcripts, and no less than four separate New York Times pieces about the process of a Times endorsement itself, we finally have an answer to the question the paper of record desperately wants to be on everyone’s mind: Who is the New York Times endorsing in the 2020 Democratic primary? That answer, revealed in a special edition of the paper’s FX show, The Weekly, mostly boils down to, uh, Warren, maybe? Unless you don’t like that. In which case, Klobuchar, I guess?
This marks the first time in its 160-year endorsement history that the Times has tried to give readers (or in tonight’s case, viewers) a sense of what actually goes into the process of a presidential endorsement....as much as the rollout of the Very Special Episode has been about the Democratic primary, it has also very much been about the New York Times and The Role of the New York Times in the Democratic primary. And in this state of hyper-self-awareness and inflated ego, the Times has done what the Times does best: choke.
...The indecisiveness might have...
Wake Up To Breaking News!