NY Tmes Endorses Warren and Klobachar

Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Public House › NY Tmes Endorses Warren and Klobachar

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • January 20, 2020 at 10:25 am #110578
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    The editorial board notes that there is a battle going on over the Democrat party that started in 2016, and they have a “may the best woman win” attitude towards it.

    “Both the radical and the realist models warrant serious consideration. If there were ever a time to be open to new ideas, it is now. If there were ever a time to seek stability, now is it,” the Times’ Editorial Board wrote on Sunday night. “That’s why we’re endorsing the most effective advocates for each approach.”

    Yes. The Democrat Party, no one will be surprised to hear, has two wings: the Radical Wing, and the Realist Wing.

    And while they endorsed both of them, they did point out that Klobuchar is a “standard-bearer for the Democratic center,” saying many progressive proposals could have their best chance under her administration.

    That’s right. Many progressive proposals…such as the Green New Deal and Medicare For All, one assumes…would have their Best Chance under the administration of a candidate who opposes them.

    Apparently, a president who will actually fight for progressive policies doesn’t have as good a chance of passing them as a president who opposes those polices. Because…Realism.

    January 20, 2020 at 12:17 pm #110581
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    January 20, 2020 at 1:14 pm #110583
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    It’s kind of curious. I don’t think they want to endorse Warren alone because she is considered progressive by many people, and the NY Times doesn’t want to be seen as going All In on progressivism. So Sanders is out right from the beginning. That leaves Warren, a bunch of people all running in the same lane, and a few outsiders. I can only think that they arrived at Klobuchar because…Biden is going to unravel in the daylight, and Buttigieg is in way over his head at this point in his career, and Bloomberg represents everything that Americans are rebelling against right now. Nobody considers Steyer, Yang, Gabbard, or anyone else to be a serious candidate, and that leaves Klobuchar. It’s the least embarrassing endorsement for the NY Times. So they straddle the fence with the two “safest” endorsements, and burnish their image as objective and even-handed while taking credit for being slightly forward by splitting the endorsement between two women. This isn’t about an Endorsement this time around. 2020 is too dicey. This is about the image of the NY Times.

    January 20, 2020 at 6:21 pm #110593
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Furthermore, of course, the NY Times (and CNN, and WaPo) would love to have gender and sexuality issues dominate the conversation, not class and social inequality. Doubling down on 2 women reinforces that focus.

    January 20, 2020 at 6:40 pm #110596
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    January 21, 2020 at 9:09 am #110608
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    …well, you could move to Spain.

    Then again, maybe not.

    “It was in Spain that [my generation] learned that one can be right and yet be beaten, that force can vanquish spirit, that there are times when courage is not its own recompense. It is this, doubtless, which explains why so many, the world over, feel the Spanish drama as a personal tragedy.”
    — Albert Camus

    —-
    w
    v

    January 21, 2020 at 9:29 am #110610
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Apparently the Times interviewed all the candidates and released the videos (or parts thereof, I dunno).

    Here’s a 39 second Bernie bit. Enjoy the body language of the editors.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.