New York Times Criticized Over Presidential Picks

New York Times Criticized Over Presidential Picks

( – The New York Times is coming under fire for nominating two Democrats as the party’s best hope for winning November’s election. The paper chose Senators Elizabeth Warren of New York and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — but then found itself being mocked for being unable to make up its mind.

Over the last 40 elections, the NYT has endorsed a candidate — usually a Democrat — to its readers. This is the first time it’s endorsed more than one. While the editors might have wanted to broaden their appeal, it seems to have gone down pretty badly.

According to the editorial announcing the paper’s choice, Warren is the most effective advocate of new ideas. The more moderate Klobuchar, on the other hand, stands for stability. What many readers will be asking is why the Times endorsed two candidates who stand for such opposing goals.

As Slate commented, “a split decision is no decision at all.”

Copyright 2020,


  1. The News Media has let the American Public down in their reporting of the last Presidential Election and term. We, the citizens, have voted in the very best President (Donald J. Trump) that America has ever had. Amid all the harassment that he has been subjected to by the Democrats and the Fake News Media, he has accomplished more than any other president I have ever heard of! I keep praying that, at some point, they will come forward in support of him and show him the appreciation that he deserves!

  2. I agree , a split decision is no decision at all, especially when the two endorsed are so far apart politically. My pick would be neither one but Tulsi Gabbord.

Comments are closed.