This is the lowest moment print journalism has ever experienced and yes I’m including the Spanish-American War.
— Reject Ophidiophobia (@agraybee) January 20, 2020
(Kinda contentious for a first-thing-in-the-morning thread, but I suspect it’s what everyone will want to talk about anyways… )
Give them full credit: Only the Thought Leaders at the NYTimes could irk me so much by nominating the same candidates *I* would’ve recommended. They wanted to go with the obvious choice for most of their paid subscribers — but they were terrified of nasty social-media pushback from people who are never voting for a Democrat, such as the Oval Office Occupant. They tried to split the difference, with the usual painful / comic result…
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
… The Democratic primary contest is often portrayed as a tussle between moderates and progressives. To some extent that’s true. But when we spent significant time with the leading candidates, the similarity of their platforms on fundamental issues became striking.
Nearly any of them would be the most progressive president in decades on issues like health care, the economy and government’s allocations of resources. Where they differ most significantly is not the what but the how, in whether they believe the country’s institutions and norms are up to the challenge of the moment…
Choosing who should face off against Mr. Trump also means acknowledging that Americans are being confronted with three models for how to govern this country, not two. Democrats must decide which of their two models would be most compelling for the American people and best suited for repairing the Republic…
Good news, then, that Elizabeth Warren has emerged as a standard-bearer for the Democratic left…
[Ten paragraphs decently recapping Warren’s message, and campaign to date.]
… Ms. [SENATOR!] Warren’s path to the nomination is challenging, but not hard to envision. The four front-runners are bunched together both in national polls and surveys in states holding the first votes, so small shifts in voter sentiment can have an outsize influence this early in the campaign. There are plenty of progressives who are hungry for major change but may harbor lingering concerns about a messenger as divisive as Mr. Sanders. At the same time, some moderate Democratic primary voters see Ms. Warren as someone who speaks to their concerns about inequality and corruption. Her earlier leaps in the polls suggest she can attract more of both…
[Eight paragraphs dismissing the remaining male candidates.]
… Good news, then, that Amy Klobuchar has emerged as a standard-bearer for the Democratic center. Her vision goes beyond the incremental. Given the polarization in Washington and beyond, the best chance to enact many progressive plans could be under a Klobuchar administration.
The senator from Minnesota is the very definition of Midwestern charisma, grit and sticktoitiveness. Her lengthy tenure in the Senate and bipartisan credentials would make her a deal maker (a real one) and uniter for the wings of the party — and perhaps the nation.
[Six paragraphs on Klobuchar.]
…There has been a wildfire burning in Australia larger than Switzerland. The Middle East is more unstable at this moment than at any other time in the past decade, with a nuclear arms race looking more when than if. Basket-case governments in several nations south of the Rio Grande have sent a historic flood of migrants to our southern border. Global technology companies exert more political influence than some national governments. White nationalists from Norway to New Zealand to El Paso use the internet to share ideas about racial superiority and which caliber of rifle works best for the next mass killing…
[The highlighted sentence, though arguably accurate, has drawn attention as “maybe too reminiscent of ‘sh*thole countries'”.]
There will be those dissatisfied that this page is not throwing its weight behind a single candidate, favoring centrists or progressives. But it’s a fight the party itself has been itching to have since Mrs. Clinton’s defeat in 2016, and one that should be played out in the public arena and in the privacy of the voting booth. That’s the very purpose of primaries, to test-market strategies and ideas that can galvanize and inspire the country.
Ms. Klobuchar and Ms. Warren right now are the Democrats best equipped to lead that debate.
May the best woman win.
Because when everything is fvcked-up and broken… might as well let the ladies deal with it!
Back in 2008, I remember Repubs who ‘joked’ about ‘getting a trapping license, cuz the next Dem candidate will be either a coon or a beaver’ — “Hey, cleaning up after spoiled frat boys who’ve trashed the nicest house in town is something women and Black men have plenty of experience with.”
If I didn’t change their minds, at least they usually changed topics.
Klobuchar, Warren, a just a little racism. Really hedging their bets pic.twitter.com/Ov1sez7Hy1
— Canadian Bread Price Fixing (@MenshevikM) January 20, 2020
Unironic take is that ordinarily the NYT would pick a center of the party liberal, but the party is so polarized between progressive and centrist wings that they though War-Klob would average out to one
— Canadian Bread Price Fixing (@MenshevikM) January 20, 2020
NYTimes reporter, not on the editorial staff:
a split between Warren and Klobuchar is essentially what kamala harris was trying to do
— Steadman™ (@AsteadWesley) January 20, 2020
And that’s what they discussed knowing the cameras were on. https://t.co/oyeVdGy4To
— Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) January 20, 2020
I liked how the NYT repeatedly explained Senate procedure to Elizabeth Warren and then described her as patronizing after she left the room.
— Seth Masket (@smotus) January 20, 2020
If I was being really obnoxious I'd point out that treating your endorsement process like a reality show bears a striking resemblance to the current guy in office
— Anna Merlan (@annamerlan) January 20, 2020
The promo, ICYMI (I sure did):
History doesn’t repeat. It comes back as a reality show. https://t.co/DsEm1jB6ZE
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) January 20, 2020
I never again want to read an NYT editorial about politicians being afraid to make tough decisions.
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) January 20, 2020
But on the other hand, watching the blowback on *this* will be… entertaining:
— Trinity Auld Acquaintance ? (@TrinityMustache) January 20, 2020