US New York Times editorial board endorses Warren, Klobuchar for president - Its time to call a truce and urge all Americans, whether they maga chuds, dsa cucks, radical centrist autists and I dare say niggers and kikes to unite against the neoliberalist and neoconservative elite



The New York Times announced late Sunday that its editorial board was breaking "from convention" and will endorse two candidates for president in 2020: Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

The paper’s endorsement has traditionally been one of the most coveted for a Democratic politician. The editorial board wrote that in choosing these two candidates, it recognizes that both "radical" and "realist" models should be considered.

The paper said it spent more than 12 hours with the candidates before coming to its conclusion.

"The history of the editorial board would suggest that we would side squarely with the candidate with a more traditional approach to pushing the nation forward, within the realities of a constitutional framework and a multiparty country," the editorial read. "But the events of the past few years have shaken the confidence of even the most committed institutionalists. We are not veering away from the values we espouse, but we are rattled by the weakness of the institutions that we trusted to undergird those values."

The paper called Warren a "gifted storyteller" who has "emerged as a standard-bearer for the Democratic left." The editorial board called her path to the White House "challenging, but not hard to envision."

Warren reposted the article on Twitter, joking, "So I guess @AmyKlobuchar and I are now both undefeated in New York Times endorsements!"

Klobuchar was described as the "standard-bearer," but for the party’s center. The paper gushed that she is the very definition of "Midwestern charisma, grit and sticktoitiveness."

The paper pointed to her goals of slashing childhood poverty, achieve 100 percent net-zero emissions by 2050 and her push for a more robust public option in healthcare. He moderate approach to governing would make for a formidable deal maker in Washington, the editorial wrote.

Reports on how she treats her staff “gave us pause,” but she pledged to do better in the future, the paper wrote.

Perhaps as important as who the paper endorsed is who it did not.

Joe Biden, the former vice president who continues to lead in polls, but his agenda does not go far enough on issues like climate and health care, the board wrote. The editorial board also wrote that Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., appeared to have missed his moment. The paper pointed out that he would be 79 when he's sworn in and has recently suffered a heart attack. "His health is a serious concern," it wrote.

The paper said it is looking forward to watching South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg develop as a politician and said it was impressed with his resume, but it also pointed out that he never won more than 11,000 votes. The paper said it hopes Andrew Yang, the entrepreneur, also continues to work in politics and recommended looking to New York to get started.

Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor who the editorial board endorsed twice, falls short of the editorial board’s aspirations for 2020. The editorial pointed to issues like barring his own media company from investigating him and his refusal to let women who signed nondisclosure settlements speak to the media. The paper said his campaign approach “reveals more about America’s broken system than his likelihood of fixing it.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is what the fine folk at stupidpol think about this:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well now its official, the elite are telling us plebians to fuck off. And I now regret wasting my college loan money on buying the New York Times.
 
The most funny outcome of this would be the very slight possibility of a Warren/Klobuchar ticket going up against the incumbent Trump/Pence ticket in 2020. That would be a Mondale or McGovern tier loss for the Democrats.
I don't understand. Lizzy's got it all:
  • Supercool nickname she can't shake
  • Caught in every lie she's told
  • Everyone loves massholes, especially in presidential elections
  • Legislators are super popular and elected POTUS all the time
  • All of her policy declarations appeal to her base while irritating undecideds
  • She could probably buy a majority share of the NY Times with her monthly fundraising
The Times gets an opportunity to get with the program and appeal to zoomers, who have never heard of a newspaper, and give them a full editorial page featuring Mommy Tulsi's sweet booty and these fossils tab a fibbing granny.

smh, fam.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand. Lizzy's got it all:
  • Supercool nickname she can't shake
  • Caught in every lie she's told
  • Everyone loves massholes, especially in presidential elections
  • Legislators are super popular and elected POTUS all the time
  • All of her policy declarations appeal to her base while irritating undecideds
  • She could probably buy a majority share of the NY Times with her monthly fundraising
The Times gets an opportunity to get with the program and appeal to zoomers, who have never heard of a newspaper, and give them a full editorial page featuring Mommy Tulsi's sweet booty and these fossils tab a fibbing granny.

smh, fam.
I know right? The last time someone ran on "I have a vagina, NOW VOTE FOR ME YOU SEXISTS." It worked so well that we are now seeing the end of Hillary's firs...umm, nevermind.
 
After the first half black president, we might get the first Native American President!
Oh wait, Trump is more native American than her 0.1-margin-of-error-percent.

Democrats want the credit for having a minority president while not doing the work. In plus, why do they have to be half white? Liberals are the real nazis.

Ironically, most of the democratic white candidates are old and nutty while the minorities have better policies in comparison. That's actually racist.
 
How the fuck can she plan something that will be shot down when a republican president step in?
These politicians and their base continue to operate under the assumption that Obama getting elected in 2008 means Republicans can't ever hold the presidency again. Yes, they still hold these beliefs despite Trump's existence being a massive counter-argument against that concept. And at this point they've become so unhinged that I'm 50-50 on whether or not the minute they get into power again they pass amnesty via executive fiat to make that dream a reality.
 
These politicians and their base continue to operate under the assumption that Obama getting elected in 2008 means Republicans can't ever hold the presidency again. Yes, they still hold these beliefs despite Trump's existence being a massive counter-argument against that concept. And at this point they've become so unhinged that I'm 50-50 on whether or not the minute they get into power again they pass amnesty via executive fiat to make that dream a reality.
To be fair, look at what that GOP field was without Trump there. Fucking Jeb and a bunch of other washouts. Even Hillary had a chance of beating that group of jabronis.

Anywho, for an endorsement, a lot of what they wrote about Warren feels so oddly backhanded. I almost want to think that they were just going to endorse Klobucunt but even they knew she's got no chance of making it far.
 
To be fair, look at what that GOP field was without Trump there. Fucking Jeb and a bunch of other washouts. Even Hillary had a chance of beating that group of jabronis.

Anywho, for an endorsement, a lot of what they wrote about Warren feels so oddly backhanded. I almost want to think that they were just going to endorse Klobucunt but even they knew she's got no chance of making it far.
Hillary would have definitely beaten low energy Bush, zodiac killer Cruz and muh small hands Rubio. All of them were pretentious cucks back then, only Cruz so far as redeemed himself to some extent.
 
Uhhh, I'm barely keeping up with these candidates.

But, don't these two ladies have completely different platforms? Like idelogically opposed to each other?

How the hell can you endorse both?
Those two neoliberal cunts are exactly the same. Warren is no different from Klobuchar or Trump.
 

I am not gonna read all their doodoo, they already robbed me of my gubment loan money that I could have better wasted on buying porn clips from clips4sale.

Why buy clips? You can watch clips on Pornhub free of charge.

@RodgerDodger - Just a shame to see a once-respected newspaper, with a good measure of journalistic integrity, become nothing more than a shrill shill for the Democratic Party. Used to like reading the Sunday NYT. Could take the constant slanting to the left with a grain of salt. But after President Trump's inauguration the NYT just went off the deep end. So cancelled the Sunday NYT subscription. No way was I paying $10/week for a single copy of newspaper as full of shit as the NYT has turned out to be. Yeah, $10/week delivered for just the Sunday paper. Fucked, no?
 
Last edited:
Hillary would have definitely beaten low energy Bush, zodiac killer Cruz and muh small hands Rubio. All of them were pretentious cucks back then, only Cruz so far as redeemed himself to some extent.

I must say that in 2016, the son and the wife were Cruzbots. No manner of verbal bitch Slappy on my part could change that.

I asked the wife to attend Trump's very first campaign rally with me here in XXX.

It changed everything. To this day, I have never seen a better off prompter, no script speaker that hit issues that his audience totally identified with.

Cruz immediately became a footnote; all aboard the Trump Train. I'm happy to see him regaining some relevancy because he's not wrong and could still be a contender in 2024 as the GOP candidate... if he doesn't burn Trump ala McCain and Jeff Snowflake in the meantime.

Self doxx... the XXX is Arizona and it's been, since Goldwater days, defining who and what the GOP should be.
 
Goldwater is the origin of how the Democrats and why majority of blacks jumped on the Republicans are racist train when he came out against the civil rights act combined with wanting to use nukes in Vietnam.

But he wasn't wrong. Just not acceptable at the time. Nukes never would have solved Vietnam.

Hell, one of my cronies laid 10's of 1000's of gallons of napalm on Vietnam in an F-4. That burning hell didn't even solve anything, other than creating a lot of fried rice.

The only value of nukes is MADD. That was one of the lessons walking out of WWII. Today? Holy fuck. There really isn't any such thing as a "tactical nuke." You go for that option and we'll all be glowinthedark niggas.
 
The double klob/warren choice is so fucking limp dicked neo-liberal that it perfectly captures the current political moment.
I think Warren was tipped off to this endorsement early and it's why she switched her campaign from the "unity" candidate to the "girl power" candidate and stabbed Bernie in the back. It's quintessential retarded Clintonite thinking and it makes sense considering all the Clintonite rats jumped overboard to her campaign after Kamala's sunk
 
So when is NYT going to cut Kloub and Warren in half in order to make their Frankenstein's candidate?
You would think they learn after the shambling corpse of Hillary lost the election.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kiwi Farms Lurker
Fucking Jeb and a bunch of other washouts.
TAKE THAT BACK!
jeb_bush_iowa_town_hall_point_ap_img.jpg

I like to think of this as the NYT's endorsing themselves even further into irrelevancy.
Like they haven't reached the Mariana trench yet.
 
Back