Kamala Harris received endorsements from the New Yorker & the NY Times

Tonight is the Vice Presidential Debate. I’m not looking forward to it because CBS has already said they won’t fact-check. JD Vance is a sleazy creep who lies like a rug and flip-flops constantly. I’ve also gotten the feeling that a lot of the “political intelligentsia” is mad because Kamala Harris did so well in the presidential debate AND because Tim Walz has the highest favorability rating out of any candidate. Basically, a lot of people are setting the stage to declare Vance the winner no matter what.

Meanwhile, two pieces of okay news… in recent days, both the New York Times and the New Yorker have endorsed the Harris-Walz ticket. The New Yorker put VP Harris on their cover, or rather, an artsy rendering of her in profile. From the New Yorker’s endorsement:

The 2024 election also comes at a moment of national crisis. This time, however, the threat to the country’s future—to its rule of law and its democratic institutions, its security and its character—resides not in a foreign capital but at a twenty-acre Xanadu on the Florida coast.

For nine years, Donald Trump has represented an ongoing assault on the stability, the nerves, and the nature of the United States. As President, he amplified some of the ugliest currents in our political culture: nativism, racism, misogyny, indifference to the disadvantaged, amoral isolationism. His narcissism and casual cruelty, his contempt for the truth, have contaminated public life. As Commander-in-Chief, he ridiculed the valor of fallen soldiers, he threatened to unravel the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and he emboldened autocrats everywhere, including Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, and Viktor Orbán. When Trump lost to Joe Biden, in 2020, he tried every means possible to deny the will of the electorate and helped incite a violent insurrection on Capitol Hill.

In contrast, the Democratic Party’s nominee, Vice-President Kamala Harris, has displayed the basic values and political skills that would enable her to build on the successes of the Biden Administration and to help end, once and for all, a poisonous era defined by Trump. Few, if any, of our readers will be surprised that we endorse Harris in this election—but many would have been surprised, earlier this year, that the choice would end up being between Trump and the Vice-President. The change in the Democratic candidate is the result, of course, of a debate of the sort that F.D.R. sidestepped.

[From The New Yorker]

“The change in the Democratic candidate is the result, of course, of a debate of the sort that F.D.R. sidestepped.” The New Yorker, like many outlets, is still so mad that they haven’t had more time to destroy Kamala Harris’s candidacy. She’s done a lot more than “displayed the basic values and political skills.” She might even be a generational political talent. Meanwhile, the NYT’s endorsement is called “The Only Patriotic Choice for President.”

It is hard to imagine a candidate more unworthy to serve as president of the United States than Donald Trump. He has proved himself morally unfit for an office that asks its occupant to put the good of the nation above self-interest. He has proved himself temperamentally unfit for a role that requires the very qualities — wisdom, honesty, empathy, courage, restraint, humility, discipline — that he most lacks.

Those disqualifying characteristics are compounded by everything else that limits his ability to fulfill the duties of the president: his many criminal charges, his advancing age, his fundamental lack of interest in policy and his increasingly bizarre cast of associates.

This unequivocal, dispiriting truth — Donald Trump is not fit to be president — should be enough for any voter who cares about the health of our country and the stability of our democracy to deny him re-election.

For this reason, regardless of any political disagreements voters might have with her, Kamala Harris is the only patriotic choice for president.

…As a dedicated public servant who has demonstrated care, competence and an unwavering commitment to the Constitution, Ms. Harris stands alone in this race. She may not be the perfect candidate for every voter, especially those who are frustrated and angry about our government’s failures to fix what’s broken — from our immigration system to public schools to housing costs to gun violence. Yet we urge Americans to contrast Ms. Harris’s record with her opponent’s.

Ms. Harris is more than a necessary alternative. There is also an optimistic case for elevating her, one that is rooted in her policies and borne out by her experience as vice president, a senator and a state attorney general.

[From The NY Times]

I wrote on Monday that I don’t think Trump is getting the same endorphin rush from his poorly-attended hate rallies, but there’s something else happening in recent weeks too. Even Trump’s base – including the media which has fed this beast for a decade – has grown tired of it. Outlets like the NYT still doing half-assed “both sides” coverage look out of touch and compromised. The Times regularly gets called out for holding the candidates to wildly different standards. It’s “give up the ghost” time – they look like morons if they continue to dither while Trump sets fire to the country.

Cover courtesy of the New Yorker, photos courtesy of Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

26 Responses to “Kamala Harris received endorsements from the New Yorker & the NY Times”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Andrea says:

    Beautiful

  2. SussexWatcher says:

    I mean, fcuk the NYTimes. They are constantly sane washing everything that the Orange Fascist says and does. They write that he’s unfit to be president yet they do everything in their power to normalize his insanity, cruelty, racism, and lies. And they’ve ruined their own credibility in the process.

    • Pinkosaurus says:

      But, but, but…she won’t be interviewed by us and allow us to misquote and misrepresent what she says to make up fake controversy!

      – – – the NYT, probably

      I canceled my subscription a couple months ago after the NYT unquestionably published Moms for Liberty saying they accidentally published a Hitler quote when they previously admitted several times it was knowingly published in their campaign materials.

    • jellitate says:

      ☝🏽 THIS

    • Maxine Branch says:

      100% agree

    • Agnes says:

      i came here to say something like that but you said it better. F them.

    • pottymouth pup says:

      They also didn’t make their endorsement front page above the fold news either, you had to dig to find it

  3. Lucy2 says:

    I mean, good, but… I’m guessing the New York Times is hemorrhaging subscribers and trying to stop the mass exodus of readers who see it for what it has become.

    • Lilly (with the double-L) says:

      Yes, when I cancelled one of the drop boxes, for reasons, was something about too right wing. So, they must be getting that a lot.

  4. Jais says:

    I kind of like the artistic rendition with the star earring. But both of those endorsements felt…begrudging. And I’m sorry but Harris is very good candidate and I’m excited for her and all these mealy-mouth wet blanket statements are trying to dampen my excitement. Well, they’re not going to but it’s annoying af. An endorsement is an endorsement though, I guess. Last time I said I wasn’t going to to watch the debate but then the clips were so good I couldn’t stop. This time I might mean it. JD Vance is so offensive to me that I don’t know if I can stomach him during a debate.

    • tamsin says:

      @Jais
      I agree that the endorsements sound begrudging, as if this is the only choice, and of course Harris is the only choice. She would still be an excellent choice against any other saner and worthier candidate for president as well. I think because they began by making the case against Trump first, it comes across as he’s an unpalatable choice, so she is the acceptable choice we must vote for. It’s still a bit patronizing with a “she’s good enough” tone, we’re left voting for her type of attitude.

      I don’t think trustworthy and venerable are words that can be used to describe the New York Times anymore. And they’ve printed “unfit” news way too much.

    • Lu says:

      I’m planning to watch the debate to send Governor Walz tons of good vibes of love and support.

  5. sevenblue says:

    Not gonna lie, I would have expected from NY Times something like: “We are endorsing Kamala Harris and here is why this is bad for Democrats”. It is amazing how low they reached in this election cycle with both their opinion and news articles. Trump really broke the media.

    • lucy2 says:

      They do love a “here’s why that’s bad for Democrats” angle, don’t they?
      If we are so lucky to have Kamala Harris win and a blue wave, I’m sure they’ll be like “Democrats win the White House and Congress, here’s why that poses a big problem for them”

  6. Brassy Rebel says:

    Donald Trump is the most awful human being to ever run for president or become president. It’s not even close. I would vote for a potted plant running against him. That said, yes! Kamala Harris is a once in a lifetime political talent with policy chops to boot. She does so many things well that a president must be able to do well. And, after years of thinking no woman running for president would ever be found likeable in such a misogynistic society, she has shown herself to be supremely likeable and relatable with a personality which ranges from serious and strong to appropriately goofy at times. Simply put, she is amazing! Rather than focusing on how horrible Trump is, I just wish these endorsements made an affirmative case for VP Harris. Because the one I just made only scratches the surface of how extraordinary she actually is. Let’s fight for her…because when we fight, we win!

    • girl_ninja says:

      Amen! Amen! And AMEN! She really is a generation candidate, and she is here for this moment in time. Not to be a footnote but to lead us as the president. I really believe this and have been trying my best to help her get there.

      If we fight, We. Win.

  7. Aud says:

    Whatever. Everyone and their second cousin endorsed Hilary and said DT was unqualified. Didn’t matter. If the fucking media didn’t coddle that orange abomination we wouldn’t be where we are today.

    • Mab's A'Mabbin says:

      This. We’ve all been scorned. We felt this way in 2016 and then the earth changed its axis. There’s still too much stupidity and we know what too much stupidity does.

  8. girl_ninja says:

    They have lost all credibility in my eyes. They have shown these last few years that they have no regard for our democracy. So, these words are empty to me, just a halfhearted attempt at getting back their lost subscribers. Nepo brat Arty Sulzberger should have just set fire to the building, it would have been a more dignified death.

  9. Nicole says:

    Madame VP went on a “All the Smoke” podcast. She is really is trying to reach everyone (e.g. all the dudes). I feel like it’s worth going into hostile waters even if it only works on the margins. I still feel like she needs to go on Bar Stool Sports and Joe Rogan. They think she’s dumb, so let them see she’s not. She not gonna get em all but even if she gets a little, it’s a win. Don’t read the comments it will just upset you. The trolls are really out for her.

    • girl_ninja says:

      Both Rogan and the Stool pigeon’s suck. I don’t think their listeners have any respect for anyone including themselves.

      • ML says:

        Girl Ninja—yeah they suck. I just responded, sort of agreeing with Nicole. Most of those audiences listen to these creeps for a reason, but I got the impression just after the debate that Rogan wasn’t thrilled with Trump. There might be more of them?

    • ML says:

      Nicole, It might be a good idea to go on a creepy podcast like Rogan’s or Bar Stool. Her numbers with women are good, but if she were to up her numbers slightly with guys, that might be helpful. I wouldn’t have recommended this last month, because I thought that it would hurt her or be traumatic, but Rogan came away from the debate grudgingly more impressed with her than him. If any of his listeners are like that, Rogan has a distressingly huge audience she could potentially reach. At this point, most of them are already voting for Trump, but she might change some minds if she shows up.

      • girl_ninja says:

        @Nicole of course your right about how MVP has to go do sit downs with dude bro podcasts. I just think that it sucks that we have coddle this weak-ass men. I saw a snippet of Rogan marveling at how well MVP did during the debate and how DT seemed pathetic. It was a little to backhanded compliment-y for me, but alas…

        I saw an article about how the targeted audience for Rogan and Barstool bros are experiencing loneliness at rate never seen before. Women of all age demos are happy to be alone, enjoying their friends, family and income. Women know what they want and don’t intend to be held back. So, I wonder if it’s even worth reaching out to them, but MVP and PJB do think that ALL the citizens of this country are worth it.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      The All The Smoke podcast was more conversational than an interview. I feel that this was a better way to learn about her as a person than some conventional political interview. And they asked about policies too. It’s a good way to reach young Black and Latino men who think politicians don’t know or care about them. And, as a 75 year old white woman, I found it very interesting.