Not Exactly Breaking News
The headline of the story on foxnews.com read: “major newspapers across the country overwhelmingly endorse Democrats in elections”…good thing I was sitting down when I read that.
Fox News Digital analyzed newspaper endorsements for president dating back to 1992, and endorsements for U.S. Senate and state governors for the past decade.
To the surprise of literally no one, both The New York Times and The Washington Post have exclusively endorsed the Democrat nominee for president from 1992-2020…that’s eight straight elections. The Philadelphia Inquirer has also exclusively endorsed the Democrat for president in those same eight elections, and the Democrat for governor and Senate consistently since 2012.
Cleveland Plain Dealer? Other than George W. Bush in 2000, it’s been all Democrats, all the time for president.
You get the idea. In fact, it’s gotten so unbalanced, that The New York Times has stopped doing general election endorsements in senate and governor races, instead endorsing candidates in the Democrat primary. Talk about being the party newsletter.
It’s a continuing sign of lack of relevancy by these formerly great information sources. I seriously doubt, for example, anyone listening is now going to vote for Deidre DeJear for Iowa governor just because The Des Moines Register endorsed her. Might actually be the opposite.
We don’t endorse candidates here…not as a station, and not as individuals. Our national hosts may take a different path. But we figure we’ll bring all voices to the table, at least those who are willing, and let you decide for yourself.
You don’t need me to tell you who to vote for…and devotees of those large blue city papers probably don’t need them doing it either. Take the space in the newspaper you used for the endorsement and simply, factually tell readers how candidates stand on issues. That’s a far more valuable service.
