The New York Times was criticized from both sides of the political aisle when it announced late Sunday that its editorial board had broken from convention and endorsed not one, but two Democratic candidates for president.
The Times' endorsement has traditionally been one of the most coveted for a Democratic politician. The paper said it spent more than 12 hours with the candidates before coming to its decision. The editorial board wrote that in choosing these two candidates it recognizes that both "radical" and "realist" models should be considered.
“I mean, newspaper endorsements are silly and self-important to begin with,” Politico’s Tim Alberta wrote. “But this Times bit... good grief. Have these people zero self-awareness?”
Ian Bremmer, the political scientist and president of the Eurasia Group, criticized the paper's decision to endorse two candidates with "completely different worldviews" in an "apparent effort to render the endorsement meaningless."
The Times was swiftly mocked by journalists and political pundits on both sides of the aisle:
Media members weren’t the only people to criticize the decision to endorse two candidates:
The controversial decision was announced on the Times’ FX series “The Weekly,” which was also criticized.