In a recent episode of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” host Joe Scarborough had a meltdown over major newspaper editorial boards choosing not to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris in the upcoming 2024 presidential election, and argued that by withholding their endorsements, these outlets are effectively yielding to the influence of former President Donald Trump, despite zero evidence that their decisions were influenced by him.
The Daily Caller reports:
The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal have all made the decision to not endorse a presidential candidate ahead of the 2024 election, most of whom have a history of backing Democratic presidential candidates. Scarborough said that the outlets are enabling Trump by not endorsing Harris in response to the former president calling on former Republican Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney to be placed on a battleground with “nine barrels shooting at her face.”
WSJ’s editorial board published an opinion piece Wednesday that claimed Harris would be a continuation of the “progressive left” and will likely not break away from the current policies of President Joe Biden and the Democratic Party. The outlet has continued their 96-year tradition of not endorsing a presidential candidate.
They wrote, “we have been searching in vain for signs that she would break from, or even temper, the progressive excess that defines the current Democratic Party. Her endorsement by anti-Trump Republicans isn’t that sign because it’s based solely on loathing for Mr. Trump. A token GOP appointment to her cabinet would mean little unless it’s a major post.”
In his segment, Scarborough said, “Again, I want The Wall Street Journal editorial page to look at this because we’ve spending a lot of time, rightly, about The Washington Post bending to the will of Donald Trump, The Los Angeles Times bending to the will of Donald Trump and actually banning … banning editorials where their editorial team calls for Harris’ selection.”
He continued, “I wonder Wall Street Journal editorial page, does this look like a meme to you or does this look like something that you, and The New York Times editorial page and The Washington Post editorial days and better days, and every editorial page and every politician on the Republican side and the Democratic side and independents would all come out speaking against this. But you have preemptively capitulated to a man who you think is going to win next Tuesday when many on his own side are panicking. They’re panicking and saying if we don’t get more young men out we are going to lose this race to Kamala Harris.”
It’s unclear exactly what Scarborough is referring to with regards to the Trump team “panicking,” as most polls have shown him gaining ground over Harris — especially in the battle ground states that will decide the election. Harris and her supporters have repeatedly attempted to connect with male voters as she desperately needs to increase her favorability with them with little success.
What’s more likely than these editorial boards “bending to the will of Donald Trump” — especially after spending so many years and resources vocally and vehemently criticizing him — is that they’re choosing to withhold endorsements as an indictment of her administration’s leadership and her failure to explain it or what she’d do differently despite ample opportunity to do so.
The Daily Caller continues:
The Washington Post’s publisher William Lewis said in an Oct. 25 op-ed that the paper will break away from its 40-year tradition of endorsing a presidential candidate and remain politically independent. The Los Angeles Times, who has endorsed the Democratic presidential nominees since 2008, decided not to make an endorsement for Harris.
Instead of Larry and Moe it is Mika and Joe. Who is still watching these dummies?
Gee Joey, now you’ll have to live with him for the next FOUR years. So SORRY, but Kamala is just an extension of Joe