The New York Times editorial board's decision to endorse two candidates, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, was met with both confusion and mockery. After an overly pretentious process, the board settled on the dual endorsement which isn't really an endorsement. Still, editorial board deputy editor Kathleen Kingsbury joined MSNBC Live guest host Chris Jansing on Monday to try to defend and rationalize the decision.
Jansing worried out loud: "you call Senator Warren the radical option. That word has some very negative connotations, certainly among many Republicans. I think even with some independents, too. And by labeling Warren a radical, does that give ammo to the other side and frankly hurt her potentially with moderates and disaffected Trump voters?"
Kingsbury criticized Warren for having "divided the universe into us versus them" and said she needs to work on that part of her message, because Trump does that as well."
After being asked by Jansing why the board decided to endorse two candidates, Kingsbury declared that Warren, "had the clearest diagnosis of what ails America today" and would make an "excellent president." She then contradicted herself, saying, "But we're a little bit worried about some of the policy proposals that she has put out."
As for Klobuchar, Kingsbury praised her as "very progressive," but "because of her bipartisan credentials in the Senate, she might actually get a lot of that legislation passed." At least she admitted they don't have a great diversity of thought over at the New York Times editorial page.
That laughable assertion aside, Jansing asked the obvious question, "So, why not just endorse her?"
Kingsbury replied with even more contradictions, "we come to this with a lot of humility, you know, coming out of Trump's election in 2016, we recognize a lot of the institutions that undergird the values that we espouse are not as strong as we would like them to be and we really hear in Senator Warren's message a path forward that will help rethink those institutions."
So, Trump is destroying institutions and that's a bad thing, but Warren will "help rethink" them because they need to be fundamentally altered or torn down, and that's good?
While the Times made a big deal about their primary endorsement process, Americans won't need to hold their breath for their November endorsement. The Times hasn't endorsed a Republican since Dwight Eisenhower in 1956.
Here is a transcript for the January 20 show:
MSNBC
MSNBC Live with Stephanie Ruhle
9:31 AM ET
CHRIS JANSING: For the first time in 160 years, its editorial board is endorsing two Democratic candidates for president. Senator Amy Klobuchar and Senator Elizabeth Warren. Joining me, New York Times deputy editorial page editor Kathleen Kingsbury who, led the endorsement process. So Katie, surprising a lot of people by picking two. Break it down for us, why Warren and Klobuchar?
KATHLEEN KINGSBURY: We really felt that Senator Warren had the clearest diagnosis of what ails America today and we believe strongly that she would be an excellent president. But we're a little bit worried about some of the policy proposals that she has put out, for instance, the board has never supported Medicare for All, and feel that Senator Klobuchar also has a very progressive agenda ahead of her, but because of her bipartisan credentials in the Senate, she might actually get a lot of that legislation passed.
JANSING: So, why not just endorse her?
KINGSBURY: You know, we come to this with a lot of humility, you know, coming out of Trump's election in 2016, we recognize a lot of the institutions that undergird the values that we espouse are not as strong as we would like them to be and we really hear in Senator Warren's message a path forward that will help rethink those institutions.
JANSING: The board lays out that the American people are being confronted with three models to govern the country, right? Obviously, one is Donald Trump, the other you call Senator Warren the radical option. That word has some very negative connotations, certainly among many Republicans. I think even with some independents, too. And by labeling Warren a radical, does that give ammo to the other side and frankly hurt her potentially with moderates and disaffected Trump voters.
KINGSBURY: We have a lot of concerns about some of the rhetoric that Senator Warren is using herself actually. She has really divided the universe into us versus them, we already have a president doing that on a daily basis and one of the messages in the editorial was she needs to figure out how to create a message of unity that more Democrats and more Americans generally can hear.
