The New York Times endorsing Clinton was less a question of if and more a question of what that endorsement would look like.
The Times’ endorsement of Hillary Clinton arrived yesterday, with the editorial board writing that the “endorsement is rooted in respect for her intellect, experience, toughness and courage over a career of almost continuous public service, often as the first or only woman in the arena.”
Where the endorsement strayed from the usual was in the board’s decision not to do a “side by side” comparison “on the issues,” explaining further, “A comparison like that would be an empty exercise in a race where one candidate — our choice, Hillary Clinton — has a record of service and a raft of pragmatic ideas, and the other, Donald Trump, discloses nothing concrete about himself or his plans while promising the moon and offering the stars on layaway.”
With that out of the way, the board went on to say their endorsement was not anti-Trump, but pro-Clinton, going on to highlight her “leadership, bipartisanship and achievement through her public service career,” which “has been defined more by incremental successes than by moments of transformational change.”
And yes, the email server made an appearance, getting a treatment different from that of that provided by its newsroom counterpart. “Now, considered alongside the real challenges that will occupy the next president, that email server, which has consumed so much of this campaign, looks like a matter for the help desk.”
The Times also indicated that it’s not done with its assessment of Donald Trump, promising a Monday editorial that will put forth an argument for “why we believe Mr. Trump to be the worst nominee put forward by a major party in modern American history.” Add that to your list of Monday reads as you wait for the primetime showdown between the two candidates.