Kamala Harris’ biggest fans are up in arms because The Washington Post — the same paper staffed with an army of woke, left-leaning journalists who can’t write two paragraphs without slipping in a jab at conservatives or painting Trump as a Nazi — didn’t endorse Harris.
Outrage echoed across X, with cries of betrayal from the Left and screenshots showing canceled subscriptions. But the movement was missing something key: normal people. Virtually every voice expressing protestation belonged to the liberal elites — the professional class of writers from The Atlantic, New Yorker, and Vanity Fair, TV pundits from MSNBC and social media activists who somehow amassed hundreds of thousands of followers (though many are bots).
The response from Kamala’s supporters is somewhat revealing — a symptom of a progressive movement that expects blind loyalty from even the most left-leaning institutions. But all the bellyaching is little more than a ploy to bring more attention to Kamala’s support from The Washington Post, ironically.
More from Jason Rantz: Detlef Schrempf apparently thinks women will die if Donald Trump is elected, but post backfires
Why are we supposed to be upset that The Washington Post skipped Kamala Harris endorsement?
The Washington Post, a paper notorious for its unrelenting criticism of Republicans, unhinged obsession with demeaning Donald Trump and its sympathetic portrayal of progressive ideals, dared to refrain from endorsing Vice President Harris. Cue the uproar: to Harris’ media cheerleaders, this is tantamount to treason, proof that even their ideological allies are now inexplicably “complicit” with the supposed “right-wing agenda.”
The reactions from left-wing media voices was rather predictable. They’re upset that in one edition of the paper, there will be one fewer attack piece against Trump.
Columnists with The Washington Post, and their media allies, have spent the last several months telling us that Trump is a “threat to democracy.” Though he didn’t try to install himself as a dictator the last time he ran, this time will be different somehow. Now, they’re claiming not printing an endorsement in a paper that is staunchly anti-Trump is also a threat to democracy.
More from Jason Rantz: Viral video shows it’s easy to print fraudulent ballots in King County. But are they counted?
Washington Post columnists weigh in
In a statement, former Washington Post editor Martin Baron denounced the decision as “cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty.” To the Columbia Journalism Review, “democracy expert” Ian Bassin called the decision “anticipatory obedience:” a fear that Trump, if he wins, will target those who endorsed Kamala Harris.
Meanwhile, 17 columnists — all decidedly anti-Trump — condemned the move in a statement. They called it a “mistake” that “represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love.”
“This is a moment for the institution to be making clear its commitment to democratic values, the rule of law and international alliances, and the threat that Donald Trump poses to them — the precise points The Post made in endorsing Trump’s opponents in 2016 and 2020,” the columnists, including Jennifer Rubin, Max Boot, Karen Attiah and others wrote.
A day earlier, the paper’s most hackneyed columnist, Rubin, lauded the resignation of a Los Angeles Times editor who resigned over their paper’s decision not to run an endorsement, either. It was a brave and principled move, apparently, though neither brave nor principled enough for Rubin or her colleagues to do the same.
More from Jason Rantz: Seattle school investigating antisemitism is hosting antisemitic conference
How dare Washington Post edits not let elitist columnist dictate how we all think!
The idea that a newspaper shouldn’t make any endorsements so it’s not seen as partisan was too much for the angry Washington Post voices the handle. Though they may have a point in that no one has viewed the Washington Post as objective since Trump ran for president. Like so many other outlets, the newsroom took a clear stance as antagonistic towards Donald Trump. They might as well lean in.
At the same time, there’s no need for a formal endorsement of Kamala Harris because everyone who cares what the editorial board of The Washington Post already knows that the paper is anti-Trump. Moreover, the people claiming outrage at a missing endorsement are only upset because they knew it would be in favor of Harris. If The Washington Post endorsed Trump, there would be as much outrage and screenshots of canceled subscriptions.
This outcry reveals a disturbing trend — the demand for ideological echo chambers over critical evaluation, where no critique of Harris is permissible and no standards of leadership are enforced.
Mission accomplished
Normal people were mostly missing in the social media uproar.
It wasn’t your every day, fair-minded American who declared they’d be canceling their subscription, but the snooty liberals who listen to NPR for all but the one hour they commit to hate-watching Fox News each night and another to shop all-organic at the Whole Foods (with groceries they pack into the latest NPR tote bag they received for their last donation). These are people who wouldn’t be moved by an endorsement because they’re already staunchly anti-Trump and anti-Republican.
The feigned outrage of the lack of a Washington Post Kamala endorsement received more attention than an actual endorsement would have. Perhaps that was the point of this very inorganic response. But the good news for Trump is that none of this matters. No one is changing how they vote because of a “scandal” only media members care about.
Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason Rantz on X, Instagram, YouTube and Facebook.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Jason Rantz
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://mynorthwest.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.