Sen. Elizabeth Warren has dropped out of the presidential race, and The New York Times (which bizarrely endorsed both Warren and Sen. Amy Klobuchar) is bitter. The headline to Friday’s front-page “news analysis” by Lisa Lerer blamed sexism: “A Two-Man Race? Women Aren’t Surprised.”
Though The New York Times is undeniably liberal in its reporting, it has been distinctly cool in coverage of the most left-wing Democratic candidate, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). It was obvious back in 2016, when reporters tried to pester Sanders out of the race against Hillary Clinton. Is it principled ideology on the part of reporters, or partisan fear? Either way, the paper fired a shot across Bernie’s bow Sunday with a story bluntly warning Sanders he better watch out, then laid out why, even using an old insult to Ronald Reagan: “Sanders, the Teflon Candidate, Faces New Tests as a Front-Runner.”
On the front page of Saturday’s New York Times, reporter Lisa Lerer wondered why so many women were reluctant to vote for a woman (i.e. Elizabeth Warren) to run for president in “Taking Feminism to Heart, if Not to the Caucuses – Beating Trump Matters More Than Electing a Woman, to Some.” As is often the case, unfettered abortion rights was a priority: "Ms. Schlenker has seen how the current political moment has convinced her daughter that her rights could be taken away, and that sexism remains a force in both of their lives."
Liberal billionaire and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg may have just one-upped fellow liberal billionaire Tom Steyer in anti-Trump spending by being willing to burn through an unheard-of amount of money to defeat President Donald Trump.
Alisha Haridasani Gupta, who writes the New York Times’ feminist newsletter “In Her Words,” made Page Two of Tuesday’s edition with “Powering the Democratic Party.” She talked to the Times' Lisa Lerer about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It's a truncated, version of a month-old Q&A from Gupta’s newsletter, suggesting its sole function is to welcome back “powerful” Pelosi as the impeachment fight kicks in again. Gupta opened with an approving anecdote of a politician attacking a press member, a seemingly odd position for a journalist to take -- until you realize it was a conservative journalist under attack.
New York Times political writer Lisa Lerer made Tuesday’s edition with news of the resignation of the formerly rising Democratic Rep. Katie Hill of California after a bizarre sex scandal involving campaign and congressional staffers, fueled by explicit photos reported by a conservative website. The headline was loaded to show how disturbed the Times felt about the spectacle of a Democratic congresswoman forced out of office in such fashion: “Revenge Porn Reaches Washington.”
The front of Monday’s New York Times featured reporter Lisa Lerer on failed feminist Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who tacked hard to the left on immigration and gun control in a failed attempt to appeal to today’s Democratic Party: “Gillibrand’s Failed Run Shows Feminism’s Promise and Limits.” It was a quite different scenario 21 months ago, when the paper launched her 2020 campaign on the front of the Sunday National section, under the large-type, incredibly sycophantic headline “Senator’s Star Shines as Nation Unites Behind Her Cause -- Gillibrand, Long a Champion of Women, Stays Out Front in a Cultural Reckoning.”
On the front page of Monday’s New York Times, political reporters Astead Herndon and Lisa Lerer were given room to celebrate Democratic female candidates under the pseudo-clever headline: “Women Who Won Are Asked if They Can Win.” (Why are they trailing so badly in the polls then?) The text box on the jump page: “The misogyny Clinton faced in 2016 resurfaces for 2020.” (So that’s why they’re trailing so badly: Misogyny.) Rather than question her, Herndon and Lerer set the table for Gillibrand to make her case: "Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York had a request: Before anyone mocked her claim that she was the Democratic presidential candidate best positioned to take on President Trump, at least listen to the evidence."
Thursday afternoon, a CNN panel rehashed the media’s already tired complaint that female candidates face a sexist standard that their male opponents, do not: Their “likability” with the media. Inside Politics host John King and his guests praised a Marie Claire interview where several of these Democrat women running in 2020 complained about the sexist questions they get asked, as they touted Hillary Clinton for paving the way for these women.
There was a consistency in stories from the New York Times Monday, with reporters taking left-wing jabs against two Democratic senators who have launched presidential campaigns The profile of Minnesota’s Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar launch in the snow by Mitch Smith and Lisa Lerer falsely tried to pose her as a non-threatening moderate: “Klobuchar Enters Race With Appeal to Center.” The front-page Kamala Harris profile was consistent with the Times’ previous “The Long Run” series of pieces on Republican candidates from 2012, profiling President Obama’s potential Republican opponents. In all cases, the subjects were attacked from the left by Times reporters.
At the top of her 10:00 a.m. ET hour MSNBC show on Monday, anchor Hallie Jackson worried that President Trump’s upcoming nomination of a Supreme Court justice would provide “kind of a lifeline for Donald Trump, given other news his administration may not want to talk so much about, like the Russia investigation.”
In a late Wednesday afternoon NewsBusters post, I commented on the extraordinary hostility reporters at the Associated Press exhibited towards Donald Trump and his administration during their first two full business days in power. In that post, I wondered if they might be carrying a childish grudge over not being able to ask the first question at Press Secretary Sean Spicer's briefings, as they virtually always have since last decade. An unbylined late Tuesday AP report spotted by John Hinderaker at Powerline confirmed my suspicion. They're mad as hornets, and clearly can't handle it.