- Apple warns coronavirus expected to cause iPhone ‘supply shortages’ Monday 7:59 PM
- Will ‘The Bachelor’ end without an engagement? Monday 7:44 PM
- This ‘Little Women’ scene just became a meme Monday 7:03 PM
- Playable version of Blizzard’s ‘StarCraft: Ghost’ leaks online nearly 15 years after cancelation Monday 6:31 PM
- This Twitter extension can block unsolicited nudes from your inbox Monday 6:01 PM
- Jeffree Star wears cornrows after being accused of cultural appropriation Monday 4:49 PM
- Jeff Bezos says he’ll commit $10 billion to combat climate change Monday 4:18 PM
- A TikTok user went on a mission to turn his urine blue by chugging food coloring Monday 3:55 PM
- YouTuber’s vacation in ‘Bali’ was actually staged at Ikea Monday 3:14 PM
- Video shows liquor store manager calling employee ‘f*cking worthless’ Monday 1:16 PM
- Instagram influencer scams followers out of $1.5 million Monday 12:22 PM
- Why did the Israeli military tweet this thirst trap? Monday 10:43 AM
- Jake Paul wants you to have financial freedom… by paying him a monthly fee Monday 10:40 AM
- Tweets from Sanders supporters are terrifying the establishment Monday 10:15 AM
- Zuckerberg says he supports 1 bill in Congress that would regulate Facebook Monday 10:11 AM
Do you have feelings of dread and anxiety over the approaching 2020 election?
Concerned about the potential of a second Trump administration?
Worried about shifts both left and right, the countervailing forces of progressivism and nationalism?
Klobarren might be right for you.
Klobarren is a new type of endorsement from the New York Times editorial board. Whereas previous endorsements’ focused one candidate as a choice for president, Klobarren’s radical new formula lets you pick two.
Sunday night, the New York Times announced its choice for the 2020 Democratic nominee for president. It came after a week of hype from the newspaper of record, releasing the transcripts of its interviews with leading candidates, teasing the pick as part of a new TV show, The Weekly, streaming on Hulu.
And their choice for president? Either Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) or Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), because while pushing for bold policy proposals is great, maybe it isn’t; and because running as a progressive is important, but what if it’s not; and because now is a good time for the Democratic party to take a shift to the left, but also maybe it should tack to the middle.
If that sounds bizarre, illogical, and downright nonsensical, welp, sorry. The future of the Democratic party is Klobuchar or Warren. Who knows? Not the New York Times.
“In 2020, both the radical and the realist models warrant serious consideration,” the Times wrote of its decision to pick two of a number of Democrats, instead of the traditional one candidate. “If there were ever a time to be open to new ideas, it is now. If there were ever a time to seek stability, now is it. That’s why we’re endorsing the most effective advocates for each approach. They are Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.”
If that sounds like an absolution of responsibility and a dereliction of duty from the leading editorial board in America, it is. Because as divisive as this primary is, the one thing everyone could agree on last night was this was a terrible way to pick a president.
Please consult a doctor before trying Klobarren, as it is physically impossible to do so.
You can read the Times’ reasoning for Klobarren here.
David Covucci is the Layer 8 editor at the Daily Dot, covering the intersection of politics and the web. His work has appeared in Vice, the Huffington Post, Jezebel, Gothamist, and other publications. He is particularly interested in hearing any tips you have. Reach out at firstname.lastname@example.org.