Sorry, Kamala: Washington Post Chooses Not To Endorse Presidential Candidate For First Time In 36 Years

The Washington Post will not endorse a presidential candidate for the first time in 36 years, the newspaper announced Friday. 

"We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," publisher and CEO Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece on the paper's website.

Lewis says the paper will also avoid presidential endorsements in the future. 

He added, "Our job at The Washington Post is to provide through the newsroom nonpartisan news for all Americans, and thought-provoking, reported views from our opinion team to help our readers make up their own minds."

The decision to avoid an endorsement is not the net negative it would appear to casual readers. The Post has never endorsed a Republican for president. The outlet did, however, sit out the 1988 election between George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis. 

So, the announcement should instead be read as a decision not to endorse Democratic nominee Kamala Harris.

Further, the Washington Post is the second major U.S. newsroom to announce this week that it would not endorse a candidate. The Los Angeles Times made the same decision, which came directly from billionaire owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a doctor who made his fortune in the healthcare industry.

As a result, the paper’s editorials editor, Mariel Garza, resigned over what she alleges was the owner's decision not to support Harris. The LA Times, like the Post, would have only endorsed the Democratic candidate on the ticket.

ASTON, PENNSYLVANIA - OCTOBER 23: Democratic presidential nominee, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris speaks at a CNN Presidential Town Hall at Sun Center Studios on October 23, 2024 in Aston, Pennsylvania. With less than two weeks to Election Day, Harris spent the day in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and made a visit to Famous 4th Street Delicatessen to greet supporters. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Could the lack of support from the Washington Post hurt Kamala Harris' chances of winning the election?

You wouldn't think so. However, the consensus among mainstream polling is that Harris and Donald Trump are separated within the margin of error (+/- 3) in all seven battleground states. 

When a race is projected to be as close as polls say 2024 will be, any slight change in momentum could tilt the outcome in either direction.

Surely, Trump can turn the narrative into "Kamala is so bad that even the far-left Washington Post won't endorse her." Which, by all accounts, would be accurate.

Meanwhile, the New York Post endorsed Donald Trump on Friday, calling him "the clear choice for a better future." The New York Post editorial board based its decision on the following criteria: 

• A secure border and a sensible immigration system.
• Safer cities and support for law and order.
• A thriving, low-tax and low-regulation economy for all — fueled by an energy policy that supports, not penalizes, industry and households.
• Common-sense policies that restore the power of parents to choose what is best for their children on school choice, gender surgery and trans athletes playing in female sports.
• An America that’s respected on the world stage — feared by our enemies and trusted by our allies.

The editors concluded, "Only one candidate can credibly claim to lead us there: Donald Trump."

Again, all accurate.

No wonder the Washington Post didn't endorse Kamala Harris. The paper probably couldn't honestly list any bullet points to back up the endorsement.