Washington Post Declines to Endorse in Presidential Race, Leaving Staffers ‘Shocked’

For the first time in 36 years the Washington Post will not be endorsing a candidate for president, the paper’s publisher announced on Friday in a move that shocked and angered some current and former staffers who have been critical of former president Donald Trump.

Publisher William Lewis announced the decision in an opinion piece on the organization’s website. Lewis said the Post is “returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates” this year and in all future presidential elections, repeatedly noting that the Post is an “independent newspaper.”

In his piece, Lewis quoted the paper’s editorial board in 1960, when it similarly explained that the paper wouldn’t be endorsing a presidential candidate. The board said then that not endorsing a candidate is the paper’s “tradition.”

The Post broke that tradition in 1952 and endorsed Republican Dwight Eisenhower, citing what it called the “unusual circumstances of the 1952 election.” The paper again made an exception to the tradition when it endorsed Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976 in the wake of the Watergate scandal.  The Post hasn’t endorsed a Republican since it started endorsing in presidential races at that time.

The last time the Post didn’t endorse a presidential candidate was in the 1988 race between Republican George H.W. Bush and Democrat Michael Dukakis.

“We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable. We don’t see it that way,” Lewis wrote. “We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.”

“We also see it as a statement in support of our readers’ ability to make up their own minds on this, the most consequential of American decisions — whom to vote for as the next president,” he added.

National Public Radio reported that Post staffers learned of the decision during a “tense meeting” shortly before Lewis’s official announcement, and that employees were “shocked.”

A Post news story citing two unnamed sources said an editorial endorsing Democrat Kamal Harris had been drafted and was in the can waiting to be published. The decision not to publish an endorsement was ultimately made by the paper’s owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, the story said.

Politico suggested that Bezos may have made the call because he has “business interests with the federal government that could be threatened” if Trump wins a second term and seeks retribution against leaders who opposed him.

The Post has continued to back candidates in other federal races, including an endorsement of Democrat Angela Alsobrooks in Maryland’s Senate race.

Former Post executive editor Martin Baron, who led the paper’s aggressive coverage of Trump during his presidency, opposed the move. “This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty,” he told NPR. “Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate the Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.”

Robert Kagan, a vocal Trump critic who was a Post editor at large, resigned on Friday over the endorsement decision, according to news reports. Columnist Karen Attiah wrote on X that the announcement was a “stab in the back” and an “insult to those of us who have literally put our careers and lives on the line, to call out threats to human rights and democracy.”

By mid-afternoon, nearly 9,000 readers had already commented on Lewis’s announcement, with many calling the decision not to endorse Harris  over Trump a “disgusting” act of “cowardice,” and saying they are cancelling their subscriptions.

The Post’s announcement comes after Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, the owner of the Los Angeles Times, similarly decided that his paper wouldn’t endorse in the presidential race, a move that led the head of the paper’s editorial board to resign.

“I want to make it clear that I am not OK with us being silent,” Mariel Garza, the former editorial editor, told the Columbia Journalism Review in an interview this week. “In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up. This is how I’m standing up.”

Anti-Trump Post columnist Jennifer Rubin applauded Garza on X, writing “Bravo. All respect,” and asking “where are the rest of them?” She was one of the 14 Post columnists who published a short statement Friday night calling the paper’s decision “a terrible mistake” and “an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love.”

While the Post isn’t endorsing for president, the New York Times has. In a July editorial the Times said Trump is “unfit to lead.” In September, the Times called Harris “the only patriotic choice for president.”

The Wall Street Journal hasn’t endorsed a presidential candidate since 1928.

The decision by the Post and the L.A. Times not to endorse for president comes as smaller papers around the country are scaling back on endorsements and opinion content generally, finding that it has little influence and can lead to problems with credibility and trust.

In a 2022 internal memo, leaders of the Gannett newspaper chain advised the heads of their more than 200 papers to cut back on endorsements and national opinion writing.

“Readers don’t want us to tell them what to think,” the Gannett leaders wrote. “They don’t believe we have the expertise to tell anyone what to think on most issues. They perceive us as having a biased agenda.”