Generally, the vast majority of mainstream media is liberal enough to skew a Presidential race towards Democrats. It’s something we’ve had to deal with since the 1970s and it’s gotten worse every election. USA Today is one of those publications that is left-leaning but usually fair. With Hillary Clinton as the likely Democratic Presidential nominee, we expected them to follow the playbook.
They didn’t. In fact, the editorial board posted their perspective on Hillary Clinton the other day, in particular the lies she’s told about her email servers. It was so blatant and apparently felt universally by the entire editorial board that one might have believed they were leaning towards Donald Trump to lean their support towards in November.
HRC deliberately avoiding transparency laws is far more disturbing than inadvertent exposure of classified info. https://t.co/q3Tv3QHztd
— Radley Balko (@radleybalko) May 31, 2016
Any notion of that changed today when they gave him even worse marks. They went so far as to call him “Non-presidential” in the title of their story.
— Dump Trump (@DumpTrump22) June 2, 2016
Even though they were arguably more harsh with Trump than Clinton, it still doesn’t bode well for her. We expect mainstream media to go after Trump, but much of the media has played apologist for Clinton. Not the USA Today editorial board. They seem to be giving both sides an earful.
With months to go before the general election and with an outside chance that Clinton could still lose to Bernie Sanders, we expect this to change. Trump will remain a target throughout, but unless more bad news strikes Hillary, chances are they will lean back in her direction just as they did the previous six elections. Since the 1992 election, they’ve given support without endorsement to every Democrat in the race. Is Clinton bad enough to make this different? If Trump wasn’t the Republican nominee, we think that it’s possible. Instead, we’ll likely see more heat on the Republicans, as usual.