Many like to point out the biases within the media around the nation, calling out the trustworthiness of the “liberal media.” It’s been prevalent throughout Election 2016, with both candidates showing an aversion to the press and Donald Trump regularly banning some outlets from even speaking to his campaign. But what happens when the most neutral media entity in the country breaks from its 35-year stance and decides to lend an opinion to current election?
That’s the situation we are currently seeing thanks to USA Today’s unprecedented decision to call Donald Trump unfit to be president. The editorial board for the paper wrote a scathing “disendorsement” of the candidate, the first presidential candidate in their history and the second overall — the paper “disendorsed” David Duke and his run for Louisiana governor in 1991. The decision is truly one that sets this election apart from any other we’ve seen, with the editorial board putting aside the paper’s daily mission to take a stand:
In the 34-year history of USA TODAY, the Editorial Board has never taken sides in the presidential race. Instead, we’ve expressed opinions about the major issues and haven’t presumed to tell our readers, who have a variety of priorities and values, which choice is best for them. Because every presidential race is different, we revisit our no-endorsement policy every four years. We’ve never seen reason to alter our approach. Until now.
This year, the choice isn’t between two capable major party nominees who happen to have significant ideological differences. This year, one of the candidates — Republican nominee Donald Trump — is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency.