USA Today Announces Decision
In a notable departure from previous election cycles, USA Today has joined the ranks of major publications choosing not to endorse a candidate in the 2024 presidential election.
This decision marks a significant shift, especially given USA Today’s active stance in recent elections. In 2016, the outlet broke with tradition by encouraging readers not to vote for Donald Trump, a rare move that made headlines. In 2020, it took things a step further by endorsing then-candidate Joe Biden.
But this year, both Biden’s former running mate, Vice President Kamala Harris, and former President Trump find themselves without USA Today’s endorsement.
Lark-Marie Antón, a USA Today spokesperson, explained the rationale for the change, saying, “America’s future is decided locally—one race at a time.” The statement echoes a trend among high-profile publications to emphasize the impact of local and state-level races over the traditionally dominant presidential endorsement.
As the flagship publication for over 200 local newspapers nationwide, USA Today’s influence could signal a broader shift in how media outlets approach political endorsements.
USA Today isn’t alone in this shift. The Los Angeles Times and Washington Post have also recently declared they will forgo endorsing a presidential candidate in 2024.
For the LA Times, a longtime supporter of Democratic candidates, this decision breaks a long-standing tradition, having previously backed figures like Biden, Obama, and Hillary Clinton. The Washington Post, meanwhile, went even further in its approach, announcing a permanent departure from presidential endorsements.
CEO William Lewis penned an op-ed asserting that The Washington Post will not endorse a presidential candidate “in this election or any future presidential election.”
This trend isn’t just confined to the media sphere. Even the Teamsters Union, representing over a million members, declined to endorse Harris, despite substantial union support for Trump—nearly 60%, according to recent polling. This decision underscores a stark change in the union’s engagement with presidential endorsements and reflects a deeper shift in labor politics.