Letters to the Editor | Oct. 29, 2024

Readers from across the region and beyond wrote in about The Inquirer’s presidential endorsement. Here are some of their responses.

I am a longtime subscriber and reader of The Inquirer. I do not believe there was ever a time when I was prouder to say that than I am today. Your endorsement doesn’t come as a surprise, but in the wake of the Los Angeles Times’ and the Washington Post’s spineless refusals to print an endorsement, it is incredibly welcome and heartening. To see those two venerable newspapers — particularly the Post — preemptively surrender to a would-be dictator is absolutely chilling. The Inquirer has shown great integrity, starting with the call for Donald Trump to leave the race when every other media outlet was screaming for President Joe Biden to exit. Unfortunately, we live in dark times. You are a ray of light.

Joanne E. Kleiner Levin, Jenkintown

Thanks to The Inquirer for endorsing Kamala Harris. The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post are displaying their cowardice in refusing to endorse either candidate. They’re afraid of the promised Donald Trump payback. They both know he should never again be given the massive capabilities of the Oval Office, particularly after his handpicked U.S. Supreme Court flunkies recently gave him a green light for unchecked power. But if fear wins on Nov. 5, they will be part of the reason. Shame on the Post and Times. There will be other wimpy followers, to be sure, but leaders lead, and you’ve done that yet again. I’ve been reading The Inquirer for 60 years, and I’m damned proud I do today.

Al Gardner, Bolivia, N.C.

I wholeheartedly agree with The Inquirer’s endorsement. With other papers not willing to take a stand in the most important election of our lifetimes, you stood with decency and the pro-democracy candidate in the race. Pennsylvania has an incredible opportunity to help write a new chapter in our American democracy.

Steve Clayton, Ocean, N.J.

We now have to add to the litany of concerns about the state of journalism, especially the super-wealthy owning major newspapers, the recent decisions of the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post not to make a presidential endorsement, and to veto their editorial editors’ planned endorsements of Vice President Kamala Harris. Patrick Soon-Shiong and Jeff Bezos are not journalism’s saviors. To the Post’s “Democracy Dies in Darkness” slogan, we should append that it also dies in cowardice. Thank you, Philadelphia Inquirer.

Jonathan Stein, Philadelphia

I am so grateful to the Editorial Board for having the courage to endorse Kamala Harris for president.

Mary Scherf, Ardmore

Billionaire Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong and billionaire Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos blocked their paper’s editorial boards from endorsing a candidate — even though both newspapers have decades-long histories of presidential endorsements. Of course, Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire owner of the New York Post, endorsed Donald Trump. There is a name for this phenomenon: self-censorship. Media outlets censor their own speech out of fear of closure and/or threats to journalists. Self-censorship crushes democracies. The polling shows a toss-up race. Why did Soon-Shiong, Bezos, and Murdock do what they did? There are probably a few billion reasons.

Lynn Strauss, West Chester, lynnfs921@gmail.com

Unlike the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times, the Inky had the courage to endorse a presidential candidate. Although we concur with the endorsement, most important is the fact that the Inky met its responsibility as the Fourth Estate. As a result, we have renewed our digital subscription. Thank you so much.

Frank Barch, Elkins Park

As a result of your courageous endorsement of Kamala Harris — no anticipatory obedience here! — I have just subscribed. Since I live in New Mexico, I don’t know if this will work as well for me as the Washington Post did, but it’s worth a try. If the fascist wins, I will be counting on you to report on the clear and present dangers. But we can all pray that won’t be necessary.

Lisa Orlando, Albuquerque, N.M.

I am writing to convey my sincere gratitude for The Inquirer’s decision to publish the Editorial Board’s endorsement of Kamala Harris. For decades, I’ve maintained my subscription to The Inquirer along with the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and the Guardian UK. I read each publication daily during this election year. I’ve now lost all faith in the credibility of the LA Times and the Post, which have failed miserably to fit the definition of a free press. This implosion of integrity, especially at the Watergate-famous Post, is one of the biggest warnings the American public could receive that fascism’s influence is clearly evident right now in our country.

The Inquirer’s courage and integrity in the face of open threats makes me prouder than ever of our hometown paper. Like many others in recent days, I’ve kept my Inquirer and Guardian subscriptions but switched my subscription money over to support smaller newspapers such as the Houston Chronicle, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and the Boston Globe, none of which are owned by billionaires. The survival of the free press is essential to our common good and survival as a democracy. It’s up to readers to keep these smaller but influential city papers alive. I hope many people join me in supporting them.

Eileen Mullahy, Wynnewood

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “A man dies when he refuses to stand up for that which is right … for that which is true.” I applaud The Inquirer’s courage in leading today with their well-written Kamala Harris endorsement and with Will Bunch’s pointed and insightful call-out of Jeff Bezos and Patrick Soon-Shiong. In the few days between now and the election, all of us must speak out. In a country of 300 million people, most change happens in conversation.

Tom Furst, Menlo Park, Calif.

Thank you so much for endorsing Kamala Harris. Your paper is amazing, and the endorsement was a really moving read. I admire that you can stand up and cut through the noise at present. The thought of an American autocracy scares me to no end. Everything is crossed for Nov. 6. All the best to every one of you.

Clare Macfarlane, Australia

Thank you for being, once again, a champion of justice, decency, and truth. For not hiding behind the guise of “neutrality” in your opinions. For continuing to give hope and comfort to a nonagenarian who wants to leave this orb under a democracy, not an autocracy/dictatorship.

Marian Eide, Souderton

Thank you for your endorsement of Kamala Harris. It was clear and convincing and powerful and a true public service. It seems ridiculous that an editorial page should be complimented for showing courage in making an endorsement in a presidential election, but that’s disgustingly where we are right now. I have canceled my subscription to the Washington Post and subscribed to The Inquirer.

Priscilla Porter, New York

Thank you, The Inquirer Editorial Board, for endorsing Kamala Harris to be our 47th president. This news is welcome as other reputable national news organizations such as the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post are showing no backbone by refusing to make an endorsement. This is a pivotal moment in American history. The United States is a shining light among nations, and we need to maintain that flame by electing a person who will unite Americans and maintain our personal freedoms. We are in danger of becoming a dictatorship, run by someone whose lies continue to stoke fear and violence. This is the moment to save our democracy by electing a fair, honest, hardworking, experienced public servant, and I’m grateful for the people who have the gumption to say they agree.

Mark Pokedoff, Chalfont

The wealthy owners of the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post have thumbed their noses at the concept of a free press. They have muzzled their respective editorial boards by refusing to endorse either presidential candidate in the current election, breaking historical precedent. The chilling effect of a, God forbid, Donald Trump presidency on a free press is already here. Shame on both of these formerly respected newspapers for cowering under the existential threat of a man who wants to rule America as a vindictive dictator, not as a president.

Larry Skvir, Delran

Kudos to The Inquirer for endorsing Kamala Harris for president. What a contrast to the epic cowardice shown by Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos when he refused to let the Post’s editorial department publish a previously written endorsement of Harris. Instead, the Post opted to announce that it was not endorsing anyone — 11 days before the election, no less. History will record that The Inquirer held firmly to its values, while Bezos put his business interests above the good of our nation.

Tom Lees, East Norriton

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s choice to endorse Kamala Harris for president stands out as a true profile in courage given the cowardly decisions by the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post to not endorse a candidate. Both papers had planned to endorse Harris, but their editorial decisions were stifled by their billionaire owners.

Patrick Soon-Shiong, the owner of the Times, said that making an endorsement would “add to the division” in the country. The Washington Post, which had already written its editorial endorsing Harris, similarly chose not to make that endorsement. The Post’s publisher made weak excuses when, in fact, owner Jeff Bezos did not want to antagonize Donald Trump, especially given Trump’s promise of new tariffs if he wins this election. Trump’s tariffs when he was president hurt Amazon, Bezos’s primary company. This represents a chilling example of what happens when great wealth controls the media.

Thank you, Inquirer, for living up to your promise to hold Trump accountable for his words and deeds, and for having the courage to say so publicly, when two of the other great newspapers in this country have tucked tails and run for cover.

Steven J. Barrer, Huntingdon Valley, sjbarrer@gmail.com

We commend and congratulate the Editorial Board and publisher Elizabeth H. Hughes for your endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris for president. You cogently present the obvious and critical choice for voters in this election. You have published an excellent and vitally important series of multiple essays over the past several months clearly stating the many ways a victory by Trump would damage our nation, and quite likely would end our democracy and rule of law.

It is nearly inconceivable that Americans could vote for an immoral, contemptible, ignorant, cruel, vindictive, vulgar, egomaniacal, narcissistic, autocratic, criminal reprobate to be POTUS. The Inquirer leadership has shown courage, intelligence, and responsibility — in contrast to the leaders/owners of the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times.

Philadelphians, and indeed all Americans who care about decency, competence, and integrity in government, must be grateful for the astutely reasoned endorsement of Harris by The Inquirer. Thank you. You have demonstrated that the cowardly leaders of the Post and the Times should be ashamed. Please continue your work striving to preserve our democracy by re-emphasizing your support for Harris, and the necessity to defeat Trump, every day until Nov. 5.

M. and K. DeWitte, Lyndell

Dear owners of The Philadelphia Inquirer: You didn’t get the memo that the billionaires of the world are supposed to fall in line behind Donald Trump? Is the problem that y’all don’t have enough money? Or maybe, just maybe, is it that you care about this country?

I, along with others, have been staggered that major papers like the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post have refused — 11 days before the election — to honor their long-standing tradition of naming the presidential candidate they think is best for the position, and explaining to the public why they think that. Why stop that tradition now? Is it that the candidates are so much alike, no difference between them, no need to make a selection? I don’t think that’s it.

The more obvious explanation is that neither the billionaire owner of the Post, Jeff Bezos, nor the billionaire owner of the Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, could find a decent reason to endorse Trump. And they don’t want Kamala Harris to win. These rich dudes like to stick together, don’t they? I guess Bezos and Soon-Shiong want to keep their positions as members of Trump’s ruling class.

Voters, if these billionaires using their power to squash something that would help Harris get elected doesn’t show you how insincere Trump’s “man of the people” act is, and how deeply sure the people with the big bucks are that he’s going to favor them in a second administration, then I don’t know what to say.

Linda Falcao, North Wales

Thank you so very much for this inspirational endorsement of our Vice President Kamala Harris. Our world would be a much better place if more journalists like you in the news media would speak up and tell the truth without fear or favor. Your article makes it clear what should matter most to the American people, which is our love, respect, and commitment to follow our Constitution and its laws.

Billie and David Sutton, Philadelphia

I want to congratulate The Inquirer for unequivocally voicing an opinion and endorsing a candidate for president. While I personally concur with your endorsement of Kamala Harris, even more importantly, in a time where an increasing number of newspapers are copping out and not voicing an opinion, The Inquirer elected to take a stand. Thank you for speaking up. Arguably, this is the most important election in the history of the United States and your endorsement, regardless of which candidate, recognizes that not expressing an opinion in this circumstance is simply not an acceptable choice.

Ken Derow, Swarthmore

The Inquirer’s endorsement of Kamala Harris for president does an excellent job of listing the myriad reasons why voters should choose her over Donald Trump for the nation’s highest office — from Trump’s threat to the world order and the earth’s climate to his misguided economic policies and his clear desire to undermine the institutions that sustain our democratic republic. I would add to the list the threat that he poses to the separation of church and state, a foundational principle of this country and something that makes America great.

However, this election boils down to the character and decency of the candidates. Voters need to remember that Trump was restrained during his term in office by sensible people around him, such as General Mark Milley, who are now sounding the alarm about the danger that he poses. In addition, the Supreme Court has since granted the president immunity for official acts. We have all seen how Trump has behaved to this point with guardrails. Imagine how someone of his character will behave in power with the guardrails gone.

Bill Fanshel, Bryn Mawr

Philly Inquirer, I have never read you in my life, and I’m starting now. Thank you for stepping up to do the obvious right thing by endorsing Kamala Harris.

Jennifer Shiman, Los Angeles

Congratulations to The Inquirer for having the courage to endorse Kamala Harris for president. Donald Trump is running for president for an unprecedented third election in a row. But by now, at age 78, he is significantly diminished from even four years ago. Trump’s speeches are becoming more and more dark, rambling, and delusional. His hyper-sensitivity to criticism is only getting worse, and there is obviously no one in his campaign who can restrain him. If elected, he will be 82 years old in his last year as President, and JD Vance will be next in line.

He is more unstable, self-centered and divisive than ever, and if he becomes president, he would be mainly focused on getting revenge on all the people he thinks have wronged him. And unlike his first term, he will use the plans in Project 2025 to get rid of any government employees who get in his way. This older, less stable and more vengeful Donald Trump is not the man we want to trust with the awesome power of the Presidency. Donald, it’s time for three strikes and you’re out.

Fred Kelemen, Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.