Liberal Outlet’s Editorial Board Endorses 19 Trump Nominees

A prominent liberal editorial board endorsed 19 of President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet and Cabinet-level nominees ahead of their Senate confirmation hearings. The Washington Post’s endorsements, published in a detailed chart, revealed a willingness to evaluate nominees based on qualifications and performance potential rather than partisan preferences. Despite an explicit acknowledgment that Trump’s Cabinet choices would not have been their own, the liberal-leaning board argued that the president-elect deserved latitude in forming his administration. “The president-elect won the election. He deserves deference in building his team,” the editorial read.

Of the 23 individuals evaluated, 19 were deemed “acceptable” for their prospective roles. Among those receiving endorsements were Florida Senator Marco Rubio, slated for Secretary of State; former Attorney General Pam Bondi, returning to the Justice Department; and former Governor Kristi Noem, tapped to lead Homeland Security. The board praised Rubio for his diplomatic acumen and understanding of America’s leadership role in the world, while Bondi was described as a serious and qualified legal mind. Noem, despite being the subject of past controversies, was recognized for her extensive experience in governance.

In the realm of economic policy, Scott Bessent, Trump’s nominee for Treasury Secretary, was lauded for his commitment to reducing the deficit and stimulating growth. Meanwhile, Howard Lutnick, a longtime Trump ally chosen for Commerce Secretary, was called a “natural fit” for the role. However, not all nominees earned praise. Pete Hegseth, nominated for Secretary of Defense, was among the most sharply criticized. The editorial board cited his “controversial” role in allegedly “persuading” Trump to pardon accused war criminals, according to The Post, coupled with concerns about his temperament and past personal conduct. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., selected to lead Health and Human Services, also faced condemnation. The board cited Kennedy’s alleged history of promoting anti-vaccine conspiracy theories as disqualifying.

via Washington Post editorial board

Similarly, Tulsi Gabbard, nominated for Director of National Intelligence, and Russell Vought, Trump’s pick for the Office of Management and Budget, were deemed unfit. The board said that Gabbard’s alleged sympathies toward U.S. adversaries raised red flags about her ability to handle sensitive intelligence matters. Vought’s previous defiance of congressional subpoenas and controversial handling of funding to Ukraine were also cited as reasons for rejection. This week, the Senate will commence a series of confirmation hearings for President Trump’s cabinet nominees, with sessions starting on Tuesday. On Tuesday, hearings will begin at 9 a.m. with Rollins, followed by Hegseth and Burgum at 10 a.m. Wednesday’s hearings will start at 9 a.m. for Noem and Bondi and a series at 10 a.m. will feature Duffy, Ratcliffe, Rubio, and more.

The hearings aim to evaluate the nominees’ qualifications and suitability for leading their respective departments. The confirmation process, often contentious, will likely test the board’s assessments and Trump’s ability to navigate the legislative gauntlet. However, the liberal paper’s decision to endorse the vast majority of Trump’s nominees sends a clear message. Whether the Senate agrees remains to be seen. The Post announced in October that it would abstain from endorsing a presidential candidate in the election, a break from a nearly half-century tradition. The unprecedented decision led to a wave of staff resignations and drew sharp public criticism from the left, culminating in the loss of approximately 250,000 subscribers—a notable 10% of its digital base. Jeff Bezos defended the policy change, asserting that presidential endorsements could skew perceptions of impartiality and rarely sway the electorate.