1:53 pm Jun. 27, 2012
Though the New York Times imprematur can be crucial in competitive local Democratic primaries, it doesn't appear to have played a meaningful role in any of yesterday's congressional races, in which three of the paper's five chosen candidates won.
For example, the endorsement was never really going to matter much in the Hakeem Jeffries-Charles Barron race or, for that matter, in Nydia Velazquez's race against Erik Dilan, which she wound up winning comfortably.
The Times could conceivably have had an impact in the race for Gary Ackerman's seat if it had chosen to endorse one of Grace Meng's opponents, but Meng got the nod, while Rory Lancman was said to leave "behind a trail of irritation" and Elizabeth Crowley was ignore altogether.
The Times editorial board was very obviously never going to endorse Charlie Rangel in his bid for re-election, but it could have played a bigger role in the race if it had chosen to endorse his strongest challenger, State Senator Adriano Espaillat. Instead, the Times endorsed Clyde Williams, and Rangel beat Espaillat by about five percentage points.
In Westchester, the Times made a point of not endorsing Sean Patrick Maloney because of the role he played in the Spitzer administration during the "Troopergate" investigation back in 2007. The Times instead backed Richard Becker, who lost to Maloney.