[FabHK]

No, that was a second point: The Economist is often portrayed as a right-wing or libertarian magazine, and I think that's an unfair and inaccurate portrayal. The list of endorsements supports that (unstated) point.

(EDIT: typos)

[hollandheese]

They are a right-wing magazine (i.e. ardently pro-capitalist). Their endorsements support that idea. All of those candidates that they supported were also ardent supporters of capital.

[skybrian]

This is kind of a weird critique though. It's like, it's not enough for a movie critic to think some movies are bad and they should have been made better. They have to hate the whole concept of movies.

[jjeaff]

Or more like, to be a true critical, you can only like the stuff that no one has ever heard of.

"Oh me, yes, I'm very liberal. I'd tell you about what candidate I support, but you've probably never heard of them..."

[FabHK]

If you want to call the candidates from the left party in the US right-wing, sure (when you look at it on a global scale, you might have a point there).

But as I said, while The Economist supports free trade and free markets, they are not laissez-faire, but support sensible regulation, anti-trust, action on climate, etc.

> "The Economist considers itself the enemy of privilege, pomposity and predictability." [1]

> Is The Economist left- or right-wing? Neither. We consider ourselves to be in the "radical centre" [2]

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20090228231949/http://www.econom...

[2] https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2013/09/02/...

https://web.archive.org/web/20190329063026/https://www.econo...

[thelasthuman]

Considering the shift in the Overton window the last 50 years in the USA, radically center is right wing.

[scarface74]

What exactly does an anti-capitalist look like that would be considered something that most Americans would recognize?