Scientific American endorses Joe Biden, breaking 175-year tradition of never endorsing a presidential candidate

Originally published at:


Extraordinary times. It’s a shame it’s come to this, but I’m glad they did what was right.


Oh Scientific America, where’s the oxford comma?


I think the voters who really need to listen and heed the advice of Scientific American neither read their publication, nor will care what they think.


Conservative response: “The magazine is owned by a German conglomerate.”

Suggested riposte: “The president is owned by a Russian oligarch.”


This one is 5 years old, but still appropriate (and yes, its satire) Scientists discover Earth endangered by new strain of fact resistant humans


“see? I told you science was just a liberal hoax.”


I discuss things online, with friends of a conservative friend who doesn’t like Trump. The others are either in love with Trump or on the fence. SA was one of the journals I would sometimes cite in discussions, as CNN and WSJ are hippie commie libtard sources apparently, and were immediately discounted. I expect to hear the same now about SA, especially after an upcoming rage tweet.



Then again, I have come across people who sincerely think that the Daily Mail is left wing.


The usual sneering complaint is that (whoever) is part of the MSM. Must be terribly distressing for people trying to sell Methylsulfonylmethane.

Well I did only skim-read it very rapidly (so E&OE) but I counted two Oxford commas and two places where it might have been used and was not.

You’ll have to subscribe to Grammar America for that coverage.


“There were very fine facts on both sides.”


Yeah, that part’s not going to be a negative for tRump cultists.

the tweet text “The 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death. We urge you to vote for health, science and Joe Biden for President.” is the instance I was referring to.

1 Like


White House Press Secretary shows off cover of Mechanix Illustrated announcing its coveted presidential endorsement of Donald Trump.

Loud sniggering from young White House aids heard as Acosta points out that the magazine folded in 2001.


Haven’t subscribed for a while (got the dead tree version for years) but I’m thinking of a digital renewal now. What is the opposite of ‘cancel culture’? Confirmation culture? If you say I have a bias towards science you might be right!

1 Like

I think you’re giving them too much credit. All they needed to know to dismiss the magazine as biased propaganda is that it has something to do with science (or as conservatives call it, “blasphemy”).

1 Like

There are apparently some style manuals that say you can mix & match whether you use the Righteous Comma or not based on whether or not a given sentence is truly unclear without it. This might be even more annoying than those that simply fail in their moral duty by leaving it out entirely.

Nah, who am I kidding. Some are better than none.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.