US The Newspaper That Almost Was - Reporters and editors at The New York Times had diligently prepared for one outcome of the 2016 presidential race. Then the election results poured in.

Page A1 of The New York Times that was intended to be published the day after the 2016 presidential election.Credit...Sonny Figueroa/The New York Times

By David W. Dunlap
Oct. 27, 2024, 3:00 a.m. ET

“Hillary Clinton is our next president. How do you think the founding mothers would feel if they heard the news?”

So began an essay by Gail Collins for a special section of The New York Times that was to have been published Thursday, Nov. 10, 2016, two days after the election. Under the rubric “Shattering the Ceiling,” the 16-page section was a celebration of what Ms. Collins called the “amazing moment” in which a woman had been elected president.

Had all gone according to the editors’ preparations, the banner headline on Page A1 the previous day would have been “Madam President.” Times journalists were so persuaded of Mrs. Clinton’s impending victory that they were already writing as if it had happened.

It’s common for news organizations to prepare anticipatory coverage before major events. Even when events turn out much differently than expected, advance material offers a valuable glimpse into the editing process.

In 2016, no special section was readied in case Donald J. Trump won.


A special section of The New York Times that would have followed Hillary Clinton’s win. Sonny Figueroa/The New York Times

The Museum at The Times has page proofs of “Shattering the Ceiling.” The Collins essay was on the cover, under a large blank expanse showing the dimensions of a victory photo that was not yet in hand. (And never would be.) Images were in place on the inside pages, but the actual headlines weren’t yet written.

The articles were set. Susan Dominus described the arc of Mrs. Clinton’s career. Susan Chira discussed the effects of a Clinton presidency on feminism. Nicholas Confessore and Megan Twohey wrote about the importance of political fund-raising among women. Vanessa Friedman decoded the messages conveyed by a president’s choice of clothing. Julie Hirschfeld Davis wondered what America would call the husband of a president. (“First gentleman? First mate? First dude?”) Amy Chozick untangled the relationship between Hillary and Bill Clinton. Jodi Kantor asked whether Mrs. Clinton’s presidency would transform the lives of American women. Jennifer Szalai prepared a bibliography. And Claire Cain Miller speculated about the style of governing that a woman would bring to the White House.


Pages within the special section that was set to be printed if Hillary Clinton had won. Sonny Figueroa/The New York Times

In the end, “Trump Triumphs” replaced “Madam President” as the banner headline, and the special section was shelved. Times newsroom executives said last week that they were unable to discuss publicly whether they might recycle either headline in November, or reuse any material from “Shattering the Ceiling” if Kamala Harris wins. But it’s a safe bet that they are preparing for two possible outcomes. Not one.

Source (Archive)

 

[RA-5C Vigilante]

Jesus Christ it’s been eight years, Clinton was a bad candidate and she lost, fuck!

 

[Nicholas II of Russia]

Not even Al Gore got this much cover as a someone who lost the election back in the day.

She lost, is good that she lost, let it fucking go already.

 

[AllieKat]

Time is a flat circle. I'd bet solid money we will read the same article with slight tweaks in eight years.

 

[Sprate Header]

Kind of spooky to think about the world where Hillary had managed to win. So much of the current online landscape was shaped by Trump's win, it's difficult to even imagine where it would be at otherwise. Definitely interesting either way!

 

[Kosher Dill]

Dewey Defeats Trumpman

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

It would be cool if the frist female President was actually good. Doesn't seem likely.

 

[invisibult plus+]

It would be cool if the frist female President was actually good. Doesn't seem likely.

After Harris, no woman would be President ever again. Not because the country would collapse or anything like that (it may it may not), but she would set a really bad precedent for what a female President is. Hillary slept her way up too, by latching onto Bill, but at least she can maneuver and pull some shit. Help two shotgun bursts to the back of the head when she needs to. Harris can't even tell someone what she has for breakfast like a normal person.
Edit:

 

[Safir]

Jesus Christ it’s been eight years, Clinton was a bad candidate and she lost, fuck!

No, this is an amazing artifact, and the article is timely. Consider:

The articles were set. Susan Dominus described the arc of Mrs. Clinton’s career. Susan Chira discussed the effects of a Clinton presidency on feminism. Nicholas Confessore and Megan Twohey wrote about the importance of political fund-raising among women. Vanessa Friedman decoded the messages conveyed by a president’s choice of clothing. Julie Hirschfeld Davis wondered what America would call the husband of a president. (“First gentleman? First mate? First dude?”) Amy Chozick untangled the relationship between Hillary and Bill Clinton. Jodi Kantor asked whether Mrs. Clinton’s presidency would transform the lives of American women. Jennifer Szalai prepared a bibliography. And Claire Cain Miller speculated about the style of governing that a woman would bring to the White House.

All of this is bullshit. Whoever wins (I'm Soviet Russian so I hope for Harry the Camel), there will be equally "insightful" and prescient analyses published, and all of it will be bullshit, retrospectively buoyed by the candidate having won.

 

[Smar Mijou]

The leftists seething rage after Trump's victory still makes me laugh to this day.
Just look at this Guardian article for a prime example of Peak Faggotry cope from the left.

And I would give anything to be a fly on the wall in her campaign headquarters after the election was called in Trump's favor. Rumor has it she was absolutely apoplectic with rage after her loss, and that's why she didn't give a concession speech until the next day.

 

[Loose Goose]

Hillary's L is truly the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Fapcop]

I used to be one of those guys who said: “I don’t have a problem with a female president! As long as it’s the right one, I’m sure it’ll happen!”

Fuck that. Not anymore.

After reading that Guardian article I’m on team: “No woman in the White House ever!”

This picture convinced me:



Cunts like these two will take it as a mandate from heaven to increase their nagging and cuntiness by 200% and get an extra abortion just to celebrate.

So fuck that. Except for maaybe Tulsi, but only if she can make broads like this cry: “Bu.. But the first female president was supposed to be a feminist!”

 

[WTBOnlineFather]

It’s common for news organizations to prepare anticipatory coverage before major events. Even when events turn out much differently than expected, advance material offers a valuable glimpse into the editing process.

In other words this "news" coverage is completely worthless because the talking heads are just guessing at what will happen and masturbating to their gay little fantasy instead of even attempting to provide real information. It's literally fanfiction.

 

[Nicholas II of Russia]

I used to be one of those guys who said: “I don’t have a problem with a female president! As long as it’s the right one, I’m sure it’ll happen!”

Fuck that. Not anymore.

After reading that Guardian article I’m on team: “No woman in the White House ever!”

This picture convinced me:

View attachment 6573877

Cunts like these two will take it as a mandate from heaven to increase their nagging and cuntiness by 200% and get an extra abortion just to celebrate.

So fuck that. Except for maaybe Tulsi, but only if she can make broads like this cry: “Bu.. But the first female president was supposed to be a feminist!”

I've never knew that they basically desecrated Susan B. Anthony's grave.

Holy shit, these people are fucking insane.

 

[Diesel Boogaloo]

At least it didn't go to print

 

[cybertoaster]

Vanessa Friedman decoded the messages conveyed by a president’s choice of clothing.

Hirschfeld Davis wondered what America would call the husband of a president. (“First gentleman? First mate? First dude?”)

This kind of retarded superficial bougie crap is why you lost to darth cheeto you clueless shits.

Fuck that. Not anymore.

There was a lady at a conference I went to recently bitching and crying about the ideological divide among genders and blaming social media for it. I asked her what about all the misandry that's been normalized in the last decade or more. Her answer? "what misandry? that doesn't exists".

 

[Fapcop]

Julie Hirschfeld Davis wondered what America would call the husband of a president. (“First gentleman? First mate? First dude?”)

First Rapist? Sex offender in Chief?

I suppose the one thing we kinda missed out on with Hillary in 16 was stories about Bill trying to shoot upskirts on young staffers and paging female staff members for impromptu strategy sessions while taking a bath.

 

[TowinKarz]

At least it didn't go to print
View attachment 6573909

Not that it excuses it entirely, but, I think it only fair to point out that the Tribune, due to the effects of a labor stoppage affecting Chicago papers, had to go to print several hours before the industry norm elsewhere. Thus they had to call it as they saw it before they got the west coast results.

Just like there are crates of "Champions" T-shirts made for both teams in the Super Bowl so that the winners can get theirs at the literal end of the game? I'm sure any reputable paper at the time had headline packages ready to go for both candidates, it's just that in this case? The Tribune had to hand out their "shirts" in the 3rd quarter.

 

[Super-Chevy454]

I used to be one of those guys who said: “I don’t have a problem with a female president! As long as it’s the right one, I’m sure it’ll happen!”

Fuck that. Not anymore.

After reading that Guardian article I’m on team: “No woman in the White House ever!”

This picture convinced me:

View attachment 6573877

Cunts like these two will take it as a mandate from heaven to increase their nagging and cuntiness by 200% and get an extra abortion just to celebrate.

So fuck that. Except for maaybe Tulsi, but only if she can make broads like this cry: “Bu.. But the first female president was supposed to be a feminist!”

You can be sure then these two weirdos wouldn't sing the same song if Sarah Palin was president. They would have sing Greta's song "How Dare You?".

 

[Clotso Coof]

They should have all hung themselves publicly. I'd have bought it on Pay per View

“Hillary Clinton is our next president. How do you think the founding mothers would feel if they heard the news?”

"That corrupt hussy? Seriously??" The founding father's wives and mothers were not boomer feminists.

they were unable to discuss publicly whether they might recycle either headline in November, or reuse any material from “Shattering the Ceiling” if Kamala Harris wins

That's proof they don't care who the female politician is, they just want a Democrat woman as President. I don't think they meant to admit they think Hillary and Kamala are basically the same...but they just admitted it.

Rumor has it she was absolutely apoplectic with rage after her loss, and that's why she didn't give a concession speech until the next day.

Rumor also has it that Hillary got blasted drunk and smashed a wine glass against the wall in the hotel suite. She was in no condition to even walk on a stage.