Hillary Clinton listens during an event at a restaurant on June 3 in Santa Ana, Calif. | AP Photo The Los Angeles Times endorses Clinton ahead of California primary

The Los Angeles Times' editorial board on Friday endorsed Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Coming ahead of Tuesday's California primary, the board wrote that the Democratic frontrunner's knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs is superior to her opponent Bernie Sanders' and her policy platforms on healthcare and financial regulation “more realistic” than the Vermont senator’s.


The editorial noted Clinton’s “liabilities as a candidate” included “a penchant for secrecy and self-protection,” and criticized her decision to use a private email server as Secretary of State.

The board characterized Sanders' objectives as admirable but naïve, comparing and contrasting his campaign and political vision with President Barack Obama's.

“Obama’s vision was of bipartisan cooperation, not a political revolution in which, as Sanders has naively suggested, Republicans would simply capitulate to a Democratic president because a million young people would be massed outside the Capitol,” they wrote.

The board gave Sanders credit for pulling Clinton left on economic inequality and noted that they disagreed with the proposition that Sanders supporters should admit defeat and vote for Clinton in California.

“Voters should choose the candidate they consider best qualified,” the board wrote. “This page has endorsed Clinton not because she is more likely to win the nomination but because she is vastly better prepared than Sanders for the presidency.”

The editorial rejected the idea popular among some Sanders supporters that the Democratic primary is rigged in favor of Clinton, writing that “she has been more successful in appealing to voters,” despite her establishment credentials.

“In a year in which many voters crave novelty, she is a familiar face,” the board wrote. “But she has formidable assets that would be especially important in a general-election campaign against Trump: steadiness, seriousness and a commanding grasp of issues about which the blowhard businessman is dangerously ignorant.”

The board endorsed then-Sen. Obama over Clinton in 2008.

The San Francisco Chronicle, meanwhile, declined to endorse anyone in an editorial published Friday.

The paper's editorial board noted their “distaste for Trump’s low-substance, high-insult candidacy,” Sanders’ perceived “disconnection with reality,” and their belief that “the nation’s most populous state deserves better” than Clinton.

The Chronicle cited Clinton declining to debate Bernie Sanders in San Francisco as well as her “judgment and ethics,” noting that they still had questions “about her email server and those six-figure speeches to Goldman Sachs.”

“Her double-cross on the debate pledge only feeds into the perception (established through the years) of the Clintons’ sense of entitlement and their presumption that they can set their own rules,” the board wrote.