Anybody have some examples of shitty election reporting by the New York Times?

Anybody have some examples of shitty election reporting by the New York Times?

Something like pic related, but for NYT.

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/donald-trump-presidency.html
nytimes.com/2016/09/25/opinion/sunday/hillary-clinton-for-president.html
wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3552
mediaite.com/print/mark-halperin-rips-ny-times-anti-trump-bias-following-election-this-is-the-onion/
nypost.com/2016/11/14/the-new-york-times-cant-improve-until-it-admits-bias/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Pls guy's.

Like pic related, but from NYT.

Like pic, but from NYT.

...

yours is better cause its the same author lol

Thx 4 bumps.

Would love some of this but from NYT.

Bumping with some more hypocrisy.

I wish there were a lefty Sup Forums, (aside from the one that isn't a dead shithole), so I could post this to see them rationalize it.

Lefty Sup Forums voted Trump. He won the working class vote, after all.

What's this "lefty Sup Forums" you're talking about?

Oh. Well I meant an actual lefty Sup Forums, or perhaps bizarro Sup Forums

This is where I actually crossed over. This and his really well thought out statement of the "Dude WEED" issue.

If you ask me, there couldn't be a lefty Sup Forums right now.

These days, the left/globalists are utterly on the wrong side of history, with violent repression and everything.
They control the media, the banks, the (multinational) businesses, most of politics.
Public discourse is utterly manipulated in favor of the left/globalism, and therefore that public discourse is increasingly untruthful.

When you allow for free and chaotic discourse to occur in this setting (i.e. Sup Forums), that freedom and chaos will inevitably slant towards the side that holds the most objective truth, which these days is the right/nationalism.

Just look up any article they wrote about Trump, Bernie or Hillary. Literally every single one. "Trump is bad" "Hillary is good" "don't bother voting for Bernie"

>being new
cripplechan lad

I know, but someone has to have some kind of easy-to-digest image ready.

Many, perhaps even most lefties outside the regressive sphere were for Trump. Know actual commies for Trump even.
Main anti outside of regressives were those willing to swallow mainstream media bs without thinking and those living in a bubble

Bump with more hypocrisy.

...

nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/donald-trump-presidency.html
Bannon-as-white-supremacist stories count?

Kek says yes, praise him.

But honestly, I'm looking for the shit they put out pre-election.

Two reasons:
1) to find evidence of their shitty reporting that led to the public "apology" they put out

2) NYT provided free access to everyone for the election, allowing them to indoctrinate more people

That's not shitty reporting.

Pat smith was genuinely NON-genuine. She was not really inspiring and 90% of her speech was "lock hillary up". Trump might have won, but don't revise history in the process.

The sad thing is that Pat Smith's story could have been amazing if she focused on her son more.

You won't find anything in the primaries bruddah trump reporting was %100 ratings driven

The big thing they did was have each editor explain why Clinton was the best choice, highly unusual even for a paper widely seen to be a Dem shill gimme a minute I can find it
Also
nytimes.com/2016/09/25/opinion/sunday/hillary-clinton-for-president.html

The shit might actually consider "misogyny, racism and greed" worse than war

I'm back

wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3552 Wikileak post showing the Clinton camp refer to NYT as "our press"

Also this was the damn front page on the fay after the election


Sauces
mediaite.com/print/mark-halperin-rips-ny-times-anti-trump-bias-following-election-this-is-the-onion/
nypost.com/2016/11/14/the-new-york-times-cant-improve-until-it-admits-bias/