I realise there are many here at DK who think the NY Times hates Bill and Hillary Clinton and is seeking to destroy them (cf endless Maureen Dowd columns in particular). However the paper has done nothing to further Bernie Sanders's campaign, and along with much or most of the MSM has been ignoring the incredible turnouts at his rallies and not giving proper coverage of his actual policies.
No doubt however much the Times may not like HRC, they clearly wouldn't want a true progressive to win. Perhaps they are hoping Joe Biden will join the race -- a "safe pair of hands" as the Brits would say.
In any case I was shocked at their coverage of the New Hampshire poll results putting Sanders in the lead.
The headline: "Bernie Sanders in Statistical Tie With Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire Poll".
Then the intro:
Senator Bernie Sanders is making significant inroads against Hillary Rodham Clinton in New Hampshire, with a new poll showing him in a statistical tie with Mrs. Clinton in the state.
A new survey released by Franklin Pierce University and The Boston Herald found that 44 percent of Democrats in the state are backing Mr. Sanders compared with 37 percent for Mrs. Clinton, a difference that is within the poll’s margin of error.
The last Democratic poll from the group in March showed Mr. Sanders with support of 8 percent of likely voters, demonstrating a significant erosion in the former secretary of state’s lead.
Emphasis added
--Bernie Sanders in Statistical Tie With Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire Poll
Can you frigging believe that? Now it's great that they are being statistically cautious in noting the margin of error. But it wouldn't be a stretch to say "Sanders leads Clinton in new NH poll", would it?
And more ridiculously, they say the poll results "demonstrate a significant erosion" in Clinton's lead. Er, how about reversal of Clinton's lead?
Christ, can they be any more obvious?