it is not a glass ceiling - it was the ceiling Hillary built -
1
"The New York Whines..."
1
Ah, the Times' own "Dewey/Truman" moment.
Makes a great poster!
Makes a great poster!
2
It hurts. It still hurts.
She would've, could've been, should've been, amazing.
She would've, could've been, should've been, amazing.
2
For all the respect i have for the journalism your paper produces there is one thing i cannot get over: The Upshot bar on your home page over the past several weeks leading to the election. Why? What was the purpose of a monotonous daily reminder that Hillary Clinton would win the election? Completely useless and annoying piece of information, that ended being completely out of touch anyway...As your journalism was also, for failing to aknowledge the existence and the voice and the reasons that people would vote Republican on this election.
6
The founding fathers predicted that tyranny on American soil would be met with violent protests. The protests have alrady started and some have become violent. Mr Trump has yet to display his agenda but if his actions follow his rhetoric they must be classified as tyrannical.
"Make America Great Again". can e interpreted as "I can whup anyone in this poolroom". One can only expect our enemies will be lining up to take a poke at Mr Trump. We have let ourselves open for chaos at home and aggression abroad. It'll be an interesting four years.
"Make America Great Again". can e interpreted as "I can whup anyone in this poolroom". One can only expect our enemies will be lining up to take a poke at Mr Trump. We have let ourselves open for chaos at home and aggression abroad. It'll be an interesting four years.
3
Well said. We're about to see the ramifications of this election. I'd be more inclined to hold judgement on Mr. Trump if he had picked steady leadership in the Cabinet, but this is going to be a bumpy ride. In 4 years the campaign line for the Dems will be "We will return America to Goidness". So glad I'm out of the Agency.
After reading Approx half of these comments I despair ! Such a plethora of bias, anger, twisted logic, unconfirmed "facts", etc !! The "paragon of virtue & honesty" won! ...to the dismay of the majority. How could this be? Gerrymandered districts? Voter disenfranchisement? a 30-40 year vendetta against the Clintons? and the ultra conservative right found in Trump a new shill for their agenda & propaganda! Voters' hangover & regret awaits.
1
I think, on the basis of the putative headlines pomposity alone, we should be gland it never saw the light of day.
1
Yeah, she didn't lose, she was cheated out of it via voter suppression. Look at the data, and why is no one discussing it? Republicans would never win without their cheating handicap. This was stolen.
7
Considering the vast army of very intelligent people who would like nothing more than for this to actually be the case, you should face the reality that "no one discussing it" means that it simply is not the case.
2
Probably flipped Wisconsin, quite likely NC. But Michigan and Pennsylvania I don't think were affected by any new rules.
Why is there not a single woman visible in the Times' newsroom?
7
Hillary Clinton didn't lose the election because she was a woman. I was one of those who voted for her (albeit reluctantly) because she clearly was the most qualified of the two presidential candidates and to vote any other way seemed unthinkable to me on many levels. I would have much preferred Elizabeth Warren in Clinton's place - again, not because Warren was a woman but because Warren was the most qualified of the 3 runner-ups last summer, with Bernie Sanders being equally so. I will say this, that as insane as it was that Donald Trump was an actual candidate for US President - at least he won the Republican nomination fair and square. Debbie Wasserman Shultz and the rest of the Democratic Party gods who took upon themselves to crown Clinton with the nomination because "she deserved it" have no one to blame for this staggering loss but themselves.
9
I doubt you're correct nor does it seem to be any interest to the media to explore the issue of how many men didn't vote for Hillary because she was a woman. My bet is (probably as good as many pollsters) that an anti-female vote occurred across white males, African American males, and Hispanic males.
4
And the photo shows why! All dudes in that shot, the fantasy title Madam President the only suggestion that women exist
8
People are acting like this is the death of feminism women have really only been fully allowed the same opportunities as men in the last twenty years you can't just give up because one woman lost an election. There will most definitely be a woman president and there are already a growing number of women leaders in this country not just in politics but in business and culture. Just because Hillary Clinton lost doesn't mean women lost. I get the whole symbolic win or whatever but stop tying your identity up in these things it was identity politics that was part of the reason Hillary lost she made identity politics for lgbt, minorities, and gender central to her campaign and then everyone is upset when poor white people decide to band together on their identity, a lot of whom have or their families have voted for democrats since FDR. Ironically I bet we would have had the first female president if you hadn't made it about having the first female president.
You are probably correct. But, the problem for most of the NYT crowd is that the first woman to be POTUS may actually be someone like Iowa Senator Joni Ernst, who obviously does not fit their narrow view of what a woman should be.
Hmmm. There seem to be an awful lot of men in this picture.
7
That is exactly what I thought.
2
Have you considered the possibility that some of the people shown are transgender or multi-gender?
Sure, US should have a female president, though that shouldn't be the reason for a woman to become one. If US needed a female in the White House, all the women would have voted for HC. Her failings were many, which she never realised. The media was her mirror when she wanted to know who was the fairest of them all!
6
Oh please - Trump is not only stunningly unqualified but he refused to release his tax returns (unheard of for candidates) and had multiple shady dealings and bankruptcies. He is not a self made man, but inherited Daddy's money. He is a bully who thinks that rules are for the little people. His views of women are misogynist. He is no role model. We are back in the dark ages with him. Hillary is Mother Theresa compared to Trump.
16
The mirror (media) mislead her and she compounded her problems with trustworthiness by not discouraging the likes of Wasserman-Schultz.
(innately dishonest,self-centered,spoiled and deplorable) and Donna Brazeil
(blindly ambitious, though previously likeable).
(innately dishonest,self-centered,spoiled and deplorable) and Donna Brazeil
(blindly ambitious, though previously likeable).
2
Oh please, Tru.o never left anyone to DIE anywhere, then left office to limit the backlash for that to try and save a presidential run. If anyone in the military did what she did with classified Intel on civilian emails, they would be in prison ... That's right, fort Leavenworth. That's fact. That's not an assumption, why is she not there? The FBI can't hold her to the USC (US Code... Law in other words), but those same dealings can land servicemen and servicewomen in Prison). To quote a picture I saw.... "I'd rather be offended by trump than left for dead by clinton."
3
"Madam" President
not Ms. President, or Mrs. President ?
not Ms. President, or Mrs. President ?
1
Ms President is correct.
Ahem. Let's hope the premature elation was spent on recycled paper lest the MSM expose themselves yet again for the hypocrites they are.
2
wow. ironic how there is not one woman in this photograph, neither in the foreground or the background. gender bias much?
9
As someone extremely interested in my two daughters getting to see the first female president, I sincerely hope that person has two characteristics:
1. Her career was not beholden on a man -- she didn't come to public attention as the 'wife of...' who then used that perch as leverage. Let it be someone who created her own story.
2. She needs to be someone honest, authentic, inspiring, visionary and decent.
Hillary fails on every count. Looking forward to celebrating 'Madam President' when the timing is right, perhaps as soon as four years from now.
1. Her career was not beholden on a man -- she didn't come to public attention as the 'wife of...' who then used that perch as leverage. Let it be someone who created her own story.
2. She needs to be someone honest, authentic, inspiring, visionary and decent.
Hillary fails on every count. Looking forward to celebrating 'Madam President' when the timing is right, perhaps as soon as four years from now.
11
Really? Where would Trump be without his father's fortune? Is he not "beholden to a man" as well? Gender bias much?
17
You got it reversed. Bill Clinton was only president because he was beholden to Hillary. She would have run for president at some point either way.
6
This has nothing to do with any "glass ceiling" that has to be shattered and overcome. She was simply not in tune with what the population wanted. She had lost all concept of what the ordinary person wants, how they live, how they talk, what are their pain points, etc. This is what President elect Trump was well aware of and was his mantra in the campaign. I was quite sure a long time ago that he was going to win because of his message.
I am glad Hillary did not win and and it would have been quite a disaster to see that Huma woman become the secretary of state or something else in the administration. She seems to be a despicable woman. I found her nauseating when I saw the picture where she was standing with her arms on her hips looking down on someone in the aircraft as if she was about to attack that person. Good riddance.
I am glad Hillary did not win and and it would have been quite a disaster to see that Huma woman become the secretary of state or something else in the administration. She seems to be a despicable woman. I found her nauseating when I saw the picture where she was standing with her arms on her hips looking down on someone in the aircraft as if she was about to attack that person. Good riddance.
9
GOT FACTS?
Your post fits Pres elect Trump to a tee. I do check facts. Plus I live here.
Your post fits Pres elect Trump to a tee. I do check facts. Plus I live here.
1
@ NA- "That Huma woman"?despicable? How do you know this? Misogynistic, biased much? Keep your unkind opinions in Montreal. Note: Trump's personal needs are so averse to the public good, we'll be fortunate if his "puppet masters" leave anything in place of our egalitarian society.
2
Is the Asian guy drinking Canada Dry?
4
This would've been the headline had it not been for Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. Had their votes in key states gone to Clinton, you would've printed this page. The vote-suck into Johnson & Stein cost 86 electoral votes in AZ, FL, MI, WI, & PA. Why is this not a story NYTimes?
10
but would the Johnson voters gone for Trump instead?
1
Trump did not win the Presidency. Hillary Clinton lost it. She lost because she and her expensive staffs and advisors are so stupidly clueless about the discontent of the American working class. Despite the fact that Bernie Sanders railed against the financial elite, the drug companies, the very rich and electrified the working class across the urban landscape, the rust belt and mountain west and the young, Hillary Clinton still did not get it and did not connect with these voters.
Political leaders get elected because of their vision and not because of their detailed policy papers. No, Hillary Clinton did not deserve to be the first elected female president.
Political leaders get elected because of their vision and not because of their detailed policy papers. No, Hillary Clinton did not deserve to be the first elected female president.
4
Hubris.
This is what made Trump possible.
This is what made Trump possible.
5
I too was awaiting Madame President as I had my shirt (courtesy of my daughter at least a year ago) on a doorknob handle waiting to be worn Wednesday first to my office and then to the gym. Well, sadly it isn't to be in 2016. I think I'll tuck it away for either my daughter or granddaughter to wear at some point, 'cause I am not sure I'll get to wear it.... :( But one thing is for sure, worn it will be!!!
4
From MADAM PRESIDENT to MADMAN PRESIDENT.
29
Thank god this headline never had an opportunity to run.... otherwise I would have had to take to the streets in protest! More like "Madam Convict" would have been more appropriate.
Time for half the voters in this country to accept the results and move on... like the other half have quietly done, peacefully.... for the past eight years.
Time for half the voters in this country to accept the results and move on... like the other half have quietly done, peacefully.... for the past eight years.
4
Surely you jest?? There is little in the way of kindness, and peaceful or quiet behavior about Trump and many who attend his rallies.
I have seen the Confederate Flag and Trump for President prominently displayed on houses and pickup trucks in PA. A new level of intolerance will not be done quietly or peacefully.
Hilary received the popular vote. That is More than half the voters in the US.
Trump faces at least 3 court cases against him before he is sworn in. Looks like "Mr. Convict" may be more accurate.
I have seen the Confederate Flag and Trump for President prominently displayed on houses and pickup trucks in PA. A new level of intolerance will not be done quietly or peacefully.
Hilary received the popular vote. That is More than half the voters in the US.
Trump faces at least 3 court cases against him before he is sworn in. Looks like "Mr. Convict" may be more accurate.
10
Easy fix: Madman President
6
Your choice of a B&W image makes it especially poignant.
3
Something make me sick about current liberal narrative, is discrimination. Discrimination against majority.That should be no any difference, according to US Constitution and common practices in Western world. Shell it be man, woman, black, white, yellow, gay, straight, wegan or burger eater.
So, actually, why liberals would be so happy, if woman takes the office? Isn't it discrimination against men?
So, actually, why liberals would be so happy, if woman takes the office? Isn't it discrimination against men?
2
Umm, we women are the majority. And yet, somehow, we've never had a woman president. So in your view, this is discrimination. To me, it's just humdrum misogyny, now normalized in our president-elect.
13
If most are USA presidents are tall, does it mean that small president should be elected?
If all presidents are physically fit , and healthy - isn't it discrimination against disabled persons?
If all presidents are physically fit , and healthy - isn't it discrimination against disabled persons?
2
You need to go back to school and learn how to reason.
5
That's how envisioned it too. I'm still with Her.
10
The more I watch Charlie Rose the more suspicious I am that he is anything but neutral. Tonight Maureen Dowd, Dan Balz among others pontificated seriously on a Trump Presidency at his round table. Only as an after thought did they mention the influence of the Alt Right, white supremacy. They are actually praising him as a great politician. Check it out. Charlie Rose is everywhere.
2
Charlie rose stopped being a neutral journalist a long time ago. He is tough and condescending with people he doesn't care for and very partial and almost worshipful when his guests are his society/political pals; and lobs only softball questions and doesn't follow-up when he knows damn well they are outright lying or obfuscating the issue being discussed. It says volumes about the state of our "intelligentsia" when he is considered the best we've got. Oh, where is Dick Cavett these days?
5
By midnight Wednesday, I'm still in my hangover. When did Wisconsin, my home state, turn "Red?" It's used to be the Blue prairie. My mentor, Professor Richard D Coy of the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, was an active Democrat. By i:00 AM Wednesday--as Trump's victory was on the thresholds of Wisconsin and Michigan, I suddenly realized that I was too old to cope with the present affairs: Things had brought about huge change around my home state. It's hard to tell whether the Badgers were leaning toward the Red Elephant or simply electing Mr Donald Trump because of his promises of change--a sort of populist Americanism. The defeat of Mrs Hillary Clinton--or Trump's shocking "upset"--was probably more complex than resulting from sexism. Are we in a new America? Let's hope that the historical lessons of the rise and fall of the great empires and/or nations will teach us something. The decaying factors were often related to internal divisiveness. God Bless America.
3
Hasn't Scott Walker been governor for several years?
Those blue prairie grasses have been scorched for a while now...
Those blue prairie grasses have been scorched for a while now...
3
Though I am not an American, I was as curious like any other American to know the outcome of the recent American presidential elections. Also, I must confess that I am not well versed in the intricacies of American election systems. All I was concerned with was, Trump or Clinton. My impression on these candidates was formed through what I learnt from the Indian print media in addition to The Guardian of the UK.When Trump won, I doubted my genius. Even I asked myself why the media 'had' to be so one sided so as to hide Trump's popularity as well as the real wishes of the American people. I feel much relieved to go through NYT articles that express the same bafflement. I wish the new president Trump and the Americans all the best.
3
You Sir, are a gentleman and more attuned to the climate here than our supposed experts. Good show!
At least this way it can be someone most of us on the left can actually feel good about - Elizabeth Warren.
6
How about this for a headline:
"Consequence of Biased Coverage Against Bernie Sanders: National Press Accidentally Hands Presidency to Racist, Misogynist Crazy Person"
"Consequence of Biased Coverage Against Bernie Sanders: National Press Accidentally Hands Presidency to Racist, Misogynist Crazy Person"
31
Blame everything except for the truth. Clinton is a corrupt, lying politician and got exactly what she deserved.
1
Not pithy enough.
"Madam(e) President" ? An apology cover could read, "Good Girls Revolt --- Not Enough"
heartbreaking day. Heartbreaking to listen and watch Mrs. Clinton's speak today.
and quite accurately depicted in the photo you NYT chose to publish along this article - all men!!!!!!!!!
shameful.
and quite accurately depicted in the photo you NYT chose to publish along this article - all men!!!!!!!!!
shameful.
15
I, along with the many millions of other persons who voted for Hillary Clinton, am disappointed that I did not get to see that historic headline atop the New York Times.
I keep hearing people saying, oh, yes, we'll elect a woman president, for sure. Someday. Just not this woman. Not now.
I keep hearing people saying, oh, yes, we'll elect a woman president, for sure. Someday. Just not this woman. Not now.
7
But they have no problem electing *this man* or any other man.
4
The world's most qualified woman runs against the world's most UNqualified man, and this is the result we get??? Truly sickening...
35
The world's most qualified trainwreck runs against one of the world's most accomplished tacticians, who just decides to conquer politics, with a passion unseen since Teddy Roosevelt.
And this is what they will be studying 100 years from now, in the Trump
Presidential Library, Boutique and Car Wash.
And this is what they will be studying 100 years from now, in the Trump
Presidential Library, Boutique and Car Wash.
3
I think that you are mixing up a tactician with a charlatan. 100 years from now, Trump will be considered are most stunningly unqualified President who got in because the United States was still not ready for a female leader.
9
Where are the women in the NY Times newsroom?
38
This is great. Not a single woman anywhere in sight. And the NYT calls the Donald sexist.
5
It's pretty childish that Donald Trump was elected president and you have had Hillary's photo on the front page all day. (I voted for Hillary but the NY Times seems churlish in this regard).
12
Not one woman in the picture. Ironic.
25
And the rubes who voted for Trump thinking he would drain the swamp and throw out the elites are probably unaware that as they are reading this Trump is assembling a cabinet, a transition team and a staff made up of elites and swamp dwellers.
Never underestimate the gullibility of a Trump supporter.
Never underestimate the gullibility of a Trump supporter.
46
You do understand that if Hillary had won she would have put all the same people in her cabinet, staff, etc. that enabled her to enrich heself with the shameful Clinton Foundation, e-mails, schemes, etc. Did you think she was going to appoint fresh-faced newcomers to Washington?
How naive.
How naive.
1
One comment that resonated with all Tuesday evening as the results came in: It's the children of the Reagan Democrat voting for Trump. It appears that of his big appeals was from blue collar working people were tired of being told what to do by Washington (substitute each state capital here.) What did Ronald Reagan do for the blue collar worker. He was a right wing President and Trump will be the same. Michael Bloomberg, himself once a Republican, said it best: "I'm a New Yorker and I can see a con man coming and Donald Trump is a con man." I rue the day.
2
Please read up on the Clinton Foundation before posting such nonsense about it. Other people you call "naive" may be naive(not really) but you are completely ignorant. Your opinion is not fact.
4
I think this whole sickening joke of an election was a direct result of all the media not doing their duty to serious issues but to 'entertainment'. So we ended up with the two worst possible candidates out of the primaries instead of ending with a Kasich vs. Sanders enlightening and purposeful campaign. And once everyone realized what a serious threat to our democracy and to free-speech Trump was, then they started trying to stop him with everything they had and make HIllary the "reasonable choice". But it was too late - she couldn't be saved. I for one, don't have high hopes for him. I am scared for my country, and for those who are vulnerable to his policies. The media helped elect a strongman; his critics will be silenced little by little
12
Heartbreaking.
14
Here's my take on the upset: There were so many stories about how Clinton was to be a certain winner--at times a 96% chance of winning--that the crazies came out in droves, in good and bad weather, in heat and cold, in gloom of night, to deliver the message of fear and loathing at their appointed polling places.
My instinct tells me Repugnant-cants would have taken the easy way out in their armchairs, had they thought (50-50 chance!) that someone else would cover for them by the end of the day. The Trumpet players rushed to the stage to blare out their preferences (vote for the Trumpet) because they panicked; the Clinton supporters just "knew" it was in the bag. They were the arm-chairs sitters, thinking there would already be enough votes to cover their ennui. Stupid is what stupid gets.
My instinct tells me Repugnant-cants would have taken the easy way out in their armchairs, had they thought (50-50 chance!) that someone else would cover for them by the end of the day. The Trumpet players rushed to the stage to blare out their preferences (vote for the Trumpet) because they panicked; the Clinton supporters just "knew" it was in the bag. They were the arm-chairs sitters, thinking there would already be enough votes to cover their ennui. Stupid is what stupid gets.
3
I have been able to keep it together throughout the day, listening, watching, and reading the news coverage of this election.
Then i read this article and looked at this picture, and that is when the tears flowed.
Then i read this article and looked at this picture, and that is when the tears flowed.
14
Absolutely devastated.
16
There will be a Madam President one day, I for one believe that this election result had absolutely nothing to with any inherent sexism in the electorate. The Democrats anointed the worst possible candidate for this contest, man or woman, one who was disliked by more than half the population and distrusted by perhaps two thirds. I am not a Trump supporter but I have hopes that he will govern much better than he campaigned. But as I think back on this election, of all the inflammatory remarks Trump had made, the revelations in the press, the negative commentary, etc., and realize that despite all of it he not only remained a viable candidate but won the presidency, I am led to the conclusion that Hillary Clinton was, as I have always maintained, a fatally flawed candidate beyond any recognition that the liberal elites in the Democratic Party were ever capable of recognizing. And so, President-elect Trump. A Republican Congress and Senate. Nice work Hillary. Exit, stage left.
32
I agree with disliked and distrusted and I believe he will govern much better than he campaigned and I didn't vote for either but I voted.
6
When she announced her candidacy she had a 60% approval rating. She herself did nothing to change that.
She was the most qualified presidential candidate since George HW Bush. And that's what REPUBLICANS said.
She acted professionally throughout the campaign.
Stop cutting and pasting Breitbart nonsense here.
She was the most qualified presidential candidate since George HW Bush. And that's what REPUBLICANS said.
She acted professionally throughout the campaign.
Stop cutting and pasting Breitbart nonsense here.
22
Wow I'm happy to read that people feel the NYT reporting on the election was really one sided and extremely biased. I just came back to the NYT after a year to read hopefully the Grey Lady eating crow!
21
Thanks for posting this story, last night I was wondering what headlines might have been created but would never be published.
4
When I was a kid, in 1964, a senator named Margaret Chase Smith ran for president. She was a Republican, though a moderate one. I believe that her candidacy was serious, but neither she nor any other woman stood a chance of winning the office back then.
Today, things are different. There certainly will be a female president, when there is a female candidate whom the public wants. Hillary wasn't that candidate. I don't think she lost because of her gender.
Today, things are different. There certainly will be a female president, when there is a female candidate whom the public wants. Hillary wasn't that candidate. I don't think she lost because of her gender.
20
..and don't forget Elizabeth Dole tried for the Presidency in 2000. A far more compassionate and capable candidate than either of the two we just had.
6
You mean the former Elizabeth Hanford, Bob Dole's mistress?
Class. Real class.
Class. Real class.
2
I have read the negative comments.
If the fact that news and opinion are separated at the Times is not by now obvious to all, they should get their news someplace else. I recognize opinion on the op-ed page and careful reporting separated out on the news pages.
The fact that there was so much negativity reported about trump was the fault of trump himself. The conflict of interest alone, given that he has not released his tax returns, will be massive and the president will need to recuse himself from many decisions. Again, all self-inflicted. His racist opinions, his lies, were all reportage required by the candidate himself.
The NYT reported the facts. You are entitled to your opinions but not your own facts.
If the fact that news and opinion are separated at the Times is not by now obvious to all, they should get their news someplace else. I recognize opinion on the op-ed page and careful reporting separated out on the news pages.
The fact that there was so much negativity reported about trump was the fault of trump himself. The conflict of interest alone, given that he has not released his tax returns, will be massive and the president will need to recuse himself from many decisions. Again, all self-inflicted. His racist opinions, his lies, were all reportage required by the candidate himself.
The NYT reported the facts. You are entitled to your opinions but not your own facts.
40
Interesting photo. It has the potential to become an iconic "Dewey defeats Truman" photograph. The oddity of only having men in the photo only adds to its "I guess we're not quite there yet" message.
58
It's really tiresome to constantly read that Clinton's problem is sexism. Her problem is corruption and incompetence.
24
How come an 'historic' newspaper cover was more important than the FACT that the female candidate and her spouse was a participant in a 'pay-for-play' scheme with the prize being US policies and government actions?
21
The life and times of Billary and their brushes with the law and legal boundaries have over the decades been exhaustively documented by the NYT. Little in the way of convictions of course, only the convictions of their critics. Regrettably, this photo was merely a footnote, albeit a powerful one.
When you post something as ridiculous as this, it's a good idea to cite sources or include links, and please not form Faux news or Breitbart.
1
Tell us, why did so many of the polls and so many columnnists, including your NYT columnists, tell us that Hillary was sure to win, and to win by a large percentage. Where did all those Trump voters come from that didn't get counted in all those percentages?
17
Hidden Trump supporters masquerading as Clinton supporters; you know wolves in sheep's clothing!
I never saw a poll or columnist say that Hillary was sure to win.
I saw many say things like "there's an 87% chance that, if the election were held on 12 October, Hillary Clinton would win".
Diana Wright should link to the statement that "Hillary was sure to win".
I saw many say things like "there's an 87% chance that, if the election were held on 12 October, Hillary Clinton would win".
Diana Wright should link to the statement that "Hillary was sure to win".
3
Because the NYT... and most of the liberal media, think they're speaking for the country. But they're not. The Times should get a copy of that old Steinberg poster "a New York view of the World" and put it up as a cautionary reminder.
13
The NY Times lost a great deal of credibility with me after the coverage of this election. You stooped to the level of Fox News in the way your coverage became a one sided biased praise of one candidate while repeating your despise of the other.
Reading your paper over the last week was painful and this why like most media outlets you missed the core narrative of this election.
My recommendation, hire reporters without a left lean and you will produce stories that capture theme of these delicate times in which we currently live. Hire political writers who can convincingly argue with depth both sides of the political aisle. Hire more philosophers and economist who have cut their skin in the real world of diverse economy. And lastly, for christ sake please lose Paul Krugman.
Reading your paper over the last week was painful and this why like most media outlets you missed the core narrative of this election.
My recommendation, hire reporters without a left lean and you will produce stories that capture theme of these delicate times in which we currently live. Hire political writers who can convincingly argue with depth both sides of the political aisle. Hire more philosophers and economist who have cut their skin in the real world of diverse economy. And lastly, for christ sake please lose Paul Krugman.
31
As a left-leaning Millennial, a Mexican-American dual citizen, and an establishmentarian, I must agree. I and several of my peers expressed last night that a great loss in this election was the Times' reporting. Please, please, maintain ideological diversity of your staff. Inclusion means including diverse ideas, too. Take Kristof's advice from earlier in the year -- that it's "liberal poppycock that there aren’t smart conservatives or evangelicals." Give us the truth. Stop pandering. Stop advancing the ideologies of folks like Andrew Rosenthal. Your readers can handle some critical thinking. The nation cannot handle losing one last trusted media outlet.
32
I don't think it's so much that the Times leans to the left. If they did that, they would have supported Bernie over Clinton. No, they were in the bag for Clinton from the word go. I suspect because their majority stockholder has given millions to Clinton. He says jump, the reporters say how high.
12
You mean like the Times stories that Hillary was the target of multiple criminal investigations based on false leaks from Trey Gowdy's committee that the paper ran with without double checking?
Then clumsily walking back the stories over several weeks?
You mean THAT one sided reporting?
Then clumsily walking back the stories over several weeks?
You mean THAT one sided reporting?
6
I hope the senior executives at The Times will come to examine what went wrong with not only their coverage of the eighteen months long lead up to this election, but I think more importantly their active one sided participation on behalf of the Democratic candidate.
In my opinion, the once proud name "New York Times" has lost its considerable luster. The drum beating for Hillary from your columnists, from the editorial staff, and from the op Ed contributors was deafening. So much so that it became obvious that you at the Times had lost your objectivity.
Objectivity is a required attribute of great newspapers. Lose it and you lose the trust of your readers. If I wanted biased reporting of these last many months I could easily have turned to CNN. But no, I wanted balanced analysis and reporting. I can figure out who to vote for on my own thank you. But balanced information helps me make up my mind. I certainly didn't get it from the Times this campaign. In fact it became a joke around my home. I hope you have learned your lesson and return to quality journalism.
In my opinion, the once proud name "New York Times" has lost its considerable luster. The drum beating for Hillary from your columnists, from the editorial staff, and from the op Ed contributors was deafening. So much so that it became obvious that you at the Times had lost your objectivity.
Objectivity is a required attribute of great newspapers. Lose it and you lose the trust of your readers. If I wanted biased reporting of these last many months I could easily have turned to CNN. But no, I wanted balanced analysis and reporting. I can figure out who to vote for on my own thank you. But balanced information helps me make up my mind. I certainly didn't get it from the Times this campaign. In fact it became a joke around my home. I hope you have learned your lesson and return to quality journalism.
52
Absolutely agree.
I don't have cable (thank god). I get my news from the NYTimes and the BBC. The Times did a terrible and biased job of covering this election, all the while telling me what I should cook and where I should travel. How snarky. How effete. What's with you guys, anyway?
I don't have cable (thank god). I get my news from the NYTimes and the BBC. The Times did a terrible and biased job of covering this election, all the while telling me what I should cook and where I should travel. How snarky. How effete. What's with you guys, anyway?
14
Agreed.
It was a huge mistake for the NYT to endorse Hillary way back on January 30, 2016 -- before a single vote had been cast in any primary or caucus. That endorsement clouded the NYT's coverage of the primary season and (of course) the general election too.
It was a huge mistake for the NYT to endorse Hillary way back on January 30, 2016 -- before a single vote had been cast in any primary or caucus. That endorsement clouded the NYT's coverage of the primary season and (of course) the general election too.
27
President Harry S Truman concedes... returning to Mrs. Truman in Independence, Missouri.. to the house he left behind.
GOP returns to The White House after 16 years and The Crash...