<p>Nationwide polls agreed that Donald Trump had a slim chance of winning the presidency. His victory last week confirmed the massive liberal bias that exists in America&rsquo;s media-controlled polling system. ;</p>
<p><em>The New York Times</em> has since apologized to its readers for underestimating Trump&rsquo;s support among voters. Moving forward, ;<em>Times</em> publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. has promised to cover the President-elect without bias:</p>
<p>&ldquo;We will cover his policies and his agenda fairly. We will bring expert analysis and thoughtful commentary to the changes we see in government, and to their ramifications on the ground,&rdquo; wrote Sulzberger in a note sent to staffers on Friday.  ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;We will look within and beyond Washington to explore the roots of the anger that has roiled red and blue America. If many Americans no longer seem to understand each other, let&rsquo;s make it our job to interpret and explain.&rdquo;  ;</p>
<p>The publisher promised that his staff would &ldquo;rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of <em>Times</em> journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p>There would be no need for apology if the paper had, as Sulzberger said, &ldquo;reported on both candidates fairly&rdquo; &ndash; but that&rsquo;s beside the point. ;</p>
<p>The point is that this widespread liberal bias backfired &#8211; making the Dems overconfident, underestimating Trump&rsquo;s chances of winning, and in the end contributing to Hillary Clinton&rsquo;s failure. ;</p>
<p>Instead of reporting about the lives of the people who elected Donald Trump as president, the <em>Times</em> dismissed his supporters as &ldquo;a rabble of racist rednecks and homophones,&rdquo; writes <em>NY Post</em> journalist Michael Goodwin. ;</p>
<p>The paper did not treat Trump with fairness or respect. As media columnist Jim Rutenberg puts it, many reporters viewed Donald Trump &ldquo;as an abnormal and potentially dangerous candidate&rdquo; and simply didn&#8217;t know how to handle him. ;</p>
<p>In the wake of Trump&rsquo;s victory, top editor Dean Baquet admits that Donald Trump has &ldquo;challenged our language&hellip;he will have changed journalism.&rdquo; The<em> Times</em> is now losing money as angry readers cancel their subscriptions, and Baquet &ldquo;must insist that the standards of fairness again become a fundamental tenet in the news room,&rdquo; writes Goodwin. ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;As an added guarantee, he must insist that the paper enlarge its thinking about diversity to include journalists who disagree with the <em>Times</em> embedded liberal slant. There has to be a difference of perspective to judge where fairness lies.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p><strong>Editor&#8217;s note:</strong> The New York Times is considered a &#8220;newspaper of record.&#8221; This is supposed to mean the highest levels of integrity and investigation. But this admission shows how far this news source has fallen from its heights. The bias aimed squarely against the Republican candidate was accepted as truth by its readers, and was meant to sway the election &#8211; betrayal of its own journalistic standards. Perhaps Donald Trump was correct and a bankruptcy of the New York Times would be good for America.</p>