Will the New York Times endorse Donald Trump?

Joe Bob Brigs writes at Taki Magazine about the New York Times op-ed bias against Donald Trump.

...Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination on May 26.

I have read every article on every op-ed page since May 26. There were lots of articles before that—the Times writers and editors have been fairly obsessed with Trump for all of 2016—but I limited the study to the past 86 days. (I’m a masochist when it comes to research, but halfway through this project I had to read 37 New York Post crime stories just to feel alive again. So 86 days is enough.)

Observation numero uno: I couldn’t find a single unalloyed pro–Donald Trump essay, column, think piece, whatever. There were some that looked at first glance like they might be pro-Trump, but they all ended up being not really.

...The final tally here would be 102 anti-Trump, 0 pro-Trump, 22 pro-Hillary, seven anti-Hillary, and six too wishy-washy to tell. (By the way, an anti-Hillary column is nothing like an anti-Trump column. “She’s not quite there on child care” would be an example of how Hillary is criticized.)

The real heart of the op-ed ideal, as set down by its founders in 1970 (wink, wink), is the guest articles. There were 410 of them. Sixty-seven were about Trump. Nineteen were about Hillary. Seven were devoted equally to both candidates.

We came up with the following totals:

Anti-Trump: 70

Pro-Trump: 0

Wishy-washy: 4

Anti-Hillary: 3

Pro-Hillary: 23

What does it all mean?

Here’s David Shipley, former op-ed editor of the Times, explaining in 2004 how it works: “If the editorial page…has a forceful, long-held view on a certain topic, we are more inclined to publish an Op-Ed that disagrees with that view. If you open the newspaper and find the editorial page and Op-Ed in lock step agreement or consistently writing on the same subject day after day, then we aren’t doing our job.”

Read more here.