par.
See the words of the Times' own ombudsman below. Game, set, match. By its own admission. I suppose you, and Moe, might argue that while a pervasive and defining bias may generally be true, it likely isn't relevant for something so trivial as a mere Presidential election. No way they'd cover Hillary "more like a cause than a new subject." heh
"Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.
As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.
Stepping back, I can see that as the digital transformation proceeds, as The Times disaggregates and as an empowered staff finds new ways to express itself, a kind of Times Nation has formed around the paper’s political-cultural worldview, an audience unbound by geography (as distinct from the old days of print) and one that self-selects in digital space."