US election: concerns for media as voters back Trump on reporters’ bias, by Cameron Stewart. Here is some media writhing in the The Australian, as they realize how wrongly they understand the situation:

A poll has found almost nine out of 10 people believe the US media wants Hillary Clinton to win next week’s presidential election. …

The Suffolk University/USA Today poll asked: “Who do you think the media, including major newspapers and TV stations, would like to see elected president: Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?” It found 75.9 per cent ­answered Clinton, while just 7.9 per cent picked Trump.

It follows an Associated Press/GkF poll that found 87 per cent of Trump supporters believe the media is biased against the billionaire — something 51 per cent of Clinton supports agreed with.

The PC excuse is gently examined:

Many will argue that Trump has bought this on himself with his maverick, unconventional and sometimes offensive behaviour and that the media is merely doing its job in calling him out when he stretches the truth, fails to provide details or acts in such a way as to raise questions about his temperament or lack of political ­experience.

Yet even some major media players now admit that Trump’s candidacy has caused barely disguised horror among many journalists, leading more of them to blur the lines between straight news reporting and opinion.

Carl Cannon, the executive editor of the influential US political website RealClearPolitics, has said “the 2016 election will be remembered as one in which much of the mainstream media all but admitted aligning itself with the Democratic Party”.

But the establishment has to do what it has to do:

But as Trump continues to rail against journalists, the media ­verdict increasingly comes down against him. Almost every US newspaper that has editorialised about the election has endorsed Clinton. Yesterday, the Clinton campaign put out a press release boasting about the latest editorials.

“These endorsements continue the unprecedented, near-universal nature of this year’s editorial board endorsements of Clinton,” the Clinton campaign said.

“Even newspapers that have historically backed Republicans have either refused to support Trump or have offered their endorsement to ­Clinton.

The establishment and the PC crew steadfastly deny the obvious. The Republican Party is two quite separate parties.

There is the establishment, or old Republican Party, whom the media recognizes. It is the minority now, as revealed in the Republican primary. It is supporting Clinton, either overtly or by not helping Trump.

The new party is the Tea Party, though it doesn’t go by any name now — because it is the Republican Party majority. The Tea Party was formed originally by both Democrats and Republicans, mainstream middle class people sickened by the bailout of the banks etc. in the GFC in 2008. There was no home for them in the Democratic Party, which is too PC and too intolerant. So they pursued their anti-establishment causes within the Republican Party. The media always dismissed them as “racists”, which is both technically wrong and completely misleading because their primary focus was on economics and corruption — and there were plenty of black officeholders in the Tea Party.

Trump is now the head of this movement. It is anti-corruption and anti-establishment. It is fighting the Democrats, the establishment Republicans, the media, academia, and the bureaucrats. The PC crew still only call them names, like a “basket of deplorables,” making little attempt to understand.

So it comes as no surprise to see all the media endorse Clinton. Shame we don’t get to vote for the media. Oh we do, sort of — newspaper circulation and audiences for the PC broadcasters fall, year after year.