The recent NYT article “Party Rules To Streamline Race May Backfire“, written by Jonathan Martin, showcases two distinct disconnects: #1) an actual understanding of what’s going on, and #2) the NYT bubble-perspective on the GOP motives.
However, it does provide an excellent tool to showcase bias and reality:

LOS ANGELES — When gloomy Republican Party leaders regrouped after President Obama’s 2012 re-election, they were intent on enhancing the party’s chances of winning back the White House. The result: new rules to head off a prolonged and divisive nomination fight, and to make certain the Republican standard-bearer is not pulled too far to the right before Election Day.
FALSE: It should read “intent on insuring the establishment GOP chances of winning the White House“. The GOPe don’t want a conservative, they want a uni-party team player. Look toward their actions – not their words.
[…] But as the sprawling class of 2016 Republican presidential candidates tumbled out of their chaotic second debate last week, it was increasingly clear that those rule changes — from limiting the number of debates to adjusting how delegates are allocated — have failed to bring to the nominating process the order and speed that party leaders had craved.
FALSE and TRUE: False because the establishment “GOPe” apparatus intentionally put nine of the candidates into place. True because despite their efforts it’s failing to bring their chosen GOPe leader, Jeb Bush, to the forefront. (more…)