When media outlets have an obvious liberal bias

I don't know if it's possible to tease any kind of specific partisan bias from the MSM (mainstream media) as a whole. In fact, sensationalism is about the only bias I can detect. Very important but boring, from a cultural standpoint, information about the economy, pending legislation, or events "on the ground" in the ongoing War Of Terror is routinely ignored or relegated to the back of the paper regardless of which side it supports.

Maybe, I'm just not looking hard enough?
Yeah, maybe.
But, I seem to know which celebrity couple is pushing out twins or which pop culture icon is feuding with the other while actively trying to AVOID tabloid crap.

If only worthwhile and pertinent information were THAT unavoidable.
We are awash in useless trivia, but it doesn't have to be this way.

Soon, I won't be able to watch TV. In that switch to digital, AFAIK and I don't know for sure, there are no plans to create public information outlets not dominated by for-profit corp's. The airwaves are public domain until they're sold, aren't they? Can't the government reserve some bandwidth for public broadcasting? I mean broadcasting for mass informing, not info-tainment. Alternatively, I could imagine airing tapings of speeches by congressmen, debates in the legislative houses about bills, etc, all for free. Maybe even some commentary or other content provided like educational programming. I don't know. Maybe this's a lame idea as hardly anybody'd watch it, anyway.

When media outlets have an obvious liberal bias

When, at least as far as the major news networks are concerned, has that ever happened?

I fail to see much difference."

I'm just thinking in public, shall we say. We'd have to see an election without any media coverage of polling whatsoever in order to see what difference that made.

The media has always, I think, had the power to influence the public consciousness. These news outlets are the main source of information for many voters, and so these outlets have a really big influence on public perceptions. When media outlets have an obvious liberal bias, I think it's also pretty obvious that they influence the elections. This is true of all media no matter what bias they have.

But to find out how big that influence is, we'd have to compare an election with media coverage of polls to one without coverage. Unfortunately, I don't see much chance of the media kicking their poll addiction any time soon.

I fail to see much difference.

Ipetrich, it's also possible that the polls, and the media coverage of them, helped produce the predicted result. Sort of like a self-fulfilling prophecy. I know I get very tired of the media calling who won these elections before most of the ballots have been counted. Winning an election fairly is one thing. But assuming from the start that one candidate must win by default is another.

There's no telling how much the media influenced this election. That's why I have mixed feelings about this whole election cycle.

Valid point. Third parties don't have to win. I'd settle for inclusion in the debates and the national dialogue. And then, maybe like someone else mentioned absorption into one of the main parties. The spectrum of ideas presented to the public with regard to issues of the economy and war is incredibly narrow. Third party candidates do have something different to say.

To borrow your analogy, currently it's more like A and B are still running against each other BUT joining forces to keep out parties C,D,and E. So that what we really have is what any "normal" nation would regard as 1 party split into two different wings.

@Mr Domino,
Well, if it's any consolation, I now see that I was completely WRONG.

Secondly, quick point. Anyone who thinks that a 3+ party system can work, has obviously never lived in a country where such a system exists.

I live in a country where such a system exists and works.

A & B, who have somewhat similar political ideals (at least more similar than the others) and are desperate to have their agenda passed, realize that the only way they can guarantee this, is to form a coalition by reaching some sort of compromise on their differing issues. They form said coalition significantly raising their voter base. C,D,E now realize that without some sort of coalition, they stand no chance...and abracadabra....your five party system collapses back into two.

There are major rival parties, A and B, and a bunch of other weaker parties, C, D, E... A or B are unable to form government themselves, so they have to form a coalition with somebody. A coalition of A and B is usually impossible on ideological grounds, so A forms a government with, say, C and D, and B with E remain in opposition. Shortly before next elections C and D losen their ties with A (people usually don't like to give their vote to a party which looks like a vassal of some other bigger party, so it's not beneficial to maintain the coalition up until the elections). After the elections new coalitions arise. This is how it works in most European countries, and it doesn't collapse into a two-party system. It is still not perfect though, different problems arise, but it is possible.

I'll be putting up a new post on the election results shortly.

I hope those who supported Prop 8 are happy with themselves--they've caused sorrow and injustice in real people's real lives.

I'm shocked that a state like Ohio could see past race.

Polly, being from Ohio, I resent that. Greatly.

Most people I know in Ohio that voted for McCain did so because they thought Obama meant higher taxes. Even in rural areas, people don't vote based on skin color; they vote based on the size of their wallet.

Any stories you heard about "I won't vote for the nigger" in Ohio were either exaggerated or stated by some fringe lunatic that couldn't merit speaking for a cockroach, let alone an entire state. In fact, I asked my lifelong NRA member, GED-Jr. cousin if Obama's race mattered to him. He answered, "No more than it does McCain being a gold digger from Arizona. F%#&in' Arizona, man, those people are out there."

Ohio isn't the South and we didn't have Jim Crow laws, so please don't lob us in the same boat with the you-know-what states.

Sheesh, I'll probably be repeating this until the day I die.

Obama's speech was even greater. What a thrill it was to see the tears of joy in the audience. This morning we put up our flag in front of our house, just to say how proud we are of our country on this special occasion.

I hope Obama will be a truly great president, because our country really needs one after the mess that W made of the last 8 years.