> Rather interesting commentary.
>
> >In the US, the liberal base is smaller than the conservative base, but the swing voters are more than numerous enough to make up for the difference.
>
> Are you certain that there are more people who label themselves as "conservatives" than "liberal"s in the US? It might be more likely that the liberal base that is most likely to vote is smaller than the conservative base that is most likely to vote.

That is what I meant. I kind of figure that if a person believes strongly enough in their positions, they will vote. (Unless they consider voting somehow evil--I know some people like this.)

> 2. Despite conservatives calling newspapers and television news programs "the liberal media", the largest newspaper chains are actually conservative or at least owned by people who are conservative. The New York Post, one of the most-widely read papers here in Manhattan, was heavily pro-Repubulican from the very beginning of the primary season. News media are supposed to be objective. When a major paper's stories are published with a bias, they're going to influence swing/undecided voters.
>
> -Faux "liberal media, ha" Pas

All of them are biased, just in different directions. The Washington Post claims to be far left, Fox News leans conservative, CNN is quite liberal, the New York Post is conservative, the Oregonian offers both points of view but the majority is liberal. Online news sites tend to be more polarized. I've heard several figures, but the resident journalist (Ellmyruh) says roughly 85% of journalists are registered Democrats, so it's entirely natural that more news companies are biased towards the left than the right.

gab"Rush is incredibly biased, but he's funny"by