Might We Have Had a Different President?

After I finished the reading for today, I had one of those moments when you think of something that would be perfect to blog about. Those moments... absolutely priceless. Anyway, the section of the reading that caught my attention talked about our beloved Ralph Nader.

The section read, "Why, he asked, when he was raising real issues, did he get no coverage while Al Gore and George W. Bush, the Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee of American politics, were covered every time they blew their noses?"

This shows that the media truly has an agenda setting role. The media has not told us what to think about Nader, but by failing to give him much coverage, they have encouraged us to think about other candidates instead (Obama and McCain), who they thought would have the best shot at winning the election.

However, might the election have turned out differently if Nader had received more press coverage? After all, there were quite a few swing states in the final stages of the election. I know that I don't know much at all about Nader's stand on the issues. My guess is that a lot of other people don't, either. Maybe that right there is the reason that Nader has not had much success in the past.

If the media had given Nader the coverage he wanted, would he have gotten more support from American citizens? Is the lack of attention given to Nader the reason he has not gotten a large portion of the votes in the past? Could the election have turned out differently than it did?

Maybe it wouldn't have changed anything, but you never know.