I hate gloating as much as the next guy, but I see this as a legitimately interesting phenomenon. New media is a big deal for a lot of people here. Getting a deeper understanding of how things really happen? Bring it.
I think the reason may be less nefarious. This election is a case study of how much reality can diverge from expectations. And how people can hold on to these expectations till the very last moment, even though data says otherwise.
For this reason, its a very interesting election to study and analyze from a technology perspective. E.g. has the internet really succeeded in disseminating data and viewpoints effectively, or has it made our "bubble walls" more rigid. What is the role of fact checking and factual reporting when it comes to the media, has technology made getting to the truth easier or harder?
Very interesting for the hackers on this site...
Also, in discussing this election, its unavoidable that Romney is painted in a bad light. He lost after a spirited campaign that was alas never as close as he and his team portrayed it to be.
I don't think it's necessarily bias, but of course there could be a leaning in the community.
Losing a presidential campaign is going to prime the media and individuals to report about the team's failings and those of the candidate. Many criticisms are going to be valid. Likewise, Obama's campaigners will have successes that will be reported on. So I think we'd be seeing the opposite articles if the outcome of the election was different.
The election is over, enough with the gloating.