I spend a lot of time thinking about politics, and I find it hugely beneficial to force myself into assigning probabilities to my predictions. It's silly, on the one hand, to intone "There is a 90% probability that this behaviour will continue" with the sureity of a Vulcan - my numbers are very, very poorly calibrated - but when I actually sit back to consider "How certain am I of this?" it helps remind me that I don't know most of the time. This can motivate me to search for further evidence - and since I'm explicitly researching from a position of ignorance, I'm less prone to confirmation bias.

A second technique I employ is the Drake Equation to avoid the conjunction fallacy - I'll always try and boil the elements down to the individual events, and multiply the probabilities. An interesting side effect of this is that it destroys almost every ideological movement - I'm thinking of environmentalism in particular. [EG Anthropic global warming X Catastrophic global warming X Reversability X (Prius+Carbon capture are net positives)] There are no easy solutions.