It never fails to amaze me just how quickly there are pundits to explain in detail things that they never suspected would happen. I always think of those commentators on the stock market who have no idea at the opening bell what will happen but who are able to tell us how the market trade and give us the reasons why within three minutes of the closing bell. In political terms, it was these sort of "experts" who came out of the woodwork in droves the moment after Eric Cantor lost his primary yesterday.
Don't get me wrong. There are certain simple conclusions that can be drawn from Cantor's loss. Nevertheless, the pundits who are explaining today in detail just what impact that loss will have on the 2016 presidential election are either fools or charlatans. For example, Ezra Klein says that Cantor's loss mean that Hillary Clinton is much more likely to win in 2016 than previously thought. Really? Is he nuts? The likelihood of Hillary winning is much more affected by 1) her decision whether or not to run (I think she probably won't), 2) whether or not she can get through the next two years without a serious mistake, 3) whether or not documents emerge that tie her more closely to the decisions regarding Benghazi or which show her statements about that attack to be lies; 4) the state of the economy in 2016; 5) the standing of the USA in the world in 2016; 6) Hillary's health in 2016; 7) Bill behavior from now through 2016; 8) the identity of the Republican candidate; 9) the events that arise in the next two years that might affect voters. In other words, the outcome of the 2016 election is hardly affect in the least by the Cantor loss in the GOP primary.
Don't get me wrong. There are certain simple conclusions that can be drawn from Cantor's loss. Nevertheless, the pundits who are explaining today in detail just what impact that loss will have on the 2016 presidential election are either fools or charlatans. For example, Ezra Klein says that Cantor's loss mean that Hillary Clinton is much more likely to win in 2016 than previously thought. Really? Is he nuts? The likelihood of Hillary winning is much more affected by 1) her decision whether or not to run (I think she probably won't), 2) whether or not she can get through the next two years without a serious mistake, 3) whether or not documents emerge that tie her more closely to the decisions regarding Benghazi or which show her statements about that attack to be lies; 4) the state of the economy in 2016; 5) the standing of the USA in the world in 2016; 6) Hillary's health in 2016; 7) Bill behavior from now through 2016; 8) the identity of the Republican candidate; 9) the events that arise in the next two years that might affect voters. In other words, the outcome of the 2016 election is hardly affect in the least by the Cantor loss in the GOP primary.
No comments:
Post a Comment