Do pundits and 'experts' really know what they are talking about?

In 2016, experts predicted that the U.K. referendum on exiting the European Union would never pass, and even if it did, the British economy would collapse if the British voted for Brexit.  They were wrong on both counts.  But why would anyone believe that all of a sudden, European countries would stop trading with one of the biggest economies in the world if they weren't part of the European Union?  Their economy has not collapsed.

Then there's Paul Krugman.  The Nobel prize-winning economist and others predicted that the stock market and the economy would collapse if Donald Trump was elected president.  He blew it, too.  Instead of collapsing, we are thriving.  Why would anyone with an ounce of common sense, especially an economist, believe that the economy would collapse if we elected someone who wanted smaller government, fewer regulations, and lower taxes, yet would thrive if we elected someone who essentially just wanted the government to get more power and money?

We were told that it would be a disaster for trade with Asia if Trump pulled out of the TPP.  Bzzt!  Wrong answer!  It looks as though he is getting a significant number of trade deals.  Why would anyone with a brain believe that Asian countries would trade much less with the biggest economy in the world if the president didn't sign a piece of paper?  Of course, we are told the same garbage about Trump if he changes or pulls out of NAFTA.  I ask the same question: Does anyone think Canada and Mexico will try to harm us greatly if we no longer have that piece of paper?  Wouldn't that punish their countries more?

The CBO predicted that Obamacare would reduce the budget deficit.  It got that wrong in spades.  When has an entitlement program ever come in at predicted cost, and when have they reduced the deficit?  The CBO also routinely underestimates the impact of tax cuts on the economy.  The question is, why do reporters and others treat their predictions as if they are accurate instead of wild guesses?

Some laughable predictions have been regurgitated by media outlets, too.  Among many fallacies, they claimed that the ice would be gone in the Arctic by now and sea levels would rise massively, all because of humans, fossil fuels, and CO2.  They didn't.  Even though the predictions have been so demonstrably wrong, they are still repeated over and over again.  The indoctrination based on inaccurate, manipulated computer models continues uninterrupted.  Facts don't interfere.

After Obama won in 2008, Republicans were told that they have to move left, or they would never win another presidential election.  Well, surprise: They did.  In the succeeding eight years, Republicans won over 1,000 seats nationwide, took over the House and Senate, and won the presidency.  In 2017, Republicans won the first few contested seats, but now, when Democrats won a few governorships in blue states, won seats in dark blue Washington, and won a Medicaid vote in light blue Maine, we are told that 2018 is a looming disaster for Republicans.  (Obviously wishful thinking instead of thoughtful analysis.)  The fact that the Democratic Party is dead broke, is having trouble raising money, and had to essentially cook the books for Hillary in 2016 is irrelevant to these know-it-all media soothsayers.

Republicans should remember that reporters and Democrats will not vote for you no matter how far left you go, so please don't listen to their advice on what is needed to win.  They are not seeking to help you.

Use your common sense and brain when listening to experts and pundits.  They appear to have little common sense and are not expert on much, if anything.

And one more point: If any politician says you didn't build that or that unemployment compensation, food stamps, and government spending are great stimulants for the economy, but allowing people and businesses to keep more of their own money is not a stimulant, he has the economic I.Q. of a rock and should not be listened to or voted for.

In 2016, experts predicted that the U.K. referendum on exiting the European Union would never pass, and even if it did, the British economy would collapse if the British voted for Brexit.  They were wrong on both counts.  But why would anyone believe that all of a sudden, European countries would stop trading with one of the biggest economies in the world if they weren't part of the European Union?  Their economy has not collapsed.

Then there's Paul Krugman.  The Nobel prize-winning economist and others predicted that the stock market and the economy would collapse if Donald Trump was elected president.  He blew it, too.  Instead of collapsing, we are thriving.  Why would anyone with an ounce of common sense, especially an economist, believe that the economy would collapse if we elected someone who wanted smaller government, fewer regulations, and lower taxes, yet would thrive if we elected someone who essentially just wanted the government to get more power and money?

We were told that it would be a disaster for trade with Asia if Trump pulled out of the TPP.  Bzzt!  Wrong answer!  It looks as though he is getting a significant number of trade deals.  Why would anyone with a brain believe that Asian countries would trade much less with the biggest economy in the world if the president didn't sign a piece of paper?  Of course, we are told the same garbage about Trump if he changes or pulls out of NAFTA.  I ask the same question: Does anyone think Canada and Mexico will try to harm us greatly if we no longer have that piece of paper?  Wouldn't that punish their countries more?

The CBO predicted that Obamacare would reduce the budget deficit.  It got that wrong in spades.  When has an entitlement program ever come in at predicted cost, and when have they reduced the deficit?  The CBO also routinely underestimates the impact of tax cuts on the economy.  The question is, why do reporters and others treat their predictions as if they are accurate instead of wild guesses?

Some laughable predictions have been regurgitated by media outlets, too.  Among many fallacies, they claimed that the ice would be gone in the Arctic by now and sea levels would rise massively, all because of humans, fossil fuels, and CO2.  They didn't.  Even though the predictions have been so demonstrably wrong, they are still repeated over and over again.  The indoctrination based on inaccurate, manipulated computer models continues uninterrupted.  Facts don't interfere.

After Obama won in 2008, Republicans were told that they have to move left, or they would never win another presidential election.  Well, surprise: They did.  In the succeeding eight years, Republicans won over 1,000 seats nationwide, took over the House and Senate, and won the presidency.  In 2017, Republicans won the first few contested seats, but now, when Democrats won a few governorships in blue states, won seats in dark blue Washington, and won a Medicaid vote in light blue Maine, we are told that 2018 is a looming disaster for Republicans.  (Obviously wishful thinking instead of thoughtful analysis.)  The fact that the Democratic Party is dead broke, is having trouble raising money, and had to essentially cook the books for Hillary in 2016 is irrelevant to these know-it-all media soothsayers.

Republicans should remember that reporters and Democrats will not vote for you no matter how far left you go, so please don't listen to their advice on what is needed to win.  They are not seeking to help you.

Use your common sense and brain when listening to experts and pundits.  They appear to have little common sense and are not expert on much, if anything.

And one more point: If any politician says you didn't build that or that unemployment compensation, food stamps, and government spending are great stimulants for the economy, but allowing people and businesses to keep more of their own money is not a stimulant, he has the economic I.Q. of a rock and should not be listened to or voted for.

RECENT VIDEOS