The Fix spends an inordinate amount of time thinking and talking about campaign politics.
Given that, we like to think of ourselves as connoisseurs of the political game — we know what’s good, what’s bad and what’s just plain odd.
In case you didn’t catch it, the writers of WaPo’s The Fix want you to know that they’re super savvy about the political process and they know better than you.
Now, I am prepared to accept this kind of thinking on some level. For instance, most of us would agree that a meteorologist knows more about the weather than we do. They have tools that we don’t have and they have a specialized degree which required them to learn all sorts of things about clouds and wind and moisture and currents. Thus if a meteorologist says hey, I’m pretty sure it’s going to rain today, we’re inclined to listen and take them seriously. But when political reporters say, trust us, we understand all this stuff better than you and here’s what’s happening… should you take them seriously?
It all depends on the reporter in question. Is this a reporter that tries to serve ordinary voters as I describe here? http://www.annatarkov.com/political-reporters-are-often-not-working-for If not, then maybe you don’t really need to listen to them.
After all, unlike the meteorologist, a political reporter possesses no special training (and no, journalism school doesn’t count). She is simply good at collection information, doing some analysis and writing about it. Do these sound to you like unique skills that few people possess? Yeah, I didn’t think so.