since its the only tangible point i can glean from what you said: alex jones is not an equal but opposite voice to chomsky, just as bill mitchell is not an equa

since its the only tangible point i can glean from what you said: alex jones is not an equal but opposite voice to chomsky, just as bill mitchell is not an equal but opposite voice to nate silver. unless you are going argue that we should weight everyone's opinion on every topic equally, i would give more credence to someone with an encyclopedic knowledge of political history than someone who ...does not have that. similarly, for projecting the outcome of an election, i would listen to someone with a long track record of public success with analytics and modeling - first with baseball, then poker, then politics, than someone with literally no qualifications at all. don't you think thats reasonable?