Perhaps a single verified data point is better than a series of hypotheses? Because most, but not all books about politics, are based on hypotheses and not accu

Perhaps a single verified data point is better than a series of hypotheses? Because most, but not all books about politics, are based on hypotheses and not accurate data. Also, if everyone voted personal opinion, shouldn't the voting process average everything out, rather than the kind of wild media-driven opinion surges/swings we observe today? (Not being rhetorical, I'm actually asking if that's a possibility)