These were a couple posts from an earlier diary entry that I think deserve re-posting for further discussion.
FIRST POST:
". . . a lot of things were written around here that just turned out to be a bunch of hogwash... groupthink began to lose touch with reality...things like "dean will begin to get money from big donors" (never happened) or "dean's organization in iowa is tremendous and will help him pull it off" (never happened- worse were KOS's pre-Iowa numbers which were the worse prediction i have ever seen.. tom schaller or whatever was also pathetic with his "i spoke with dean operative mcmahon who said he's got a hard count of 1s over _fill in number as i've forgotten- ALL BUNK)
then there was all the analysis by KOS and others of how crucial it was that dean was mounting a national campaign and advertising in tons of states pre-Iowa.. this proved completely WRONG as it turned into a huge waste of money...
and lets face it: all the Trippi is a jedi crap was particularly pathetic- Trippi ran a terrible campaign from the gore endorsement on... didn't he realize he needed to change dean's message from simply an anti-bush anti-war one to a positive one.. and what about all those lame ads, which convinced no one, that his firm profited from... and then he walks out on dean instead of accepting the role of advisor as he should have in order to help dean.... THERE was no analysis on this site of the pathetic trippi campaign from the gore endorsement on..it was all bout the inevitability of the dean victory....
lets face it.. thats the way it went down.. conventional wisdom on this site was really conventional stupidity..
i may be a frustrated dean supporter..but i'm particularly frustrated at all the self congratulatory completely devoid of reality crap that was peddled as analysis on this site.. and i'm continuing to read the site until i find something else to do as it has become a bit of a habit.. but in the end the analysis here was little better than anywhere else...."
by serge on Thu Feb 19th, 2004 at 22:04:29 GMT
SECOND POST:
"I agree with this fully. While Nick is not the most eloquent at expressing this viewpoint, it is valid. Kos blew it as a pundit.
The fact that other pundits also blew it does not obscure that Kos did blow it bigtime in his prognisticating here. Kos assumed an air of authority in what he was saying and therefore invited people to view him as having specialized knowledge. The failure of events to bear our Kos' purported wisdom is bound to have consequences the next time Kos makes similarly bold predictions. I mean it's human nature and entirely natural that Kos readers attach less credibility to what he says in the future."
