We have for some time now watched people comment on the 2019 elections and lessons of different kinds have been learnt. It appears, as in other areas, the commentators fall into different categories. There can be many of them, but they all can be synthesized into three major categories and my view of that is as follows:
Observers
Individuals or groups (some experienced in the exercise, having been doing it for years in different countries) who worked out their plans, traveled great distances, went out to the field on election days, observed the exercise in different parts of the country and methodically recorded their observations.
Analysts
Individuals or groups who painstakingly studied election performance (facts & figures) in the past, watched the buildup to the elections and watched TV reports during and after elections including commentaries by observers but did not go to the field. Members of this group allow data to speak for themselves.
Soothsayers
Individuals mostly, and sometimes groups who did not look at existing statistics, did not go to field to see things for themselves, did not listen to observers who went to the field, watched TV when they liked but churned out large commentaries on their expectations. They turned against everyone else whenever their expectations did not materialize. Since soothsayers are people who have special knowledge and can predict the future and know things happening at places distant from them, they don’t need to compare notes with anybody.
Which group do you fall into?
