The folks at Lawfare have repeated their online poll of the trust in the various investigations currently in progress concerning the Presidential election. Here’s their result for Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference:
This highlights a question in my mind – how much do people prefer data which fits to their preconceptions, and how much do they accept data which may do damage to their preferences? Given known tribal preferences, this seems to indicate the folks are not using independent data to decide if they trust Mueller’s investigation.
To be fair, it’s a little difficult to do so. One must evaluate the character of Mueller, his professional qualifications, and whether his allegiance is first to his party (Republican) – or to his country. (My own evaluation suggests his background renders him more interested in country than party.)
But to take his results – the indictments, in this case – and use that as the metric on which to evaluate his investigation’s trustworthiness, without having some omniscient data set with which to compare, is a fallacious approach – going either way. That is, if you’re evaluating Mueller based on his results, then regardless of whether or not you’re for Trump, you’re not using a good methodology.
And that’s unfortunate, because then we’re essentially at the mercy of our emotions.
