… How long-lasting an effect will the Paris attacks have on the United States presidential race? Absent further attacks, the suggestion that Paris will prove to be a “game changer” is unlikely to be correct. Though unexpected events like Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” taped remarks or the Ebola outbreak often seem tremendously important at the time, their effects on the polls and the content of debate are often less durable than we expect. …
It will be tempting to construct post-Paris narratives in which voters are more likely to select a candidate who can capably serve as commander in chief. But research and history suggest that the primary process is already likely to winnow out outsider and factional candidates like Bernie Sanders, Ben Carson and Mr. Trump who can’t attract widespread support within their party — precisely the sort whose prospects the attacks might seem most likely to damage. In other words, if the Paris attacks hadn’t happened, some other rationale would have probably been used to force them to the sideline. CONT.
Brendan Nyhan (Dartmouth), New York Times