Validity of Opinion

There will always be the odd man out; complete consensus is a statistical anomaly for the human race. For every matter discussed under the sun, whether it is religion, child-rearing, driving or politics, opinions vary. Even within a single theory such as realism you would find different interpretations (i.e. opinions) on how realist goals are best acted out. To this point then I would “theoretically informed analyses of empirical events and situations” are always opinions.
However I would question whether the validity of the opinion can make these “analyses” something more. When discussing validity of opinion we might consider the expertise and experience behind the individual or group responsible for the opinion. Do they know what they are talking about? With what authority do they speak on this topic? If the individual’s or group’s opinion is well correlated and easily understood to be connected to the event or situation at hand, does that lend more weight to their opinion. It has often seemed to me that many people are more willing to believe in the answer/opinion that is most easily understood, instead of taking the time to consider the more complex solution/analyses. The problem with the validity question is that validity is subject to opinion as well. Just consider how we are all most likely to give more credibility to the opinions espoused by our respective political parties. One person might believe (opinionate?) that republicans have more credibility while another person might believe that democrats have more credibility. As I believe Akthor stated or implied, what isn’t based in opinion, what is objective, other than facts?
Now to continue to the second part of the question, does this something more mean that opinion can be right or wrong? On individual basis if you grant an opinion great validity, as compared to other opinions on the same topic, I would say that that individual is judging that opinion right. On an individual basis then there are right or wrong “theoretically informed analyses of empirical events and situations.” We all decide in the end which opinion we believe, going with gut feeling or cool logic. Clash comes of course when a “right” decider meets a “wrong” decider, at which time yes, it simply depends on point of view. Why can’t the “analyses” be right and wrong, depending on your point of view?