Reply #86: "Serious question"? [View All]

[JoseGaspar]

No... just a typically insulting one.

You continue to cherry-pick. In this case, you are picking peaks and valleys in order to make mountains out of mole holes. Clinton's "valley" was in '93 (37%), a low that he never returned to. After that, he went back up to the high 50s before settling back down to the 40s. Your "choice" of dates "makes" your "case". If you drew trend lines at each point (what else can "trajectory" mean?), it is just as I described.

What should be "concerning" to you is that, unlike Clinton and many of the others, Obama does not show a wildly oscillating approval rating. Instead, he shows a a steady erosion of support, without any evidence of major counter-balancing trends.

Your interjection of Obama being "ahead" of Clinton at one point is just moving the soap... and your Reagan discussion attempts to launch the soap into the next county (let's see... if Obama can just go down to 35%, he is sure to win 49 states in 2012).

Consider how far afield you are from your initial premise. The Gallup poll is gossamer... it cannot support what you purport. Your willingness to "slice and dice" is your own testimony to that fact.

But, don't let me stop you. Please do return to exactly the same narrative you had before these elections. I'm sure it will work out better this time.