Throughout this campaign season, especially over the last six weeks, I’ve read every conceivable argument for and against the polls; many of them math-based and scientific — but this one one from Ace is by far my favorite.
Still, the assumptions for this tie are very strange. Apparently 2010 never happened, the country never rose up to reject socialism and failure, and 2008’s Democratic plurality grew by leaps and bounds.
Apparently the continue majority support for repeal of ObamaCare somehow managed to increase the Democrats’ popularity. Apparently the $6 trillion in new debt Obama signed into existence boosted his party’s support.
Apparently presiding over a higher unemployment rate than any president ever re-elected (since FDR) has made the Democratic Party the dominant political force in the country.
Bill Clinton, apparently, had it all backwards. He presided over a furiously growing economy with (for a couple of quarters) a sub-4% unemployment rate but didn’t manage to realign the country in the Democrats’ favor.
But Barack Obama, by keeping unemployment at the 8% level (higher than the very high unemployment he started his term with) has won the hearts and imaginations of the nation for the Democratic Party.
That Clinton. What an idiot. He tried success. Didn’t he know catastrophic failure in nearly every detail was the right approach?
Now, Team Obama explains that a growing, rather than shrinking, Democratic advantage in the electorate is possible because they’ve signed up 1.8 new voters. That’s very wonderful.
It just gets better.