Pandagon

Meoww, Jesse you're such a bitch! I love it! Money is on its way.

Just so I'm sure I follow: Clinton was unpopular because Gore ran away from him and lost? Gore avoided Clinton, then lost, but the real problem was Clinton? Man, they just need to blame that guy for everything, don't they?

And are they seriously trying to claim that responses to the question "Do you approve of the president?" aren't an effective way to gauge whether people approve of a president?

I knew National Review readers weren't that smart, but Sweet Christmas, this is painful. Almost as painful as my grief over the death of Reagan.

that was reely, reely, reely, reely, reely, reely, reely, reely funny.

It's tough when facts get in the way of Received Wisdom.

Don't they know not to publish Lowry unedited?

I'm still trying to figure out where these stupid, uninformed, gullible illiterates get off calling themselves American, and, more, patriotic. It leads me to a conclusion I do not like.

THAT LAST LETTER IS A FAKE I CAN TEL BECUAS THEIR IS A SPECIAL CODE TRUE CONSERVATIVS USE TO TIPE THEIR EMAIL AND I CANT TEL YOU WHAT IT IS BUT WE KNOW IT WEN WE SEE IT SO WE CAN TEL WHO EACH OTHER ARE

PRETTY GOOD FAKE, BUT NOT GOOD ENOUHG

Teddy Roosevelt was one of the least popular presidents ever, since he lost his last election with only 27.4% of the popular vote, and 16% of the electoral vote. That's how it works, isn't it? They just put his face on Mount Rushmore to be nice.

Of course, the very same link makes a liar out of me, since it shows Taft, incumbent at the time, positively getting his ass handed to him with 1.4% of the electoral vote (apparently Wilson was a very strong man :P ).

The point being that looking at electoral results is not at all a measure of popularity, any more than it proved the Reebok-sponsored non-league semi-pro basketball team was one of the best basketball teams ever when they beat the UW-Marathon (2-year school) team handily. The competition matters, and Carter was severely weakened in 1980.

Hey, now. Let's not go talking about the context of the 1980 election. Context is only important when you're trying to diminish the proven popularity of a Democratic president.

The best thing from that part of the Corner today (imho) was this:

the fact that Clinton's numbers were so high is a testament to the fact that Clinton desired to be popular more than he desired to be effective

While some of the Johan Goldberg's readers might be suggesting Reagan was more popular, Goldberg is not (I think). A little further down, there's the Reagan vs Clinton item to which they were responding. The Jonah Goldberg suggests unpopularity is a sign of greatness. Here's a quote:

"Clinton was more popular than Ronald Reagan according to the polls. This is true, but it means less than they think...[It] was his, [ Reagan's] unpopularity which indicated his greatness"

So unpopularity shows greatness? Thus Timothy McVeigh and Jose Pedia must two of the greatest Americans ever.

Also, later in the item, Goldberg says: "Reagan was popular precisely because he had the brass to buck the conventional wisdom, endure the scorn of the intellectual class and the media." So was Reagan popular or a man of greatness? Hmmm, can't decide? Be a conservative, choose both.

Let's not conflate job approval and popularity. People loved Reagan as a person. People approved of Clinton's work as a president. I think that is where the polls that are cited are disconnected from the perceptions of the Reagan lovers.

I was never a fan of Ronald Reagan's and I am not one now. If his death alters the right's opposition to stem cell research, than his death will have done more good for more people than his life.

You say the 1980 wasn't like 1992 or 1996, and
then give data for 1992 and 1980.

In 1996, Perot got 8.0%. In 1980, Anderson got
6.6%. Those look like remarkably similar
3rd party results.

I did give the data for 1996 - hence, the link.

Also, as I pointed out, comparing Clinton's congress to Reagan's, or the Democratic party of the 80s to the Republican party of the 90s leaves you with the impression that although both of them faced opposition, Clinton's was a hell of a lot more virulent than Reagan's ever was - and he succeeded despite that.