Chris Cillizza is generally an insufferable douchebiscuit (remember the gem of a video below).  But this latest post is truly beyond hurlworthy:

Headline: Obama: The most polarizing president. Ever.

President Obama ran — and won — in 2008 on the idea of uniting the country. But each of his first three years in office has marked historic highs in political polarization, with Democrats largely approving of him and Republicans deeply disapproving.

For 2011, Obama’s third year in office, an average of 80 percent of Democrats approved of the job he was doing in Gallup tracking polls, as compared to 12 percent of Republicans who felt the same way. That’s a 68-point partisan gap, the highest for any president’s third year in office — ever. (The previous high was George W. Bush in 2007, when he had a 59 percent difference in job approval ratings.) [...]

What do those numbers tell us? Put simply: that the country is hardening along more and more strict partisan lines.

While it’s easy to look at the numbers cited above and conclude that Obama has failed at his mission of bringing the country together, a deeper dig into the numbers in the Gallup poll suggests that the idea of erasing the partisan gap is simply impossible, as political polarization is rising rapidly. [...]

For believers in bipartisanship, the next nine months are going to be tough sledding, as the already-gaping partisan divide between the two parties will only grow as the 2012 election draws nearer. And, if the last decade of Gallup numbers are any indication, there’s little turnaround in sight.

[Also, too: a lovely poll called: "Vote:  Is Obama the Nation's Most Polarizing President of All Time?"]

Yes, the body of the article does a fine tapdance but we’re left with the link-whoring evoked by the headline and poll question.

Do we get much in the way of an analysis of what is behind the disparity in poll numbers?  Not really.

Are we treated to all kinds of insinuation that Obama is out there being all partisan and making people hate him.  Yep, quite a bit.

  1. Lev says:

    I always love it when Beltway pundits show contempt for their audience. Dubya deliberately used polarization to whip up his own supporters into a frenzy in order to win elections. Obama nearly destroyed his presidency more than once by trying to cut a deal with Republicans who outright declared their top priority to be to deny him another term. I know this, the public definitely knows it, and I am positive Milbank does too. Either that or the D.C. kool-aid was especially strong today.

  2. Mark Schumaker says:

    It is a shame that when a President try’s to govern and bring the country together and over come its problems that he is attacked by both sides for not following partisan politics. One of the strengths of his 2012 campaign should be in the way that he has tried to reach out to the opposition but was constantly attacked and rebutted for trying to govern.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>