JPS
I never said it takes ONLY two points to define a line (or discern a trend). I said it takes AT LEAST two points to define a line and the mathematical equation for a line is y=mx+b (which I think is still taught in junior high school).
The links I provided did not contradict the point I was making. I was simply pointing out that to discern a trend one MUST select a reference point for comparison. AT LEAST a second time point is required. Depending on what second time point one selects, the trend can be positive or negative (or flat).
You have finally selected a second time point (Jan 27) for comparison and, as a result, I can provide a mathematically correct answer.
If assessing the trend in approval rating from Jan 27 until Mar 26, then you are absolutely correct. The slope of that line is negative: his approval rating has decreased from about 66 – 68% to about 60 – 62%. A similar trend is observed in a number of different polls. Zogby is still an extreme outlier.
I can’t say I read all your posts, but think this may be the first time you raised the issue of disapproval rating. This is an entirely different measure than approval rating. Please don’t confuse the two. Nonetheless, if assessing the trend in disapproval rating from Jan 27 until Mar 26, then you are also absolutely correct. The slope of that line is positive: his disapproval rating has increased (I don’t know the precise numbers – perhaps from about 10 or 15% to about 25 or 30%) during that time frame.
The gap is narrowing and the increase in disapproval rating is greater then the decrease in approval rating. But his numbers are not radically different from, or significantly worse than, many first term Presidents in mid March of their first year in office. I believe Gallup has a poll on this – you can find it yourself. I can’t remember, but think his numbers are worse than Carter, better than Clinton and about the same as both GHW and GW Bush. The sample size is small and I would give it much credence.
But you get completely lost and start contradicting yourself when you lecture me that it is incorrect to compare an approval rating to an election result. Of course it is incorrect! One is comparing apples to oranges. I am not the one making the argument that it is a valid comparison. Since you also seem to agree (at least you did agree earlier in your latest post) that it is an invalid comparison, then why on earth do you go on to cite the number of actual votes in the election? I quote:
‘Do you think that the significant numbers people numbered among the 59,930,551 are now changing their minds and supporting Obama based on his performance, or people that were numbered in the 69,438,983 are moving away from supporting Obama based on his performance.’
What is your point?
59,930,551 + 69,438,983 = 129,369,534.
69,438,983 divided by 129,369,534 = 0.5367 multiplied by 100 = 53.67% of the electorate who voted on Nov 4, 2008 (and whose votes were counted) voted for Obama.
If you are now going to use THAT number (53.67%) and THAT date (Nov 4, 2008) as your reference point to assess the trend in Obama’s approval rating – which I know for certain is an invalid comparison – then one must say, well, I guess his ‘approval’ rating today (~61%) is greater than his ‘approval’ rating on Nov 4, 2008 (~53%). I think it was your original statement, my dear, which led to the original argument.
But one cannot make that comparison! It is invalid! It is illogical! It is nonsensical! You said it yourself! Go back and read your own post! You have now come full circle and contradicted yourself yet again. What is wrong with you? Oh, yeah. You voted for McCain. He lost. GET OVER IT!
