Academic

A DIVIDER, NOT A UNITER: Obama?s Approval Ratings More Polarized in Year 2 Than Year 1. UPDATE: ?

By Glenn Reynolds

A DIVIDER, NOT A UNITER: Obama’s Approval Ratings More Polarized in Year 2 Than Year 1.

UPDATE: Reader David Gerstman emails:

It’s always fun going back to the WaPo’s endorsement of Barack Obama. It’s attributed many qualities to him that were not in evidence during the course of his earlier career. Now it’s fun to watch the President’s faults come to the surface showing how one more element of endorsement was bogus.

When I read that the President’s ratings are more polarized after two years, I went back and found:

Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building.

It would be one thing if the endorsement matched the candidate, but it didn’t. It matched the editors’ inflated view of the candidate demonstrating how vulnerable they were to his image. But these are supposed to be the skeptics of the fourth estate whose wisdom is supposed to shield us from folly. Something’s not working.

Yeah, they’re suckers through and through. Obama’s tendencies toward arrogance and tin-eared out-of-touchness were apparent during the campaign to anyone who paid attention. Which didn’t, apparently, include the people who were supposed to be covering the campaign.

Alternatively, they knew this was false then, but hoped that enough people would fall for it to get a Democrat elected President. In which case: Mission Accomplished! But how’s that hopey-changey stuff working out for you now, Washington Post?

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on February 04, 2011 (boomark / email).