Fantastic: conceived or appearing as if conceived by an unrestrained imagination
In a previous diary, I suggested that the best way to read David Brooks’s New York Times column is to read the last sentence of each paragraph and assume the opposite is true. I'm convinced he has stopped trying to fashion anything useful for his readers. Both of them. Now, he just writes what he wishes were true.
Today’s Brooks column is a perfect example. Mr. Brooks has written of a fantasy world in which American voters are fleeing the Democratic Party as fast as they were flocking to car dealers to grab their share of the "Cash for Clunkers" money.
Brooks Example 1:
All presidents fall from their honeymoon highs, but in the history of polling, no newly elected American president has fallen this far this fast.
That was a nice try from Mr. Brooks. Perhaps he shouldn’t have buried and discounted the fact that President Obama started with one of the all-time highs when entering office. Obama and Ronald Reagan are at about the same level in this point in their presidencies, but Reagan started lower, so I guess Brooks is technically correct.
Brooks makes good use of the "newly elected American president" qualifier, too, otherwise he would have had to admit that Gerald Ford crashed and burned during his first year in office like nobody before or since.
Brooks Example 2:
Over the first months of this year, the number of people who called themselves either Democrats or Republicans declined, while the number who called themselves independents surged ahead.
As usual, he cites nothing to back up his statement. He gives no numbers. He does not define "surge."
Well, I found the numbers that Mr. Brooks may be using. If not, they are as good as any.
Gallup 1
Gallup 2
Yes, according to Gallup, there is a small drop in Democratic Party affiliation, and a small increase (hardly a "surge") in the number of voters who now call themselves independent. If Gallup is indeed his source, he conveniently ignores the conclusions and interpretations of the Gallup pollsters contained in the report. Conclusions such as this:
Since Obama was inaugurated, not much has changed in the political party landscape at the state level -- the Democratic Party continues to hold a solid advantage in party identification in most states and in the nation as a whole.
And this...
The lessening Democratic advantage may to some degree reflect a return to more typical party support levels, because the 13-point Democratic edge from the first quarter is on the high end of what Gallup has found since it began tracking this measure of party identification in 1991.
And this...
The fact that Democrats hold a six-point advantage on initial party identification compared with a larger nine-point lead on leaned party identification indicates that independents are currently a little more likely to lean to the Democratic Party than to the Republican Party.
And this...
Gallup polling shows a slight dip in Democratic support in the most recent quarter. However, the Democrats had such a large cushion that even with the drop, they maintain a sizable advantage over the Republican Party....The data indicate also that, although the party gap may be shrinking, the Republicans have not made any significant gains of their own in recent months. Their support levels remain on the low end of what Gallup has measured for the past two decades.
Our Mr. Brooks. Always good for a laugh. This is the funniest one of all:
Driven by this general anxiety, and by specific concerns, public opposition to health care reform is now steady and stable.
Yes, Mr. Brooks – steady and stable at about 25%, although it could be argued that the opposers showing up at town hall meetings are not exactly "stable."
A much more steady and stable history and interpretation of the loss of independent voters identifying as Democrats can be found here.