I agree though that the headline used for the data is an attempt at grabbing headlines and from what I can tell, it has worked. Saw one of the talking heads on CNN this morning quoting it to support why Obama’s policy’s were bad for the country.

Any comparison to Bush, Reagan, Clinton, etc. means nothing. None of those presidents took office in the climate that Obama took over. None of them, not even Bush, had the 24 hour coverage focused on them, most of it critical, that Obama does.

And before you right wing loons start with your liberal media bias bullshit, watch a bit of news. ATtacks from the left on not going after the Bushies on torture, illegal wiretapping, former VPs and ignoring decorum by attacking a sitting president, whole networks fomenting violent outrage over socialism, fascism, gun rights, on and on.

Must suck for wingnuts that Obama is still so popular. But that’s the consequences of having total power and completely and utterly screwing up. Now sit in the back of the room while the smart grownups fix your mess.

The root question is “to what extent is the gap between within party approval and opposition party approval a proxy for measuring polarization.”

Obviously, moderates and independents foul the measurement. Also, overall approval fouls the measurement, because it’s very, very hard to have a big gap in this measure unless you are very popular within your party.

In other words, in general you are probably more likely to see a lower partisan gap when a President is getting poor marks all round. Suppose a given President is doing so poorly that a majority of his own party disapproves of him, which I believe happened with Bush. Does this mean that people are being “less partisan?” Probably not.

Now to the current Obama admin. IMO it strains credulity to suggest that Obama and his early policy movements have not led to increased partisanship due to reflexive dislike for liberal policies on the part of a substantial majority of conservatives. Higher spending, tax increases, and a more conciliatory foreign policy are all things that have alienated conservatives regardless of their merits. And honestly, this is not really cause for losing any sleep. We could have set our watches by it, right?

BTW you can’t have it both ways. You can’t run multiple posts on fringe conservatives foaming at the mouth and Rush Limbaugh running the show, and then deny that things are more partisan.

Bottom line: these pol numbers are built for spin. I would read very little in to them. It’s early, overall approval is good, moderates seem to be still on board in good numbers, and the GOP aint. Who is surprised by this, exactly?