Take this comment by James P. Pinkerton in his Newsday column:
So here's a question: If Bush is falling apart so dramatically that he is in danger of simply vanishing, how come he's hanging in there in the polls?But what would an "epic collapse" be, from a 35 percent approval rate? Isn't a 35 percent approval rate, lasting over a year, in itself evidence of an "epic collapse"?But don't take my word for it. According to pollingreport.com, a nonpartisan compendium of polls, Bush's average approval rating for April 2007 is 34.6. And what was his approval exactly a year ago, for all of April 2006? It was 35.6. Neither number is impressive, but what's clear is that Bush is hanging in there, approval-wise -- no "epic collapse."
So what gives? The answer would seem to be that Bush is not being evaluated in isolation: Instead, in the public mind, he is being compared and contrasted to the rest of Washington, D.C. - specifically, the Democrats who now control Congress.
But that's not baseball-speak. In baseball terms, Pinkerton is talking up a team that is performing poorly by comparing it to the other team. Without some propping up like that, the audience for such commentary would just go away. It's entertainment, and the game must be made to look interesting enough for someone to watch. And for the commentators to continue getting their fees. (It should be said that even on Pinkerton's own terms -- arguing that Bush isn't doing so bad because he's being viewed in comparison with his Democratic opponents -- his case is belied by the facts in multiple respects.)
Come to think of it, the baseball analogy applies to even deeper levels of politics. Suppose that there are two teams, the Republicans and the Democrats, and suppose that the game is played all over the government. Then it would make sense to party-politicize, say, the Department of Justice.
--J. Goodrich
