I do not contest those numbers. . .but I contest the meaning of those numbers.
First, if ONLY 62% blamed Bush in 2009, and the rest ALREADY blamed Obama. . .that is evidently a ridiculous concept. . .what could Obama have done in the first 6 to 12 months of his administration to carry the whole weight of Bush's 8 years of bad tax policies and expensive wars?
But I don't think that was the case. It is not that 62% blamed Bush and 38% already blamed Obama. . .it is that 62% blamed Bush alone, and 38% was split between Obama haters (with no brain and/or no integrity)and the rest (probably the most reasonable) blamed a combination of circumstances, including Bush, but not only Bush (I personally blamed Cheney a lot more than Bush!)
Today, I don't believe that the numbers reflect that 42% believe that Obama is responsible for the situation that existed when he took office, or even in 2009, but that it reflects people's disappointment that that desperate situation left by the Bush administration didn't just "evaporate" under Obama's policies. So they may be blaming him for the situation TODAY, certainly NOT for the situation that led us to today.
By the way, you didn't present any data showing that the number of people blaming Bush has gone down by 15%. . . you just "assume" this. . .and you obviously did not present the questions used to obtained these numbers.
