This is another stupid statistic that compares things in a meaningless manner. If this was intended to be serious and not just for political maneuvering, then I am surprised. I expect better from Harry Enten. He certainly knows better.
Trump ran in a larger field than the other leading candidates for longer than they did. Of course he has a smaller share of the cumulative votes.
The big clue on whether this was an honest error or was intended to support a predetermined conclusion: The time window in the graphic started at 1980 and left out the most recent contested primary. Coincidence? I think not!
“...Trump ran in a larger field than the other leading candidates for longer than they did. Of course he has a smaller share of the cumulative votes...”
Exactly...
But don’t expect the GOPe lovers to figure that out...
Candidates have been dropping out all along. Rubio dropped out a month ago. I think the point is Donald's numbers haven't been rising in correlation.