Unimpressive Poll by 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair Names Arch "Least Impressive" Landmark

Image via
Suck it, The Alamo.
Last July, when the folks at CBS News and Vanity Fair called about 1000 adults to get their views on fluffy topics like underwear and Jesus, a plurality -- 46 percent! -- said the Gateway Arch was the "least impressive" landmark. 

Let's put that another way: A miniscule proportion of our nation's grown-ups recently concluded on the phone that the Arch is not as impressive as The Alamo, Mount Rushmore, The Grand Canyon and Niagara Falls.

Uh, this is the "Least Impressive Poll" we've ever seen (and we've seen a few).

First of all, they're vague on methodology. Was this question open-ended, or was it multiple choice? Because the Space Needle in Seattle should've been a choice. We saw it two days ago. It sucks. So does Stone Mountain in Georgia (which we've never visited, but we've seen pictures, and let us spare you the Google search: It's a big rock with Confederate guys on it, whom you may remember as the losers of the Civil War).

alamo1.jpg
Image via
The Alamo doesn't even have a basement.
But that's another thing: Only informed adults could reliably determine which landmark is the least impressive, but that "random sample" of "adults" in the poll maybe contained respondents who weren't actually adults. Maybe they were teenagers. And teenagers are not well-informed, proven by the popularity of Taylor Swift.

For the record, the Gateway Arch is 630 feet high. That's "impressively" taller than its competitors The Alamo (33.6 feet), the Mount Rushmore heads (60 feet) AND Niagara Falls (167 feet).

True, The Arch is not bigger in scope than the Grand Canyon. But you know what's under the Grand Canyon? More rock. You know what's under The Arch? An awesome museum.

You know what's under The Alamo? Nothing: It doesn't even have a basement.

I mean, come on.

My Voice Nation Help
4 comments
egolterman
egolterman topcommenter

The Arch and & sports and casinos downtown is one of the most regressed, least recovered in the Country. Not how other cities brought back their downtowns. They started in their historic civic centers with restored or new downtown performing arts centers and spruced up, or  new museums or libraries within walking distances. These have been the year-round,quality of life catalysts for downtown rebirths regardless of the 'level of shit' one attributes to CBS and Vanity Fair. The Arch is an appropriate symbol for people leaving St. Louis, and they continue to do so at an alarming rate. It is seasonal, and drive-in-and-drive-out for the most part. .

KITTY
KITTY

CBS and Vanity Fair are biased full of shit! Travel & Liesure Magazine lists the top 22 most visited American Monuments and The Arch is # 9 on the list with 2.359M visitors per year. So, if The Arch is so unimpressive, why does its yearly attendance beat the following:

 

FDR MEMORIAL 2.32 M    MT RUSHMORE 2.08M    JEFFERSON MEM 1.945M

PEARL HARBOR 1.690M    ML KING 1.49M    THE WHITE HOUSE 570K

WASHINGTON MONUMENT 660K    JEFFERSON MEMORIAL 1.945M

 

THE MOST VISITED:

STATUTE OF LIBERTY 3.382M

LINCOLN MEM 5.971M  THE #1 VISITED MEMORIAL

VIET NAM MEMORIAL 4.02M

WWII MEMORIAL 3.372 M

FDR MEMORIAL 2.31M

OhOh
OhOh

I would understand if the general public thought the arch was less impressive than the Grand Canyon, Mt. Rushmore, or Niagra Falls. But the Alamo? Seriously? 

NP_DailyRFT
NP_DailyRFT

 @OhOh Couldn't agree more, OhOh. It's a monumental injustice. 

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

Loading...