Trump approval ratings thread 1.2

[pbrower2a]

My most recent map of approval and disapproval. The most recent changers involve Virginia, New York, and Pennsylvania.  

Approval

Trump ahead      Trump behind

55% or higher    45% to 49%
50% to 54%       40% to 44%  
45% to 49%       under 40%

Ties are in white.



Disapproval:

60% or higher  (deep red)
57% to 59%
55% to 56%
50% to 54%
46% to 49%
43% to 45%
42% or less

[pbrower2a]

Trump is more popular in Montana than Nebraska?

Well alrighty.

No. I think I show the opposite between the two states.  The number is for disapproval which I consider more critical than approval with a troubled Presidency. You may have misread my map.

It is possible to be underwater 37-45 early in a term of office and still win re-election by turning undecided voters into voters for one, which one can do through achievements and campaigning. Being down 47-52 implies that one must change disappointment to satisfaction in a significant number of voters, which is far more difficult.

Rural votes matter greatly in Montana and Nebraska. A recent poll shows rural voters nearly split in approval and disapproval of the President. It's questionable that a majority of the rural vote in northern states has gone Democratic since at least 1964. when Goldwater lost in a landslide. If the rural vote splits 50-50, then the vote goes D for farm country and R in ranch country, or vice-versa. I would guess that Trump would do worse in farm country than in ranch country because farm country includes lots of dairy workers who do factory-style work under much the same conditions as an industrial proletariat. Like industrial workers, they do not have their employers looking  out for them in ensuring that they have housing or such supplies as food. Ranch hands, in contrast, have to be taken care of because ranches are more isolated.

If a significant part of the voting public splits evenly between A and B, then an edge for A by everyone else gives the advantage to A.    Figuring that Trump is doing badly among urban and suburban voters on the whole, I would guess at this stage that

NE-01 (eastern Nebraska, including Lincoln) goes to Trump's Democratic opponent because the agriculture in NE-01 is largely farming, and Lincoln, which is not a giant city, leans D in most years.

NE-02 (greater Omaha) has practically no rural population, so if Trump is doing badly throughout urban America, then he loses this district.

NE-03, comprising central and western Nebraska and such small cities as Scottsbluff and Grand Island, is ranch country as is most of rural America between about the 100th meridian of longitude and either the Cascades or the Sierra Nevada. This is one of the most Republican-leaning districts in the USA, and if Trump doesn't win its electoral vote he might be skunked altogether.

OK. Montana, by contrast, has some Democratic-voting areas, as attested by some elections of Democrats to the Senate and the Governorship. But the agriculture is largely ranching. Trump could lose Nebraska at large and win Montana.

Two caveats:

1. I assume that approval polls generally correlate closely with voting results in the upcoming election, with elected incumbents typically gaining about 6% from approval to their vote share, except that 100-disapproval sets a ceiling.

2. We are still about three years away from the election, and much can happen between now and then.      

[pbrower2a]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://morningconsult.com/2017/10/10/trump-approval-dips-in-every-state-though-deep-pockets-of-support-remain/

Looking at net approval by electoral votes we find that in January we find that President Trump was ahead in parts of America with all but 88 electoral votes. If net approval decided the election, then President Trump would have won the electoral college 448-90 ahead . He was behind only in California, Hawaii, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. That would be much like a victory of Bush I over Dukakis.

To be sure, the President was barely above water in such states as New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Washington, and New Mexico... but that would change.

In February, such states as Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Connecticut, and New Hampshire slip into the negative category and New Jersey goes even. This now gives Trump a still-overpowering edge of 384-129 with New Jersey  (14) even.

In March he gets Colorado 'back', but loses New Jersey outright. That leaves an edge of  393-145 with no ties.  No big change.   

In April he loses a hold of Colorado. Minnesota and Maine drop off. (Surprisingly he still has a big hold on Illinois and smaller holds on New York and Virginia). For the first time he is behind in a state that he won, if by the barest margin (that is, Michigan). The edge is by then 365-173, which is (by a strange coincidence) what Obama won by in 2008. Trump would project to win by a bare landslide.

In May, Illinois and New York slip decisively away. Delaware, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Ohio also slip into the D camp. Pennsylvania goes even. It's now 259-259 with Pennsylvania as a tie. We have a horse race.

In June, Pennsylvania goes D, breaking the tie. Nevada and New Mexico slip away from Trump, if barely. Trump still has Virginia, barely... and Florida. An election based upon net approval would now go 290-248 for a Democrat.   

In July, Nevada and Ohio go back to net zero. But Arizona, Florida, Indiana (), and Virginia go D. It's now 330-184 with 24 ties. With the ties going to Trump, that's like a Democrat winning like Obama in 2016. But it is clearly the Democrat this time.   

 

[pbrower2a]

North Carolina: High Point University, Sep 28-Oct 6, 404 adults (346 RV)

Trump approval is 35/51 among adults, 38/51 among RV.

Right track/wrong direction is 18/70 and 19/68.

Gov. Cooper approval is 44/30 and 47/31.

Sen. Burr: 29/34 and 32/35.

Sen. Tillis: 33/35 and 35/36.

Wow, that's really ugly for Trump considering it's NC. Cooper is doing great.

A Republican must win North Carolina outright to win a Presidential election. I'll go with registered voters, but note that I have no distinctions below 40% approval anyway.  I see
100% less disapproval as the likely ceiling.

Approval

Trump ahead      Trump behind

55% or higher    45% to 49%
50% to 54%       40% to 44%  
45% to 49%       under 40%

Ties are in white.



Disapproval:

60% or higher  (deep red)
57% to 59%
55% to 56%
50% to 54%
46% to 49%
43% to 45%
42% or less

[pbrower2a]

I will say this:  It is not good for a nation to have so little positive regard for its leaders as we have now.

The problem is that we have leaders so unworthy of positive regard. That goes beyond politics to Corporate America and cultural 'creators'.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We have had better. It is easy to forget that a year ago we still had a good President.  The President's opponents don't get much opportunity for leadership when we effectively have one Party in meaningful power. Democrats can now only lie low for another year for congressional and gubernatorial races and for bigger prizes (the Presidency and the Senate) in 2020.

So far I see Donald Trump doing little that gets a President re-elected.   

[pbrower2a]

So far I see Donald Trump doing little that gets a President re-elected.   

Does he have to though?  His supporters are die-hard and they'll be showing up to vote no matter what; he could declare himself Jesus and emperor of the world, and they'd cheer him on; he could advocate the opening of extermination camps for all Muslims and they'd praise him for it.  If the other side fails again to get out the vote, I can see him squeaking to another victory simply on the backs of his deranged supporters who will be there rooting for him regardless of what he's done so far or what he will do.

Every Party succeeds in getting out its base to vote. Unopposed elections are rare for House and Senate seats.  Someone will get 27% or more of the vote running against even the slickest campaigner, as with Barack Obama in 2004 for the US Senate.

But what holds true for Donald Trump will also hold true for the Democratic nominee for President; that candidate will get the vote of hyper-partisan Democrats, too. Elections are lost in landslides because a Party fails to get out the less hyper-partisan support. Close elections are decided by the swing voters who decide which nominee has more ability to convince marginal voters to vote.

It's the base voters who do the more active deeds from fundrasing and donation to electioneering.  Every canvassing effort will reach people who say absolutely no -- as in "I'd rather vote for a snake". Maybe people who hear enough rejections will give up on canvassing.

At this stage we have no electoral matchups. We don't even have such a hypothetical matchup as "Generic Democrat" versus Donald Trump in polling. After all, "Generic Republican" and "Generic Democrat" go into hibernation early in campaign season. The best that we have is of approximations.  People who now strongly approve of President Trump will almost certainly vote for him in 2020. People who strongly disapprove of him will almost certainly vote for someone other than him in 2020. Those who "somewhat approve"  will tend to vote for him -- but that is a much-more fickle part of the vote. Those who "somewhat disapprove" will need some strong convincing to vote for him in 2020. Bad first impressions are difficult to undo.   Then there is the really fickle part of the electorate known by the word "undecided", or the vacant "no opinion".

Can President Trump get re-elected? Sure. He wins should he change the political culture, which I don't see him doing. He's not a great orator. He also wins if he should succeed at inflicting early pain that results in policy changes that make life better. If he can't convince people that giving up Obamacare for the profits-first medicine that gives people health so long as they don't end up broke and be priced into the grave, then it is hard to see how he can convince people to support tax 'reforms' that shift the tax burden from the super-rich to the non-rich or (the dream of much of the GOP) to eviscerate labor laws and labor unions while cutting the minimum wage so that Americans get the dubious privilege of full employment on sweating for near-starvation pay. He is not convincing most of us on the 'need' to ravage the environment for quick profits for special interests such as coal barons.

A President starting out this badly can gain by putting an end to a recession, constraining inflation, tending to see civil unrest go into decline, or getting some huge and positive change in foreign relations or military reality. The Trump Presidency begins with an eight-year boom and with steady improvements in the international scene under his predecessor. This President insults about every democratically-elected leader (for which there is no precedent) and rattles his saber on Iran and North Korea. Anybody who expects no recession before 2020 is a fool. Civil unrest and mass demonstrations? Not under Obama, but certainly under Trump.

Very little can go right for this President that has yet to go right, and much can go wrong. But he is already unpopular. He is in worse political shape than Hoover was before the 1929 Stock Market Crash. The Iranian Revolution and the Iranian hostage Crisis caught President Carter unsuspecting and ill-prepared -- but everyone was unsuspecting and ill-prepared. His response to the violent attacks on peaceful protesters in Charlottesville demonstrates how clueless this man is about the moral standards of most people. His self-praise for handling a dangerous situation for hurricane survivors will not set well.

I see him losing.        
      
    

[pbrower2a]

Maybe both parties should have nominated non-pieces of sh*t?

One party did, but she had the impossible task of running against 20+ years of unfounded, illogical, and many times sexist propaganda.  Was Hillary perfect?  No.  Was she the best candidate?  Absolutely not, and she made many mistakes that led to her defeat.  But she wasn't, as you say, a piece of sh*t.  There is no politician in the US who does not have a checkered reputation or  questionable values and morals.  But she was vastly superior in every way to her opponent; from moral compass, to leadership ability, to intelligence, to composure, to grace, etc etc etc.  She was the only presidential candidate in the history of presidential candidates (non-incumbents) who was literally molded and ready for the job on day 1.

But instead we went with a near literal "piece of sh*t" who is not the master negotiator he claimed to be, nor was he ready or even really willing to take on the role of commander-in-chief.  Someone who quite possibly colluded with a foreign government to meddle in our election on his behalf.  The world's biggest hypocrite; the world's biggest narcissist; the world's greatest liar; and the world's best conman.

Say what you will about Hillary Clinton.  Hate her.  Hate the things that 20+ years of conservative lies tell you.  Even if you consider all of it as truth, she was still better than the utter garbage we elected.

A++++


Am I reading this right in that WV is actually split on Trump now? That is truly shocking to me, and yet gives me hope. They're not getting what they expected from this president, and maybe that's already sinking in.

No. That's pbrower's map cherry picking the single worst poll Trump has in every state, and there was a poll a month ago showing him even there, even though it was obviously junk. Other polls have shown him around 60% there.

I have yet to update the polling map. I reject polls by special-interest groups (labor unions, chambers of commerce, and advocacy groups). Outliers happen, and I have shown Trump disapproval diminishing in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Outliers can show real change.  Suppose that the stock market loses 1000 points on three consecutive days, gets a slight 'dead cat bounce', and then continues to erode for a couple months. So approval for President Trump goes from 48-45 in Georgia to 36-55. Is such an outlier then valid? Maybe.

The Morning Consult poll actually looks like an improvement for the President. It is valuable for getting all 50 states and Dee Cee, which statewide polls rarely do.  It is an apples-to-apples, oranges-to-oranges comparison: all states polled similarly, all the similar voting status, and all in the same time frame. Much of what you will see supplants a polling series by Survey Monkey, typically in states with no recent polling.   

   

[pbrower2a]

So far I see Donald Trump doing little that gets a President re-elected.   

Does he have to though?  His supporters are die-hard and they'll be showing up to vote no matter what; he could declare himself Jesus and emperor of the world, and they'd cheer him on; he could advocate the opening of extermination camps for all Muslims and they'd praise him for it.  If the other side fails again to get out the vote, I can see him squeaking to another victory simply on the backs of his deranged supporters who will be there rooting for him regardless of what he's done so far or what he will do.

I'd bet that much fewer of his diehard supporters will show up to vote if they don't have a woman or minority to hate.

They may get one or the other. They may even get someone who is both female and minority (Kamala Harris).

Female or an ethnic minority? After Donald Trump, the best sort of President that we could get is someone with an agenda and temperament like those of Barack Obama no matter what the gender or ethnicity. It's blasphemy to expect anyone to be another Lincoln or FDR, and we are certainly unlikely to end up with another John Kennedy.   

[pbrower2a]

Why the polls are still wrong

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/355066-why-the-polls-are-still-wrong

The 2016 polls did not predict the ability of the Right to wear down about every liberal politician not in an ultra-safe state or district. Do not underestimate the Right for its dedication to make America the sort of neo-feudal monstrosity in which 95% of the people suffer for 2% of the people, emigrate, or die. That is what happened in 2016. Count on the Right having much the same plans for 2018 and 2020; it is far safer than clinching a victory early and having riots in the streets by people who know that the system doesn't even pretend to give them any breaks.  

That's a harsh statement, but that holds true for feudal lords, gangsters, slave masters, and non-Marxist tyrants. Life is to be great for a comparative few who get everything good and horrid for the common man who must compete with each other for the scraps. That's how things go until a violent revolution or a catastrophic defeat in war.

We have a novel form of tyranny in America: government by lobbyists. Our government is becoming more like that of the People's Republic of China, where a formal opposition has no real power but gets the occasional opportunity to plea for scraps from the dominant Party. China splits representation between Communists and non-Communists about 70-30; the American style is to ensure that representation splits about 55-45 for now with the prospect of 60-40 very soon.  

[pbrower2a]

PBrower: I think your approval/disapproval map should have more shades, because Trump's national approval is below 40. Perhaps something like:

(if disapproval is higher than approval)
30 and below = Red 90
30-35 = Red 70
35-40 = Red 50
40-45 = Red 40
Above 45 = Red 30

(If approval is higher than disapproval)
60 and above = Blue 90
55-60 = Blue 70
50-55 = Blue 50
45-50 = Blue 40
Below 45 = Blue 30

That way the map can be more helpful in showing the full range of approval and disapproval of the President

Nice idea. The problems are:

1. that I don't have enough verbal distinctions between colors that show on the map. I have "navy", "blue", and "light  blue" showing up to color the rating zones in my legend for blue, and "maroon", "red", and "pink" for shades of red.

2. I think that the critical zone for approval, at least in the  zones under 50 for approval, is between 43 and 45% for any state. Early approval at 45% gives about an 80% chance of winning; approval at 44% gives about a 55% chance of winning; approval at 43% gives about a 30% chance of winning for an incumbent Governor or Senator, and I would guess much the same for an elected President.  Chances for winning go up to about 90% for approval at an early approval of 46% and very close to 100%  for approval at 48%. On the not-so-great side, approval at 42% gives about a 15% chance of winning re-election, and the chance goes rapidly down to near zero.

This does not apply to appointed politicians who have never shown that they can win their seats. Appointed politicians have a very poor record of getting elected after being appointed.

So why is the line where it is? Against the average incumbent, the average challenger in the average election has a chance of the incumbent is struggling to keep approval from slipping below the mid-40s. Approval ratings for a recently-elected politician typically fall within three years (for a governor) or five years (for a Senator) from the level of the election by about 6.5%. But an incumbent who runs a campaign of average quality for an incumbent can usually pick up about 6.5% from approval to the vote share in a binary election. A vote share of 50% is usually needed for re-election. There are better and worse campaigners.

Many people thought that when Obama had approval ratings around 46% that he was doomed to lose.  But think of what else we all knew. We knew that he was a slick campaigner. He exuded optimism. The mainstream media on the whole (even if you include FoX "News") still liked him. Against an average challenger he was going to get a result in the lower fifties. In fact he faced an above-average challenger in Mitt Romney and still won. I'll say this here: had Mitt Romney run for the Republican nomination for President in 2016 he would have won it and he would have won a landslide.  Democrats might have still won the Senate majority, but Romney would be more effective dealing with a Democratic majority in the Senate than Trump is in dealing with a Republican majority in the Senate.   (I suspect that he did not run because of reasons of health -- his wife's health).

So why does the dip happen? Most politicians don't quite achieve their campaign promises. Campaigning gives a politician a very one-sided expression of the uncompromising self in an optimistic setting. Governing and legislating are messy business.

Running for President is like running fifty gubernatorial or Senatorial races (and the effect is the same for Governors and Senators; Presidents have usually been Governors or Senators before running for President), five Congressional races (districts in Maine and Nebraska), and mayor of one city (it is Washington, DC).

OK -- but what about politicians who face a breaking scandal? Those pols are usually secretive about that, and that does not look good in the public mood. Journalists do not plug politicians with troubles from potential indictment for bribery or from exposure of an illegitimate child. Nobody wants to hitch himself to a falling star. The pol with a scandal about to break usually has approval ratings well below a good start for an electoral campaign.

3. It's great to show fine distinctions, but I like to keep them relevant. There may be a huge quantitative difference between a football team down 59-10 at the start of the fourth quarter and another down 28-0 at the start of the fourth quarter. Both teams are going to lose. The team down "only" 28 points? The opposing offense of the team ahead has ground down the defense to the point that the team down is on the brink of collapse.

But this is not the fourth quarter of a football game. Approval below 30%? It might be interesting, but I find it hard to distinguish between having an approval rating of 24% and having an approval rating of 34%. But a distinction between 41% and 44% is gigantic in the prospects for a politician.

I might tinker some with the scale. You have some largely-good selections, but as the 2016 election shows, the People do not elect the president. The states do.                            

[pbrower2a]

Approval +7? That's pretty generous to Trump considering past occurrences.

In 2004 and 2012, the incumbent President got roughly 51% of the popular vote. Translating that to just the two-party vote, Obama got 52% in 2012 while Bush got around 51.5% in 2004.

In late October 2004, Bush's approval was 48%. In late october 2012, Obama's was 50-52%. Compare that with election day results, and Bush got around +3 from his approvals while Obama got jack squat. Thus we should take these approvals at face value for 2020 instead of giving Trump a bonus that previous Presidents running for re-election did not enjoy.

The model is by Nate Silver, and it refers to approvals early in the year. Electoral results in November will usually be very close to approval ratings in October.

Average incumbent facing an average challenger. Silver's list of incumbent Governors and Senators included George Allen, Jr. (2006), who began with an approval rating of 51% in the spring but still lost. He hitched his star to Dubya in 2006, which would prove a mistake. He ran an execrable campaign, culminating in an ethnic slur and in an incident in which his staffers beat up a critic. He also faced a challenger of extreme effectiveness. The usual advantages of incumbency and being connected to an incumbent President who did not yet have execrable approval numbers vanished. The usual challenger to an incumbent Senator or Governor is usually a weaker candidate, the incumbent usually showing why he won the last time.   

You must be logged in to read this quote.

From October, 2-3% is the usual gain for an incumbent President from approval levels if a politician is still actively campaigning until Election Day. There was a difference between the campaigns of Dubya in 2004 and Obama in 2012: Obama practically shut down his campaigning because of Hurricane Sandy. He was going to win anyway. Dubya campaigned until the last hour because he had to, and there was nothing to stop him.

But we can't predict hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes,  or volcanic eruptions eight months earlier, can we?

[pbrower2a]

At this stage  I am tempted to use 100-DIS as the ceiling for Trump support. Thus if Trump has a disapproval of 57% in Michigan, he cannot get more than 43% of the vote -- roughly -- in Michigan in a re-election bid.

One might be tempted to adjust that number upward to adjust for Trump supporters being more likely to go to the polls... but it is too early to do that. At this stage, disapproval is far more difficult  to dislodge than is approval.  I hear very few people defending him even in a rural area in which he won about  65-35. I noticed that at a harvest festival in town the Republicans had a booth -- and no Trump material. It was as if the Republicans had some question of who would be their standard-bearer.  Maybe they were afraid of people giving stiff-arm salutes or shouting "Heil Trump!" in mockery. I think they are beginning to recognize that Donald Trump was a mistake.   

[pbrower2a]

At this stage  I am tempted to use 100-DIS as the ceiling for Trump support. Thus if Trump has a disapproval of 57% in Michigan, he cannot get more than 43% of the vote -- roughly -- in Michigan in a re-election bid.

One might be tempted to adjust that number upward to adjust for Trump supporters being more likely to go to the polls... but it is too early to do that. At this stage, disapproval is far more difficult  to dislodge than is approval.  I hear very few people defending him even in a rural area in which he won about  65-35. I noticed that at a harvest festival in town the Republicans had a booth -- and no Trump material. It was as if the Republicans had some question of who would be their standard-bearer.  Maybe they were afraid of people giving stiff-arm salutes or shouting "Heil Trump!" in mockery. I think they are beginning to recognize that Donald Trump was a mistake.   

You always vomit hate, you and pittsburgh steel do not even see the reality

Uh, where is the hate?

Sure, I have much contempt for the President... but that is not to say that he does not merit such contempt. Does grabbing women by the crotch sound like admirable behavior? Stiffing subcontractors? Effusive self-praise for a job not yet done? Baiting an mentally-unstable leader in possession of WMDs? Unilaterally renouncing agreements of the previous President?

This President is dangerous. Ideology has nothing to do with it.   

[pbrower2a]

CNN, Oct 12-15 (change from Sep 26-28)

Approve 37 (nc) Strongly 25
Disapprove 57 (+1) Strongly 47

Generic Congressional Ballot: 51D, 37R (among RV: 54D, 38R)

The "strongly disapprove" category is near a majority. This is higher than approval of any form -- by  a full ten percent. Statewide polls would be interesting. At this point, I figure that if the election were in November (obviously contrafactual), the President would lose in a landslide.

The Congressional ballot is not definitive, but the ballot is close to a loss of the House (if not the Senate) for the GOP. Gerrymandering as it is, Democrats need at least about a 54-46 split in the overall popular vote to break even in the House.

The Senate: Democrats in a normal election would have a potential loss of six seats this year if the President were at all successful in convincing people of the rectitude and desirability of his agenda. There are only two reasonable chances for Democratic gains in the Senate (Nevada, with a Republican in a Democratic state and Arizona, which seems to  be going Democratic due to demographic change). But with the retirement of Bob Corker (TN) and the likely demise of John McCain (AZ -- I saw him speak on TV, and he sounded like death warmed over... and I liked the content of his speech), there might be more Democratic chances. 

Rifts in the Republican party are severe. The President is inflicting pain without any coherent idea of how the harsh medicine can make things better for most people. He is riding a bull market not of his making that could implode any day. His diplomatic efforts are crass failures so far. His regional base is the areas of America least like his home of New York City.

   

[pbrower2a]

Polling data based upon Morning Consult, Note that this data is more flattering, on the whole, to President Trump than what I already had.

I now have restored electoral votes to the states on the approval map.

Trump disapproval, net negative and

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

44-49%
50-55%
56% or higher

But raw disapproval numbers appear instead  of electoral votes here:

Disapproval (net negative for Trump) :

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

(net positive for Trump)
46-49%  
41-45%
40% or lower

[pbrower2a]

Quinnipiac, Virginia

October 18, 2017

https://poll.qu.edu/virginia/release-detail?ReleaseID=2493

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as President?

                     LIKELY VOTERS........................................
                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Approve              35%    81%     4%    34%    40%    31%    36%    55%
Disapprove           62     15     96     65     57     67     63     41
DK/NA                 2      4      1      2      3      2      1      3
 
                     WHITE.....           Non-
                     Men    Wom    Wht    Wht
 
Approve              49%    38%    44%    14%
Disapprove           49     60     54     83
DK/NA                 2      2      2      3
 
 
Horrid numbers for President Trump, especially among people with college degrees, white women, and minorities.  This is probably the last poll that we get from Virginia before the gubernatorial election, and the Presidential approval is an afterthought in contrast to the gubernatorial election , where Northam (D) holds a 53-39 lead over Gillespie (R).  

This poll post-dates the data from Morning Consult, so I can update the polling maps.

This approval map shows  electoral votes to the states on the approval map.

Trump approval, net positive

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

Trump approval, net negative

44-49%
50-55%
56% or higher

But raw disapproval numbers appear instead  of electoral votes here:

Disapproval (net negative for Trump) :

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

(net positive for Trump)
46-49%  
41-45%
40% or lower

[pbrower2a]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fixed the maps so they look a little better. If we don't have any specific data for the individual districts, we shouldn't be showing them in grey. The disapproval map, I set the year to 1984 so ME and NE can have their disapproval numbers as electoral votes.

Also, wow yeah that map is a lot sadder than the previous one.

The single districts might be shown some time in polls of Maine and Nebraska -- not that those states generally decide an election. But ME-02 went for Trump (unlike the other three electoral votes of Maine) in 2016, and NE-02 went for Obama in 2008 (unlike the other four electoral votes for Nebraska that year.

To be sure it is hard to imagine how ME-02 goes Republican except in an overall Republican win or how NE-02 goes Democratic except in a Democratic blowout. Maybe I can set the year to 1984 until I see any polls of individual districts in Maine or Nebraska. Both states, let alone their individual districts, get polled rarely. 

[pbrower2a]

I doubt Niger is going to have any effect on Trump's approval numbers. Unlike Maria, it seems like one of those things that will be seen differently by his base and his opposition.

I concur. People who thought him cruel, hollow, incompetent,  reckless, unfeeling, or crazy will simply have their beliefs confirmed by another bad incident. Support that remains for this President is extremely firm. Something has to hurt his firmest supporters before they turn against him. The economy is still OK, but it is unlikely to improve. People are not going to have trouble with him on foreign affairs until American troops get massacred in a war that the President provoked.

God help the Korean people should our President provoke a mercurial dictator to loose his "fateful lightning".   

[pbrower2a]

Morning Consult polling is slightly more favorable to Trump than other polling. Contrast how different its polling is for Virginia, which has some similarities to Florida, to that of Quinnipiac.

But 48-47 in polling involving Florida, and we see surprisingly little polling for Florida aside from polling data of 50-state polls, is statistical noise.

[pbrower2a]

Morning Consult polling is slightly more favorable to Trump than other polling. Contrast how different its polling is for Virginia, which has some similarities to Florida, to that of Quinnipiac.

But 48-47 in polling involving Florida, and we see surprisingly little polling for Florida aside from polling data of 50-state polls, is statistical noise.

I imagine we'll see a lot more state level polling after the November 2017 elections. Particularly of states with competitive senate races

There are quite a few states -- Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Florida, Arizona...

[pbrower2a]

Poll of active duty troops, 44/40 favorable/unfavorable, big divide between enlisted and officers.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2017/10/23/military-times-poll-what-you-really-think-about-trump/#.We617FI69Mt.twitter

Among officers: 31% favorable, 53% unfavorable.

It is nearly impossible to become a commissioned officer without having a college degree. That itself is a huge cultural difference reflected in polls in America as a whole.

[pbrower2a]

Given how the army is disproportionately white

Is it?

The Armed Services are close to a cross section of American life, except for the economic elites and the mentally and physically disabled, in ethnicity and class origin. They offer about as genuine equal opportunity as any government agency, let alone private business. Base communities are close to the nationwide ethnic mix as any others. Enlisted personnel might be drawn heavily from poorer, less-well-educated people, but consider that the Armed Services offer vocational training and formal education to people who might otherwise not get them. Getting a four-year degree before enlisting practically ensured that once one gets through basic training, one need not spend much time in the lower ranks -- and most people who already have a degree get military commissions anyway.  On the other side, the military insists upon people having the high-school diploma; high-school dropouts have shown themselves as the overwhelming majority of disciplinary problems.  

[pbrower2a]

The Morning Consult polls might be a bit too favorable for Trump. That will work itself out.

[pbrower2a]

Fox News (vs. Sept.)

Approve: 38 (-4)
Disapprove: 57 (+4).

Strongly Disapprove is 49%.
"Some of the drop comes from white men without a college degree, as 56 percent approve of the president, down from 68 percent last month.  Working-class white men were a key voting bloc for him in the election (71 percent backed Trump according to the Fox News Exit Poll)."

Headline blames nature LOL.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/25/fox-news-poll-storms-erode-trumps-ratings.html

Just look at the hideous number for "Strongly Disapprove". Just under half!

Blaming the weather? Obama did well in meeting tornadoes for which there is no preparation other than general readiness.

[pbrower2a]

FLORIDA (29 electoral votes)

How is it that Trump is not underwater in Florida? The reverse of the Cuban Thaw?

Update:

Bill Nelson: 37
Rick Scott:  36
Other: 7
Don't know: 20

Poll taken Oct. 11, through Tuesday, Oct. 17, with 838 completed surveys from Florida registered voters. In February, the same group had Nelson 44/Scott 38.

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wjct/files/201710/ScottTrumpSurveyResults.docx_.pdf

Approval ratings:
Trump: 37/59
Rubio: 42/37
Nelson: 35/15
Scott: 59/28 (was 46/40 in February, so clearly a big hurricane bump)

Also polled: confederate statutes, legal immigration support, government influence in healthcare.

(focus is on the Senate race).

This is unusually bad for Donald Trump, too, which may reflect the bungled relief effort to the hurricane in Puerto Rico. No way should Florida ordinarily be close to Illinois or Virginia in disapproval of the President.  Otherwise this is an outlier. But should this not be an outlier, then the prospect for a Trump victory is DOA.

INDIANA (11 electoral votes)

Trump underwater in Indiana:

Old National Bank/Ball State University 2017 Hoosier Survey (adults)

41% Approve
45% Disapprove

Source

Because of the high number of undecided, I am going to mute the color for approval and disapproval.

Republican nominees for President can usually win Indiana handily. But they do not win nationally unless they are winning the Hoosier state by double digits.

NEW JERSEY (14 electoral votes)

New Jersey likely voters disapprove 65 - 33 percent of the job President Donald Trump is doing. Republicans approve 80 - 19 percent and white voters with no college degree are divided, as 47 percent approve and 52 percent disapprove. Every other party, gender, education and racial group disapproves by wide margins.

https://poll.qu.edu/new-jersey/release-detail?ReleaseID=2494
 
This approval map shows  electoral votes to the states on the approval map.

Trump approval, net positive

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

Trump approval, net negative

44-49%
40-45%
39% or lower

But raw disapproval numbers appear instead  of electoral votes here:

Disapproval (net negative for Trump) :

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

(net positive for Trump)
46-49%  
41-45%
40% or lower