Trump approval ratings thread 1.6

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

There is a potential for a rally around the flag for Trump, but today's job report makes it more difficult for his type of conservative voters and indies to come around to him. He flatlined by the time the end of the week, when job reports are released, Trump

[GeorgiaModerate]

Minnesota: PPP, July 22-23, 1218 RV

Approve 41
Disapprove 54

Biden 52, Trump 42

Senate: Smith 48, Lewis 39

[woodley park]

There is a potential for a rally around the flag for Trump, but today's job report makes it more difficult for his type of conservative voters and indies to come around to him. He flatlined by the time the end of the week, when job reports are released, Trump

Rally around the flag because of what? That we now have over 150,000 dead people because our president is an incompetent failure?

[Person Man]

There is a potential for a rally around the flag for Trump, but today's job report makes it more difficult for his type of conservative voters and indies to come around to him. He flatlined by the time the end of the week, when job reports are released, Trump

Rally around the flag because of what? That we now have over 150,000 dead people because our president is an incompetent failure?

That ship has sailed. And if we end up losing the vaccine race, that's enough arrow in Biden's quiver. Whether or not one happens sooner than later.

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

First by-the-numbers poll showing positive approval for Trump since early May (if we exclude a tied poll during that sane time period), though Rassy and the Hill continue to be the only two non-tracking pollsters regularly showing a single-digit margin between Trump's approval/disapproval.  

[BobbieMac]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

Cancel election bump

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Poll numbers are snapshots in time and MSNBC whom commissioned the MSN polls was the same polling company that underestimated Johnson support and got 2016 wrong.  They are the same news network that gave Biden a pass on Ukraine Hunter.  The polls are inflated in FL, GA and NC, that's why they dont poll OH, IA and TX, to make Biden numbers look good, the election isnt over

[Arizona Iced Tea]

What does he need for re-election, 46%?

[GeorgiaModerate]

What does he need for re-election, 46%?

It's not just overall approval and disapproval; you also have to consider strong approval and disapproval.  An incumbent will usually win over at least some of those who somewhat disapprove, but almost none of those who strongly disapprove.  Something like 46% overall approval in the averages would probably put Trump within striking distance, although I think he'd still be the underdog.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

What does he need for re-election, 46%?

Trump is only gonna make it close in WI and PA so that either he can contest the irregular ballots or Jorgensen takes enough support from  Biden to take either state like Johnson did Hillary. Small chance in MN.  Polls are inflated, due to Covid 19. It was never gonna be but a 3 to 5 pt race like we have always had polarizing elections since 2000.


Obama even in a 2008 victory didnt sweep AZ, FL, NC and GA and then putTX in play and he won by 7

[Person Man]

What does he need for re-election, 46%?

It's not just overall approval and disapproval; you also have to consider strong approval and disapproval.  An incumbent will usually win over at least some of those who somewhat disapprove, but almost none of those who strongly disapprove.  Something like 46% overall approval in the averages would probably put Trump within striking distance, although I think he'd still be the underdog.

I'd go with net approval.

[Sir Mohamed]

What does he need for re-election, 46%?

It more depends on the margin of victory, not the vote share itsself. With Trump at 46.1% in 2016, HRC would have won with fewer 3rd party votes. If she got 50.2% rather than 48.2%, that would have given her the victory. Trump was short of an actual majority in the 3 key states and in FL. Remember Romney got 47.2% in 2012, which is a higher vote share than Trump with 46.1%.

I think Biden needs a margin of 3+ pts to make sure he has collected 270 or more EVs. If he's winning by 5 pts, it really doesn't matter much whether it's a 48-43% or 51-46% NPV advantage. Given that 3rd party vote share is expected to drop from 2016, 46% won't be enough for Mr. Trump to pull it off. I'd assume he needs at least 47.5% to stand a chance in the EC. If he ends up with less than 46%, he's toast.

[VAR]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

First by-the-numbers poll showing positive approval for Trump since early May (if we exclude a tied poll during that sane time period), though Rassy and the Hill continue to be the only two non-tracking pollsters regularly showing a single-digit margin between Trump's approval/disapproval.  

I think it’s either:

A) a slight improvement in Trump’s numbers, as YouGov/Economist has showed us
B) Rassy trying to make it seem like Trump is rebounding, probably to please the President given no one believes their polls

Both are likely imo.

[GeorgiaModerate]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

First by-the-numbers poll showing positive approval for Trump since early May (if we exclude a tied poll during that sane time period), though Rassy and the Hill continue to be the only two non-tracking pollsters regularly showing a single-digit margin between Trump's approval/disapproval.  

I think it’s either:

A) a slight improvement in Trump’s numbers, as YouGov/Economist has showed us
B) Rassy trying to make it seem like Trump is rebounding, probably to please the President given no one believes their polls

Both are likely imo.

Another possibility is that Rasmussen got a weird daily sample that will throw off their average until it rolls out.  This has happened to them several times, in both directions.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Emerson has it now Biden plus 4, Biden isnt gonna win by 10 to 15 pts

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The 334 to 413 freiwal is cracked. Now its backed to reality

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Its gonna be Biden 279 to 259 and 51/49 D controlled Senate, no more, no less

[Person Man]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

First by-the-numbers poll showing positive approval for Trump since early May (if we exclude a tied poll during that sane time period), though Rassy and the Hill continue to be the only two non-tracking pollsters regularly showing a single-digit margin between Trump's approval/disapproval.  

I think it’s either:

A) a slight improvement in Trump’s numbers, as YouGov/Economist has showed us
B) Rassy trying to make it seem like Trump is rebounding, probably to please the President given no one believes their polls

Both are likely imo.

By allowing  benefits to expire and threatening the election

[VoterDoofus]

50-48 Rassy Hahahaha

Please ban him moderators. Ignore is pointless when other members engage in trolling.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The landslide we can now say was presumptuous

[pbrower2a]

The landslide we can now say was presumptuous

And the freiwal?

What is your definition of landslide?

I can discuss a landslide by classifying electoral margins.

In the last 120 years there mean electoral victory has been between  56.4% (1960 in a very close race in the popular vote) and 66.5% in electoral votes (1908, which wasn't) in a binary election. If electoral results were normally distributed, then you might have cause to expect electoral vote percentages to cluster somewhere near 62%, as did the 2012 election between Obama and Romney. 

That election is the only one in that range. Even that one was close to being close, Obama won Florida by 74.309 (0.88% of the popular vote) which is not the closest margin in Florida history, but had he lost Florida Obama would have won only 303 electoral votes, signifying a close election in the electoral college.

With the exception of 2012, Presidential elections are close unless they aren't. Coincidence? Not with that much data.  On the whole you might expect a random distribution of electoral votes clustering around the mean as happens with most random data. Results in the Electoral College seem to avoid the mean. So what happens?

It's the campaigning. Let's look at the reality of campaigning: no politician seeks an election as the result of random chance. Getting close and hoping to win a state or two that puts one over the top may be all that is possible, and nominees often tailor their campaign to win key constituencies in a small number of states. Such applies to choices involving VP candidates (Lieberman in 2000 and Edwards in 2004), which isn't particularly reliable. What one does to seek a small but critical edge may work (narrow in) or not (may not).

So let us suppose that 260 electoral votes are reliably those of your opponent and you have 267 reasonably secure, and the states not so certain are Iowa and New Hampshire. You are behind by 6% in Iowa and 2% in New Hampshire, so as the days dwindle around Halloween you must choose between Iowa and New Hampshire. OK, ad buys are less expensive in New Hampshire and you are closer to winning New Hampshire. You probably abandon Iowa with the idea that there are few remaining voters in Iowa that can swing to you... or not enough. So you spend your resources -- time and campaign funds -- heavily in New Hampshire.

Now reverse the reality. You are assured of 260 electoral votes  and your opponent is assured of 267 unless something goes haywire, and the states are Iowa and New Hampshire. You must win both. Possible results for you are  260 (you lose because your opponent wins both Iowa and New Hampshire), 264 (you win New Hampshire but not Iowa... you lose), 266 (you win Iowa but not New Hampshire... you lose). and 270 (you win because you win everything expected and both Iowa and New Hampshire). It is trickier, but still possible.

Now let us suppose that you have a shaky hold on 240 electoral votes and your opponent has a near-lock on 265. 33 electoral votes remain undecided. By an odd coincidence that might be North Carolina (15) and Ohio (18) this time. You need those two states, but by expending enough time and campaign funds to those states you put some other state -- let us say Florida (29 electoral votes )and  at risk  You do not play to look good losing; you play to win. But things don't quite work out, and your opponent has made some huge campaign-ad buys in Florida and has appeared at every possible site of a campaign. You don't win either Ohio (258 votes with it) or North Carolina (255 votes with it). Burt you have put your bare lead in Florida at risk and lost the state. Your opponent has just won the Electoral College 316-221 unless some other states also go away from you. It is closer to a runaway for your opponent than you expected.

[https://electoral-vote.com/evp2020/Pres/Pngs/Aug01.png][/img]

As of August 1, 2020, Joe Biden has an edge of some kind in states numbering 388 to Trump having 150. To put it tamely, Trump has his work cut out for him and needs immediate results. I can easily see Trump cutting that down to 319 to 219, which would leave Biden with a win much like that of JFK in 1960 because three states in which Biden has nominal leads are within 3% of going for Trump. Still, 388-150 doesn't look good for Trump. He could as easily be in collapse mode as in recovery mode... and he needs a gigantic recovery. His shaky leads in Iowa and Ohio could vanish quickly. and that would put Biden (I am assuming that Biden wins NE-02) at 413 electoral votes.

Weird things happen in electoral landslides. If Trump were in a mirror image, then around 390 electoral votes maybe Illinois and Washington would be available to him if things went right for him. OK, so I have some suggested categories on electoral votes:

269-269 TIE to be decided in the House.
50% plus one to 53% squeaker (Bush 2000 and 2004)
54 to 57% close (Truman 1948, Kennedy 1960, Carter 1976, Trump 2016)
58% to 66% in the zone of the mean (Obama 2012 - but nothing else!)
67% to 71% landslide, but relatively weak (Roosevelt 1904, Taft 1908, Clinton 1992 and 1996, Obama 2008)
72% to 82% moderate landslide (FDR 1944, Reagan 1980, Bush 1988
83% to 88% severe landslide (Hoover 1928, FDR 1932 and 1940,  Ike 1952 and 1956) 
89% or more   monumental landslide (FDR 1936, LBJ 1964, Nixon 1972, Reagan 1984)

 For now, basically any win stronger than Obama in 2012 is a landslide of some kind, and anything win less than the margin of Obama in 2012 is not.

[Reaganfan]

Reading this forum, you would think Donald Trump's approval ratings were at a steady 21%. I remember when Bush's got down that low in 2008. Now that was a bad approval rating.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

Reading this forum, you would think Donald Trump's approval ratings were at a steady 21%. I remember when Bush's got down that low in 2008. Now that was a bad approval rating.

Ah! ReaganFan is back!

[Reaganfan]

Reading this forum, you would think Donald Trump's approval ratings were at a steady 21%. I remember when Bush's got down that low in 2008. Now that was a bad approval rating.

Ah! ReaganFan is back!

Just a cameo.