Quinnipiac: Americans Oppose Almost All of Trump's Proposals

[Virginiá]

As if there won't be any blowback in 2018 and/or 2020 if Trump/GOP pushes hard for policies people don't like. The same dynamic applies (and already applied) to Democrats. Maybe any sort of potential backlash in the next election(s) won't be enough to completely stop Republicans, but to say these policies being unpopular is not relevant is not really true.

[ApatheticAustrian]

None of this is relevant for the next four years. Elections have consequences.

2 years, we are not in austria/dutch.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Donald Trump: the Bait-and-Switch President.

i.e. exactly the same as the last 5 presidents.

Do you mean that Reagan wasn't?

Reagan promised to cut taxes: He did and massively cut taxes

Reagan promised to take a more aggressive and offensive stand against the Soviet Union: He clearly did

Reagan promised to cut regulations : He did

Reagan promised to rebuild the American military : He did

Reagan promised to work with the Soviets to reduce nuclear weapons : He did

[Rjjr77]

Sample skews heavily democrat. 1.36 dems for every 1 republican. Income over 100k is also oversampled.

A lot of those are opposed by double digit margins. Reducing the party gap wouldn't increase the popularity that much.

.36 is a pretty big party gap, it would absolutely affect the poll.

The whole sample seems out of whack, poll looks to be an outlier.

But are registered dems and registered reps actually balanced IRL?

No, which is why it shouldn't be asked in general, ideology should be used, but if you are going to ask it with Registered and Lean they should be equal. In an opinion poll they should be looking at ideological balance from the US in general.

Regardless Quinnipiac actually weights their polls, which mean if sampling margin is off( as it appears to be with what they provide) it can be waaaay off with how they weight. Quinnipiac is normally a solid poll, this set of polls they've been running on the subject seems off.

[Rjjr77]

.36 is a pretty big party gap, it would absolutely affect the poll.

The whole sample seems out of whack, poll looks to be an outlier.

I wasn't implying it would have no effect. Party identification usually skews more Democratic, and so my post assumed a smaller gap but still not even.

Gerrymandering gets a lot of pull on here, but it really isn't that bad, one of the things that hurts democrats with district draws is the minority-majority requirements

It's a number of things hurting Democrats. VRA districts, natural packing, incumbency (for now), and gerrymandering all play a part. Getting fair maps in the midwest/rustbelt and select other states could still give back to Democrats a meaningful number of seats, though. It is much easier to obtain a House majority if you are only 12 - 15 seats in the hole and not 24 - 30.

Quinnipiac weights, so if they sample is off that much on party ID it's going to have wild MOEs down the line, especially if they weight for race/age/income. Normally Quinnipiac has good sound polling but looking back I think they've made a sample error on a couple of similar polls in the same direction. They ought to stop weighting for demographics.

[ApatheticAustrian]

Donald Trump: the Bait-and-Switch President.

i.e. exactly the same as the last 5 presidents.

Do you mean that Reagan wasn't?

Reagan promised to cut taxes: He did and massively cut taxes

Reagan promised to take a more aggressive and offensive stand against the Soviet Union: He clearly did

Reagan promised to cut regulations : He did

Reagan promised to rebuild the American military : He did

Reagan promised to work with the Soviets to reduce nuclear weapons : He did

you are correct.

but he was president in easier times in SOME ways, imho.