Trump’s Approval Rating Stands Around 35 Percent in Three Key Midwest States

[Panhandle Progressive]

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/trump-s-approval-rating-stands-below-40-percent-three-key-n794061

Without these three states in 2020 the Democrat would win the electoral college 278 to 260.

[Tender Branson]

It should be noted that NBC News/Marist had Hillary winning PA by 12 points in mid-October.

As we know, Trump won by almost a point.

NBC didn't poll MI and WI in 2016.

[BudgieForce]

It should be noted that NBC News/Marist had Hillary winning PA by 12 points in mid-October.

As we know, Trump won by almost a point.

NBC didn't poll MI and WI in 2016.

Hillary was probably ahead by a decent amount in PA around mid-October. If your trying to tell us that Marist is inaccurate because of 2016, well then we wouldn't be able to trust most pollsters going forward, would we?

[Tender Branson]

It should be noted that NBC News/Marist had Hillary winning PA by 12 points in mid-October.

As we know, Trump won by almost a point.

NBC didn't poll MI and WI in 2016.

Hillary was probably ahead by a decent amount in PA around mid-October. If your trying to tell us that Marist is inaccurate because of 2016, well then we wouldn't be able to trust most pollsters going forward, would we?

I'm not trying to say that Marist is necessarily inaccurate (they also had some good results, such as in AZ).

On the other hand, they also flopped badly in NC (predicting a 6-point Hillary win there), in a poll just a few days before election day (she lost by 3 or 4).

So it's possible that Trump's approval is actually at 40-42% in these 3 states right now ... who knows ?

[BudgieForce]

It should be noted that NBC News/Marist had Hillary winning PA by 12 points in mid-October.

As we know, Trump won by almost a point.

NBC didn't poll MI and WI in 2016.

Hillary was probably ahead by a decent amount in PA around mid-October. If your trying to tell us that Marist is inaccurate because of 2016, well then we wouldn't be able to trust most pollsters going forward, would we?

I'm not trying to say that Marist is necessarily inaccurate (they also had some good results, such as in AZ).

On the other hand, they also flopped badly in NC (predicting a 6-point Hillary win there), in a poll just a few days before election day (she lost by 3 or 4).

So it's possible that Trump's approval is actually at 40-42% in these 3 states right now ... who knows ?

I see no reason to believe any pollster is underestimating Trump's support, especially now since they are hyper aware of the polling failure that was 2016.

[Kamala]

It should be noted that NBC News/Marist had Hillary winning PA by 12 points in mid-October.

As we know, Trump won by almost a point.

NBC didn't poll MI and WI in 2016.

Hillary was probably ahead by a decent amount in PA around mid-October. If your trying to tell us that Marist is inaccurate because of 2016, well then we wouldn't be able to trust most pollsters going forward, would we?

I'm not trying to say that Marist is necessarily inaccurate (they also had some good results, such as in AZ).

On the other hand, they also flopped badly in NC (predicting a 6-point Hillary win there), in a poll just a few days before election day (she lost by 3 or 4).

So it's possible that Trump's approval is actually at 40-42% in these 3 states right now ... who knows ?

I see no reason to believe any pollster is underestimating Trump's support, especially now since they are hyper aware of the polling failure that was 2016.

Yeah - pollsters rely on being accurate to bring in clients. They've probably changed their methodology compared to pre-2016 election.

[heatcharger]

Wow, look at those numbers with college whites! Time to campaign in every Panera Bread and Whole Foods in the country.

[President Johnson]

Very bad for Trump but it's a) very early and b) we should not underestimate him again.

[Panhandle Progressive]

Very bad for Trump but it's a) very early and b) we should not underestimate him again.

I couldn't agree more. Take nothing for granted. The Apprentice did get one thing right though, Trump regularly saying "You're Fired". Now the American people need to say the same thing in 2020. That would be the ultimate irony to Trump and his plan to "Make America Great Again".

[Mr. Morden]

It should be noted that NBC News/Marist had Hillary winning PA by 12 points in mid-October.

As we know, Trump won by almost a point.

NBC didn't poll MI and WI in 2016.

Hillary was probably ahead by a decent amount in PA around mid-October. If your trying to tell us that Marist is inaccurate because of 2016, well then we wouldn't be able to trust most pollsters going forward, would we?

I'm not trying to say that Marist is necessarily inaccurate (they also had some good results, such as in AZ).

On the other hand, they also flopped badly in NC (predicting a 6-point Hillary win there), in a poll just a few days before election day (she lost by 3 or 4).

So it's possible that Trump's approval is actually at 40-42% in these 3 states right now ... who knows ?

I see no reason to believe any pollster is underestimating Trump's support, especially now since they are hyper aware of the polling failure that was 2016.

Depends on what's being done to fix it.  The AAPOR report claims that the big reason why the polls were so far off in the Rust Belt states this time was that the polling firms that did the most polls there didn't weight by education levels.  They weighted by other demographic factors, but not education levels, and since education was more strongly correlated with voting preference this time than normal, that was a problem:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=263658.0

So is this poll weighting by education level?  Does the demographic breakdown on education level look reasonable?

[Rookie Yinzer]

I just don't see him winning these states in 2020. He did not crack 50 percent here and won by less than a point in each. He will not be running against Hillary and the 3rd party vote is surely to decrease. The dynamics will be completely different. There were many 3rd party votes from folks who didn't want to get their hands dirty by voting Hillary bc they thought she'd win anyway. Now Trump is here and I'm sure many of these voters can be convinced to coalesce around the Dem candidate.

And the Obama-Trump voters should be easy to sway back as long as a GOP Congress continue to be unproductive. God help us if Trump actually stops getting in his own way.

[Shadows]

Those are terrible numbers. I thought he would do worse in Michigan than PA or WI. Surprised by WI leading the way.

The economy is keeping him afloat. Every poll says the economy is as good or has improved. If the economy goes South, his ratings will fall from 35% to 25% odd or less in these mid-Western states. Many other states will come into play.

Trump could be destroyed in 2020 if the economy is in a bad state.

[Coraxion]

Great poll!

[Liberalrocks]

Is America "great again"?....

[jaichind]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

[Matty]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

Exactly. Why is it so hard to understand that people will still vote for someone they dislike if the other person is seen as worse?

[Coraxion]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

Exactly. Why is it so hard to understand that people will still vote for someone they dislike if the other person is seen as worse?

HRC is a worse candidate than any prospective Dem candidate for 2020.

[Xing]

I'd also mention that favorability for an "outsider" candidate is different from an approval rating for an incumbent president. No one should be ruling out a Trump victory this early, but there's no way to spin this in his favor. These numbers are terrible for Trump.

[PragmaticPopulist]

I'm a bit surprised that his numbers are worse in Wisconsin than the other two. Maybe WI's progressive tradition is returning, or Hillary Clinton was just the worst possible Democrat for it. It's still early, though this could mean the WI GOP will have a tough year in 2018.

Trump has absolutely no room for error in MI. It was the second-closest state and a more generic Democrat would probably be favored in it.

PA might be the most likely of the three for Trump to hold, though I don't see him surpassing the numbers he got in western and Northeastern PA. Not much different than MI.

If Democrats don't nominate another laughably weak candidate, I think Trump is in trouble.

[BudgieForce]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

Im not sure what your implying. An unpopular incumbent is not the same as an unpopular candidate.

[BudgieForce]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

Exactly. Why is it so hard to understand that people will still vote for someone they dislike if the other person is seen as worse?

If you can name me a potential candidate with likability ratings similar to Hillary, then you have a point. But as of now, even polarizing Elizabeth Warren isnt anywhere near Hillary levels.

[Liberalrocks]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

Exactly. Why is it so hard to understand that people will still vote for someone they dislike if the other person is seen as worse?

If you can name me a potential candidate with likability ratings similar to Hillary, then you have a point. But as of now, even polarizing Elizabeth Warren isnt anywhere near Hillary levels.

Well Clinton's unfavorables increased as a result of the email scandal (which originated from the GOP led Benghazi investigations) and from being perceived as corrupt because of her Goldman Sachs speeches/Clinton Foundation/financial contributors/etc due to a left wing insurgency candidacy from Sanders and his supporters.

I don't think either of those events would've been prophesized in 2013; in fact Clinton's favorability rating back then was perfectly fine.

Exactly which people often forget, In fact when she announced her favorables were still fine. If one thinks this rebranding is exclusive to Hillary and another democrat doesnt have the potential to have their character dragged in the mud, then they have another thing coming to them.

[Mr. Morden]

2016 exit polls Trump fav/unfav.  WI 35/64.  PA 42/56. MI 39/59. This poll is all adults and not even LV.  It seems Trump gained a bit of ground since election night.

Exactly. Why is it so hard to understand that people will still vote for someone they dislike if the other person is seen as worse?

If you can name me a potential candidate with likability ratings similar to Hillary, then you have a point. But as of now, even polarizing Elizabeth Warren isnt anywhere near Hillary levels.

Well, the "as of now" thing is key.  The GOP hasn't yet gone to town on whoever the 2020 Dem. nominee is going to be in the way that they're going to ~30 months from now.  Once someone becomes the de facto nominee, then the GOP attack machine will focus its attention on that person, but that hasn't yet happened, because it's too early to know who that person will be.  Not saying that means they'll end up with favorability #s as bad as what Clinton had last year, but will they have worse favorable #s than "Generic Democrat", who is the only person "running" against Trump right now in most people's minds?  Probably.

There's also likely to be a "coming home" effect, whereby some Republican-leaning voters who currently feel free to hold a negative opinion of Trump end up excusing his sins once an actual flesh and blood Democratic challenger emerges.

[jaichind]

Exactly which people often forget, In fact when she announced her favorables were still fine. If one thinks this rebranding is exclusive to Hillary and another democrat doesnt have the potential to have their character dragged in the mud, then they have another thing coming to them.

If I recall correctly even after the email scandal broke she still had pretty good favorables and well ahead of her GOP opponents.  It was well into the election primary campaign with both Sanders and Trump going after her on it that her numbers started to to drop.

[Panhandle Progressive]

If Democrats don't nominate another laughably weak candidate, I think Trump is in trouble.

That's just too far. "laughably weak" yet she beat the other major candidate by almost 3 million votes. Lets all remember that the only reason she isn't president at this very moment is because of the electoral college.