Trump approval ratings thread 1.5

[pbrower2a]

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2618
Quinnipiac University National Poll

American voters give President Trump a negative 41 - 55 percent job approval rating, compared to a negative 38 - 55 percent rating March 5, before the release of the Mueller Report. Today, there is a wide gender gap as women disapprove 62 - 34 percent while men are divided, with 48 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving.

RV:

41(+2)/55(+0)%    (strongly 30/46%)

American voters say 57 - 28 percent that Donald Trump committed crimes before he became president, according to a Quinnipiac University National Poll released today.

This compares to results of a March 5 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh- pe-ack) University National Poll, before release of the Mueller Report, in which voters said 64 - 24 percent that President Trump committed crimes before he was elected.

In today's survey, 46 percent of voters say Trump committed crimes since he became president and 46 percent say he did not commit crimes.

But American voters say 66 - 29 percent that Congress should not begin impeachment of President Trump. Democrats support impeachment 56 - 38 percent. Opposition to impeachment is 95 - 4 percent among Republicans and 70 - 27 percent among independent voters.

Investigating Trump distracts Congress from other national issues, 53 percent of voters say, while 43 percent say Congress can investigate Trump and work on other national issues at the same time.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller conducted a fair investigation, voters say 72 - 18 percent, including 65 - 25 percent among Republicans.

Voters say 51 - 38 percent that the Mueller Report did not clear President Trump of any wrongdoing.

American voters also say 54 - 42 percent that Trump "attempted to derail or obstruct the investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 election."

Committed a crime, but should not be impeached? Does it mean that they think crime is not serious enough?

This may reflect the consensus that impeachment is futility at this point. Add to this, many people are being numbed by the bad behavior of this President. Yes, it is sickening. Investigation comes long before impeachment. 

[pbrower2a]

More from "the Q":

Quinnipiac, April 26-29, 1044 RV (1-month change)

Approve 41 (+2)
Disapprove 55 (nc)

Strongly approve 30 (+2)
Strongly disapprove 46 (-1)



[/quote]

The Mueller Report seems to have little effect. Maybe some people believe that it exculpates him, and they are increases in support. Still, strong disapproval is higher than total approval, a very bad sign for the President.

Other pertinent data:

1. Americans are split down the middle 46-46 on whether the President committed any crimes.  The 46% who believe that the President committed crimes may be an amazing coincidence with "strong disapproval". I would guess that most Americans expect the President to adhere to the minimum standard of behavior of not violating criminal statutes... but I would expect an even higher standard -- to avoid doing something licit but morally objectionable.

Criminal conduct is the most obvious cause for impeaching any elected official. We cannot tolerate war crimes, corruption, or obstruction of justice by the President. I may have pooh-poohed the charges of perjury by Bill Clinton on the grounds that his sexual excapades were not legitimate objects of public concern. Whatever one's ideology, the President (or any other elected official) must not get away with certain things.

So 46% of Americans polled believe either that

(1) the Mueller Report is inconclusive
(2) President Trump is innocent of the offenses even if some political rogues acted on their own contrary to his wishes
(3) the President is the victim of a miscarriage of justice, as in a 'witch-hunt'
(4) the President did such things, but it is OK because he is President and deserves our undying loyalty no matter what he does.

(1) and (3) are matters of interpretation; (2) is absurd; (4) is an acquiescence with dictatorial or despotic government under 'the right conditions' such as getting one's cultural or economic agenda achieved in legislation.

2. Voters are 66-29 against impeachment. Maybe impeachment is premature because of its futility at this stage, and it might not be effective until the summer of 2020. If I am a partisan Democrat I would hold off until a failure to impeach and remove a President for partisan reasons alone makes electoral defeat for a Republican pol a near-certainty. The ultimate impeachment of the President is his rejection in his re-election bid.

If you wonder about me... I do not like political failure, but I am willing to see the Other Side get caught defending the misconduct of the current President and facing electoral defeat.  A new Democratic President, a continuing House majority, and a new Democratic Senate majority will make practically every Trump policy moot.

The investigation will continue, and it would be wise for Republicans to distance themselves from the President's misdeeds.

3. Voters believe, 51-38, that the Mueller Report did not clear the President of wrongdoing.  With the 46% who believe that the President committed a crime, I would guess that about 5% of voters believe that the wrongdoing  is trivial. Such is one possible interpretation.

Presumption of innocence in criminal cases is a cornerstone of American jurisprudence, and it is best that we make no exceptions on this.

4. The news media is an important part of democracy, 66 percent of American voters say, while 23 percent say the media is the "enemy of the people." Republicans say 49 - 36 percent that the news media is the enemy of the people. Every other listed party, gender, education, age and racial group says the media is an important part of democracy.

By 52 - 35 percent, voters trust the media more than Trump to tell the truth about important issues. Republicans trust Trump more than the media 82 - 9 percent. Trusting the media more are Democrats 92 - 2 percent and independent voters 54 - 29 percent.

Americans have accepted the term "Public Enemy" in the past to describe criminal marauders such as John Dillinger, the Barrow-Parker gang, "Pretty Boy Floyd", and the like. But even when it was being used to condemn overt criminals devoid of any excuses, it was never applied to opponents of political leadership. "Enemy of the People" was a stock phrase in Stalin's Soviet Union for someone doomed to torture and execution for running afoul of the dictator.

People who associate the stock phrase "Enemy of the People" with Stalin find it as appalling as "Master Race" or "Final Solution" among Nazi scum. Maybe something is wrong in American education -- we need to know what the American Way of Life excludes if America is not to become a nightmare like Nazi Germany, Stalin's Soviet Union, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Apartheid-era South Africa, contemporary Iran, or any other political order that demands unqualified obedience and personal subordination.

5. Employers should not be allowed to fire someone based on their sexual orientation or sexual identity, American voters say 92 - 6 percent.

Well, at least we have grown up on something as a nation. "Enemy of the People"? Our historical memories are too short on that one -- especially for Republicans, who used to be the staunchest anti-Communists in American public life.

[pbrower2a]

Source unknown, but it makes sense.  Take out the Hispanic component of Roman Catholics, and Catholics are probably much like mainline Protestants in accepting or rejecting Trump.

All that I can figure on Evangelical Christians is that they have come to believe that Donald Trump, however godless he may be, serves as a tool of God as no prior President has been.

[pbrower2a]

I don't know if Gallup has caught the trend or if it is just an outlier (likely it is), but I still expect we'll have a Post-Mueller bump. Mueller-fever has had the all MSM:s airtime in two long years. Mueller will testify in May, and, I'd say, that Collusion-coverage will mostly dies off by the fall.

Whatever the NEW news coverage will be about, it'll likely be way better for Trump than Mueller's investigation coverage with talking heads seeing the things.

It could also be that Trump supporters are less likely to read the report and are willing to accept that there is noting there. Reading the report takes intellectual effort.

[pbrower2a]

https://twitter.com/marcushjohnson/status/1124012566265716736

Statewide polls, of which I have seen few since the release of the Mueller Report, could be interesting. If this  even split of the white electorate were even across the country, then President Trump would be facing a nearly-complete loss in the Electoral College. All Hispanic minorities (except perhaps Cuban-Americans) are Democratic-leaning, and all non-white minorities are anti-Trump.

 

[pbrower2a]

Wow! It's hard for me to believe that the Mueller Report didn't cause Trump approval ratings to crater. Could it be that Trump supporters are in an impenetrable bubble? So the big mean Deep State and mainstream media have been picking upon the Great and Infallible Leader.

I might be the wrong person to interpret this, but

1. Many people have never even started to read the Mueller Report. To say that Trump would have won in 2016 without aid from Russian intelligence services is now specious. Whether one read even a part of it may depend upon whether one wants to connect Donald Trump to shady behavior or whether one does not want to believe such.

2. Many people do not understand how the law works. The legal definitions in statutory law and the rules of evidence are rigid. Nobody can spin a legal definition to say that some unauthorized taking of property is not larceny. Most people do what they can to have as few interactions with the legal system as possible because such dealings are usually expensive and devoid of any fun.

3. Those who still tend to believe Trump or want to achieve his agenda may assume that redactions are of exculpatory material. Yes, I hold Donald Trump in contempt even as a person, but I assume that exculpation would be for all to see. It is easier to exculpate than to convict. But why would exculpation be redacted?

4. Trump supporters are circling the wagons, so to speak. But over time one can expect some news to slip through the bubble.  Material behind "Harm to Ongoing Matter" and "Grand Jury" remains protected. Any exculpation would not be protected material. It is not my position to assume either exculpation or criminal activity  redacted from the report; such is a legal matter not open to public knowledge.  There can be no question that even if Donald Trump did not order or direct cheating he did nothing to tell people to not cheat on his behalf. 


5. Even if this poll is accurate, it suggests that Trump approval is low enough to give a Democrat a strong edge in 2020.   

[pbrower2a]

It would be nice if the media didn't praise every little thing the little fascist did. The local news is full of nothing but praise for the Great Leader. One of the local news sites even ran an article written by the local electric monopoly praising Trump's tax "cut." And no, it wasn't labeled as an op-ed.

Kentucky, huh? One of Trump's strongest states. Greater Louisville, Kentucky suburbs of Cincinnati, and maybe a college town or two are the few places in Kentucky in which Trump would do badly in any election.

Kentucky is not attractive to people moving in from out of state, so it is not drifting D as have Colorado and Virginia and such states as Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas are drifting. Educational standards are poor, so people are less likely to see something wrong with Trump rhetoric. In essence, if one did well in high-school geometry (a usual divide for being able to get through or get anything out of a college education) one can apply formal logic to political rhetoric and catch either propaganda or logical gaps.

How bad is Kentucky? One demographic indicator is that Kentuckians are the heaviest smokers in America by state. Smoking and socio-economic status (SES) are negatively correlated. Smoking is an anathema in elite events. One sees few people smoking outside Symphony Hall or near art galleries, but I see employees of dollar stores out for smoking breaks. A hint: never take a pack of cancerettes  to an interview for a job that pays much over the minimum wage. Kentucky also has an average state credit score far below the national average. No, it is not that Kentuckians are racking up huge credit-card bills at JC Penney, Wal*Mart, and Target -- it is that they are having a tough time paying rent, taxes, and utilities, which really wrecks one's credit rating.

Trump support remains strongest among under-educated white people, and that describes Kentucky far better than most states. Under-educated people are the ones most likely to fall for demagoguery of any kind and for any propaganda that fits their culture. It is telling that totalitarian regimes function most effectively among people barely literate, as in Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China, Castro's Cuba, "Socialist" Burma, Franco's Spain, thug Japan, North Korea,  fascist Italy, Ba'athist Iraq and Syria, ISIS-occupied areas, and wartime satellites (Finland clearly excepted as it was well-educated and never even authoritarian) of Nazi Germany. Hitler debased formal education in Germany to the extent that German prisoners of the US were found to typically need remedial education -- in a country once proud of its educational achievements. A hint: a degree from a German university was respected if from before 1933. From 1933 until 1945 a degree from German universities was suspect because the Nazis debased the universities into diploma mills. After 1945 a German university degree is respected again.

Totalitarian regimes are good at getting people to learn to read -- but not to think. The very word intelligence suggests the knack for 'reading between the lines'. The totalitarian state wants people to read so that it can accept propaganda and perhaps read instructions -- but it does not want people to think. To think is to question the authority of questionable leaders, and that requires the ability to see contradictions and thus either foolishness or deliberate deceit.

...I have seen the same sort of propaganda on a TV station owned by Sinclair (a/k/a "Stinking Liar") Broadcasting, at least until I quit watching that station's local news. "Stinking Liar" owns TV stations in Lexington, Cape Girardeau MO, Huntington WV, and Cincinnati,  which means penetration of big parts of Kentucky -- but surprisingly not areas in the Louisville market or near Evansville, Indiana). Of course FoX News is everywhere, and it tends to reinforce right-wing ideas. Although straight reporting on FoX is reliable, analysis on FoX is spin.

As low as educational standards are in Kentucky, it is easy to understand how low the journalistic standards are in small towns and small cities. All newspapers are struggling financially, but small-town papers are really struggling. The line between advertising and journalism is ideally clear in reputable papers, with corporate op-eds identified as such. In small towns, advertising as editorials might be good for sale of some more papers. Maybe the Podunk Tribune dares not sell advertising as news coverage, but it might get to run off a few hundred copies to sell to the entity that offered the story. That could be the difference between staying in business and going under.

In time, more people will be exposed to the reality of the awfulness of the Trump Presidency. 48% of the vote went against him, and that percentage will not shrink in 2020. Democrats got the majority of the votes for Congress in a state that went by 9.41% for Trump in 2016, as well in three other states (Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) that went for him -- and a plurality in Arizona went for Democrats in House elections. Trump's Party lost the total vote in all states for House elections in states that he lost. The Congressional vote allowed Americans to send a message; I question whether the President got the message.



    
    

[pbrower2a]

Morning Consult state tracking polls

Trade Indiana for Arizona, and it is identical to Obama in 2008.

Indiana? Trump can lose with Indiana, but no Republican has won the Presidency since the 1920s without winning the state by double digits. Net approval for the President in Indiana is only +3 (see also Georgia and Texas). Although net approval is not identical to the likely result in a forthcoming election, it is usually close.

Trumpmentum.

Yup. Down the drain or into the maelstrom.

[pbrower2a]

St. Leo University, April 22-29, 1000 adults (change from Feb.)

Approve 42 (+2)
Disapprove 55 (-3)

Strongly approve 22
Strongly disapprove 44

Has Trumps performance actually improved?

A 2% change either way is within the margin of error.

This is not one of my favorite pollsters, as it usually has a huge D advantage. If you dislike this poll, then just wait for another. Florida will be polled often. Trump is not winning Florida with a disapproval rating in the mid-fifties in this state.
 
Louisiana. A state that rarely gets polled on a one-state basis. The focus is on a gubernatorial race. The incumbent Democrat, John Bel Edwards, leads in a jungle primary but does not clinch in it -- but also projects to win against the Republicans in the run-off election.   

The poll also found Donald Trump’s support his slipped slightly. While Louisiana supported Trump during the 2016 election by a 58%-38% margin, his approval rating in the new survey is 54%, with 37% disapproval.

https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/elections/article_d72d7be2-7113-11e9-b659-77c319cf23d6.html

This is consistent with the tepid polling performances of the President that we have seen in Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas. Louisiana is not like one of those other states. I see Trump winning Louisiana, but not by his 2016 numbers. It does not change the map. 

Trump, net approval positive -- raw approval

55% and higher
50-54%
under 50%

tie (white)

Trump, net negative approval -- raw approval

43-49% with disapproval under 51% if approval 45% or higher
40-42%, or under 45% if disapproval is over 51%
under 40%

[pbrower2a]

In the RCP average, Trump's approval rating has reached the highest level since his inauguration with 44.4%

Hasn’t he reached that before several times? Isn’t he still two points lower than his last peak net approval?

Donald Trump made promises of infrastructure which resonated among people in the iron-and-steel business and in the concrete and glass businesses. Much of the coal is used in processing iron ore, so people involved in mining iron ore, limestone, and coal heard exactly what they wanted to hear from Trump. iron and steel are  big variable components in construction of buildings and highways. It turns out that the first Trump proposal was to simply turn low-cost infrastructure over to profiteering monopolists so that people would pay much more for what they were now getting for free or at modest cost.  So that is how many Obama supporters became Trump voters in 2016.

Such is my take, and that explains Ohio, which depends heavily upon production of glass, steel, and coal for what remains of its prosperity.   That was also enough to explain the shift of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin from Obama to Trump.

Trump cannot afford to lose much of the  vote that went from Obama to him.  If this is the only marginal vote that trended to Trump, it would not take much (numbers are net sing, D to R):

MI  9.69
PA  6.10
WI  7.71

to lose the three states that make the difference.OK, but what of states in which he came close?

ME 12.33
MN  6.18
NH  5.21
NV  4.26

A significant reversal of the swing takes these states out of meaningful contention.

[pbrower2a]

Trump's absolute approval rating on RCP is up to 44.6%, basically tied with June 4 2018 and October 25 where he had 44.6 and 44.7% approval. These are the highest numbers since the early part of his administration in February and March 2017 where he was around 45%.

Well we all know Trump is not going to fall south of 45% no matter what so I wouldn't read much into that.

In any event I am more concerned with disapproval than approval. It is difficult to undo disapproval, and 100 less disapproval is an obvious ceiling for the vote for him in the forthcoming election  -- barring that something unusual happens with his disapproval number.

We have different models for who the voters will be, and one of those models will be right. As an example, Rasmussen well fits an electorate of 2010 or 2014; such an electorate gives a GOP wave.  Such a model is obviously off for the electorates of 2006, 2008, 2012, or 2018.

....I do not as a rule predict the direction of polls except when some event seems to compel such, and the release of the Mueller Report seemed to have less impact, and perhaps even counterintuitive impact upon polling. 

[pbrower2a]

Trump is up to 45.1 in the rcp average.

His approval, imo, has gone from bad to mediocre (if you look at his ratings at this time compared to past presidents.

Gallup and nbc/wsj have him at 46%, which is higher tha reagan, carter, and obama

Not saying that is good or ideal, but it isn’t insurmountable at all to win re-election if you can just get those numbers up a tiny bit

With the Mueller investigation losing it's heat and the economy continuing to be good, it's likely that Trump's numbers will continue to rise the next few months.

Except at election time, movements of approval and disapproval inside the margin of error are statistical noise.

So what do you think is behind such redactions as "Harm to Ongoing Material" and "Grand Jury"?  I look at the sentence structure in the summaries before redaction, and I cannot assume that there will be any exoneration. "Investigative Technique" and "Personal Privacy"? Do we really need to know?

The investigation is far from complete. People have been convicted in courts of law. This is  not a McCarthy-style witch-hunt. Note well that the FBI ceases an investigation when its suspicion comes to an end, and tells all only in a court of law. The FBI does not beat confessions out of suspects. It has a large dragnet, and it asks a few questions of innocent people that might expose some of their knowledge that clears the innocent but implicates the guilty, collects evidence and examines it in one of the finest labs in the world, and eventually gets the perpetrators to turn against each other or to tell lies that implode.  Basically, find the liar, and you find the criminal.

Anything that exonerates people would not be redacted. What remains redacted is still under investigation. I have patience with that. I prefer that offenders not get away with crimes.

The FBI may not be a secret police in the sense of the Gestapo, Cheka/NKVD/OGPU/KGB, or Mukhabarat, but it is secretive. It releases its findings to the public at the worst possible time for a criminal defendant -- the criminal trial.

For an allegedly-strong economy, Trump is doing badly. Maybe he has offended too many sensibilities.

[pbrower2a]

INDIANA

This does change the map. Since 1920 no Republican has won the Presidency while winning Indiana with a margin less than 10%. On election night, Indiana is typically one of the first states to be called (2008 was a blatant exception) because it closes its polls at 7 PM and it usually doesn't have much of a contest for the Presidency. The only Democrats to win Indiana outright in any Presidential election since 1920 were FDR (1932 and 1936), LBJ in 1964, and Obama in 2008. But what happens when Indiana is close? Truman barely lost the state in 1948 and would have had a landslide without the defection of Dixiecrat racists.

So on November 3, 2020, and you are a Republican and hear at 7PM that Donald Trump wins Indiana with a lead of 8%, then how do you feel?

Based in the historical pattern, you might have little to cheer that night. You are going to be biting your nails as the results come in from Ohio, and you might want to watch a sporting event or an old movie around 9PM as the vote comes in from Michigan and Wisconsin. 

President Donald Trump’s job approval sits just barely under water.  Overall, 46% of Indiana voters approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 48% disapprove (-2% net job approval).  Split along party lines, his approval is at 82% with Republicans, while 89 % of Democrats disapprove of his job performance.  Among Independents, just 35% approve of his job performance, while 45% disapprove.   

   

http://www.weaskamerica.com/surveys/2019/5/9/indiana-statewide-survey-of-registered-voters

This is registered voters. As conservative as Indiana is I expect Trump to pick up practically of the undecided voters, which will be enough to win Indiana. But for any Republican nominee for President, a bare win of Indiana suggests big trouble.

Not a great pollster, but if you are a Republican, then this is very bad news. Trump loses Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Ohio -- maybe even Texas -- before he wins Indiana. This could even be literal with respect to timing.   

Trump, net approval positive -- raw approval

55% and higher
50-54%
under 50%

tie (white)

Trump, net negative approval -- raw approval

43-49% with disapproval under 51% if approval 45% or higher
40-42%, or under 45% if disapproval is over 51%
under 40%

[pbrower2a]

I'm not using this set of polls. I use it as an illustration of what biased polls (commissioned by Big Business) look like.



I will be back with the link.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/gop-poll-reassuring-for-trump-in-key-states-but-offers-warning-about-michigan

I include nothing.

[pbrower2a]

Iowa: PPP, April 29-30, 780 RV

Approve 49
Disapprove 49

2020: Trump 48, generic D 48

This suggests that President Trump is not being hurt so far by the release of the Mueller report. It could be that people who have already decided that they will  never vote for him already made their decision and the report at most reinforces their disdain for him, and that those who would vote for him could be defending their 2016 vote by approving of him in a tough moment for him. Iowa will be close. It is no longer the same state politically that gave Obama a near-double-digit martin in 2008, but neither will it be quite the same state that gave Trump a near-double-digit margin in 2016.  Intensity of the disdain for an incumbent does not give one more votes.

Note that only 2% of people are undecided on whether they approve or disapprove of Trump, and only 4% are undecided on whether to vote for Trump or for "Generic Democrat". 

Iowa will not decide the Presidential election. Wisconsin is the likely tipping-point state, and it puts a Democrat at 278 electoral votes and Trump at 272. Iowa is slightly more R than Wisconsin, but it is unlikely to be the difference between 266 and 272 electoral votes for the Democrat.   

Trump, net approval positive -- raw approval

55% and higher
50-54%
under 50%

tie (white)

Trump, net negative approval -- raw approval

43-49% with disapproval under 51% if approval 45% or higher
40-42%, or under 45% if disapproval is over 51%
under 40%

[pbrower2a]

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1128162217625575425

He's not winning with those numbers.

Scott W. Rasmussen? That Scott Rasmussen?

[pbrower2a]

Were economic stewardship the exclusive measure of relevance in elections, then Obama should have won a landslide victory in 2012. Likewise, Trump should be facing a landslide victory. Obama was a good President; Trump offends too many sensibilities.

"It's the economy, stupid" applies to a President bumbling with the economy. When times are fairly good, other things go to the fore. Corruption? Foreign  policy?

[pbrower2a]

Texas. Emerson.

President Trump has a 46% approval/44% disapproval in Texas. However, he remains popular within his party, leading Republican opponent former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld 87% to 13%. (n=344, +/-5.3%). This is consistent with other Emerson polls conducted in different states over the past several months.

https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/2020-texas-biden-and-beto-in-dead-heat-in-democratic-primary

Note the huge margin of error. That reflects Texas itself due to huge regional differences and the obvious reality that the state has not usually in play politically in any statewide races.

A 13% support for Bill Weld in Texas indicates potential trouble for the President not in getting re-nominated for President, but instead that dissent already is forming within the Republican Party and among conservatives. Weld has no particular ties to Texas, so should Trump approval stay around 45% in Texas, then the state could easily go 47% D, 45% T, and 8% C: "D" for the Democratic nominee, "T" for Trump, and "C" for some conservative third-party or independent alternative.

Texas, as if I need repeat myself, looks to be straddling the 400-EV line for any Democratic nominee for President as it has since the late 1980s.   

Trump, net approval positive -- raw approval

55% and higher
50-54%
under 50%

tie (white)

Trump, net negative approval -- raw approval

43-49% with disapproval under 51% if approval 45% or higher
40-42%, or under 45% if disapproval is over 51%
under 40%

[pbrower2a]

OK, to check my own impressions on the relative noisiness of the YouGov polls, I plotted their daily Trump approval ratings for the last month.  This is the rating among adults from 538's database.



Weekly approval among adults in the same time period was 41, 42, 42, 42, 39.

You can decide for yourself which one is noisier.

Plot the binomial given that Trump's "true" approval is 42% and 1000 voters.

n=1000
p=0.42
print numpy.random.binomial(n, p, 20)/10

gave me

[44 44 41 42 39 43 40 39 42 41 44 40 40 41 41 44 43 43 42 44]

Noisy enough? Stat 101.

I think you've just (inadvertently?) supported the point I was trying to make.  Yes, that kind of noise is quite natural in a random variation.  And that's exactly why people shouldn't be keen on pointing out a daily jump from 41 to 45, as a certain person did upthread. 

YouGov's weekly results have a flatter trend; maybe this is due to some methodological difference, maybe not.   To me, that makes them more useful than looking at daily fluctuations.

...and that's why we have the concept of margin of error. A minor change in approval or disapproval is meaningless. 4% or more? Much so.

[pbrower2a]

Wasn’t someone here extrapolating up from his bump to posit Trump at 50% on Election Day? LOL.

I heard they also bought heavily into the stock market when the DJIA hit 26,900.

I bought in in 2009, but I would have sold out a year ago. I had to sell out earlier when my father went into a nursing home, and since then I have been poor in a culture that values nothing other than material gain and indulgence instead of the people who make such possible.

[pbrower2a]

Hart Research for National Security Action (D), April 23-27, 1205 LV

Approve 44
Disapprove 56

Lots of questions on national security and foreign policy.

Republicans have usually owned those issues in Presidential elections -- but not with Trump as President.

[pbrower2a]

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2622

Quinnipiac University, 1,078 RV, MAY 16-20.

38 (-3)
57!!! (+2)


So Rasmussen did, indeed, show the trend. Who would believe that? Rasmussen!

The nation's economy is "excellent," 22 percent of American voters say in a Quinnipiac University National Poll today, the highest "excellent" rating for the economy. Another 49 percent of voters say the economy is "good." The total 71 percent for "excellent" and "good" is the highest total number for American voter attitudes on the economy in almost 18 years.

Some 52 percent of American voters say they are better off financially today than they were in 2016, while 21 percent say they are worse off and 23 percent say they are the same.

But American voters give President Donald Trump a negative 38 - 57 percent approval rating, compared to a negative 41 - 55 percent approval in a May 2 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University National Poll.

American voters give Trump mixed grades for his handling of the economy as 48 percent approve and 45 percent disapprove. He gets negative grades for handling other issues:
37 - 58 percent for handling foreign policy;
39 - 53 percent for handling trade;
40 - 50 percent for handling the nation's policy toward China;
37 - 47 percent for handling the nation's policy toward Iran.
Voters say 48 - 40 percent the president's trade policies are bad for the U.S. economy, and say 44 - 36 percent that these policies are bad for their personal financial situation.

FAKE NEWS!

Also:

In the 2020 general election for president, if Donald Trump is the Republican
candidate, would you definitely vote for him, consider voting for him, or would you
definitely not vote for him?

Definitely yes 31 (-2)
Consider 12 (-1)
Definitely no 54 (+2)

Although Rasmussen Reports usually gives an unduly rosy view of Trump approval, movements in it can suggest real change that others might show independently.


The "Definitely no" must obviously now include some conservatives that the President has rubbed the wrong way, and the "consider" must now be a rather Right-leaning lot. America may be more liberal than it was in 2010 through 2016 -- but not that much. "Definitely no" sounds like a sticky number only to the detriment of the President's chances.

It is not America that has abandoned conservatism; it is Donald Trump who has betrayed it. Republicans have typically owned foreign policy for almost forty years, with Democratic Presidents such as Clinton and Obama getting away with their foreign policy by sticking close to the GOP orthodoxy. Conservatives used to have patriotism as an appeal -- until Trump.

The only way in which Donald Trump can win re-election in an honest election is if the liberal side of the political spectrum should rift, which seems not to be happening with the "quarterback controversy" that the Democrats now have. 

The "definitely no" number suggests at the least a near-landslide defeat of this President. A map may be in order.

[pbrower2a]

An exercise in predicting how margins would change the map. This is what a nearly-even popular vote would look like for President Trump. Trump actually lost the popular vote in 2016 because Hillary Clinton was still running up huge margins in states such as California, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Washington while Trump was winning the states that got close. This is a map of how I see an even popular vote going to Trump:

 

Trump/Pence 351
Sacrificial lambs 186

The most volatile states are likely the closest states, although that is not a strict rule. You can argue that Colorado or Virginia might somehow end up voting for the sacrificial lambs of 2020 -- but any state that was for Clinton by a marginal edge of 3% or so ends up going to Trump.

The popular vote going as it did in 2016 gives a result much like that of  2016, except perhaps for one or two states of the Trump win going to the Democrat.  Trump still wins: the Democrat must win Michigan, Pennsylvania, and one of either Arizona, Iowa, or Wisconsin.

Relying entirely upon demographics in which the new (largely Millennial-Generation) voters offset the departure of older voters from death and senility, a Democrat could in theory win the Presidential election with about a 2% shift of the popular vote. The shift would be strongest in the states closer to ties in 2016 and least in states that were never in contention in 2016.

 

(people cuing "Happy Days Are Here Again some time between 11PM and midnight EST) 288
Trump/Pence  249

popular-vote margin about 5% D



I consider Florida much less volatile than other states, in view of its recent pattern of voting. The Democrat is close there, as in any state in blue on the previous map that makes the shift -- and Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina, and Ohio. I'm choosing ME-02 and NE-02 as the districts that vote differently from their states at large; NE-02 was much closer than NE-02.   Trump picks up nothing, but loses 67 electoral votes from what he got in 2016. Somehow I think that Iowa will revert to its norm and give its electoral votes to the Democrat.

The Democrat wins a nail-biter of an election.

So what happens if Trump loses 55-45? The states are probably as polarized as they have been in Obama elections...  

 



(people cuing "Happy Days Are Here Again some time between 11PM and midnight EST) 373
Trump/Pence  165

In practice the zone between 310 and 360 electoral votes for the eventual winner is an unstable zone. A candidate barely behind might choose to make some shifts of resources from places where he is out of range of winning to critical states that can make or break him. That could mean changing the emphasis of the campaign, making more appearances, or spending more money on advertising. The leader at the time is likely to seek to solidify leads into holds and let the calendar run out while taking effort away from states no longer in easy reach.  But once the lagger stares as the leader holding 320-350 electoral votes, the lagger usually starts to make  
gambles to win states not really in reach at the expense of states that are close that he really needs to win. Thus one sees John McCain making a quixotic effort to win Pennsylvania while neglecting such states as Florida and Ohio.

This is electoral strategy, and not a prediction of how individual states will go.  Beyond this -- it is hard to see, after Texas, what states are 'next'. The core coalition of the GOP is cracking at such a point, and it is more prophecy than anything else to predict how that coalition cracks.

[pbrower2a]

Whoops! Instead of renovating an old post and showing it as a new post, I simply modified the old post. The state in question has the second-largest number of electoral votes,  so I re-post the poll here.
 
Texas. Emerson.

President Trump has a 46% approval/44% disapproval in Texas. However, he remains popular within his party, leading Republican opponent former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld 87% to 13%. (n=344, +/-5.3%). This is consistent with other Emerson polls conducted in different states over the past several months.

https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/2020-texas-biden-and-beto-in-dead-heat-in-democratic-primary

Note the huge margin of error. That reflects Texas itself due to huge regional differences and the obvious reality that the state has not usually in play politically in any statewide races.

A 13% support for Bill Weld in Texas indicates potential trouble for the President not in getting re-nominated for President, but instead that dissent already is forming within the Republican Party and among conservatives. Weld has no particular ties to Texas, so should Trump approval stay around 45% in Texas, then the state could easily go 47% D, 45% T, and 8% C: "D" for the Democratic nominee, "T" for Trump, and "C" for some conservative third-party or independent alternative.

Texas, as if I need repeat myself, looks to be straddling the 400-EV line for any Democratic nominee for President as it has since the late 1980s.   

Trump, net approval positive -- raw approval

55% and higher
50-54%
under 50%

tie (white)

Trump, net negative approval -- raw approval

43-49% with disapproval under 51% if approval 45% or higher
40-42%, or under 45% if disapproval is over 51%
under 40%

[pbrower2a]