Trump approval ratings thread, 1.4

[LimoLiberal]

NBC/WSJ

Approve - 46 (+2)
Disapprove - 51 (-1)


Taken entirely after Manafort/Cohen news.

This is the highest number I’ve seen for Trump in a live caller poll.

Post reported by Torie as trolling.

[IceSpear]

Andrew is lying again. The poll is from the 18th to the 22nd, only covering one day of the Cohen/Manafort news.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[KingSweden]

Andrew is lying again. The poll is from the 18th to the 22nd, only covering one day of the Cohen/Manafort news.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Whoa Limo omitting info that doesn’t suit his narrative? Who’d have thought

[Torie]

NBC/WSJ

Approve - 46 (+2)
Disapprove - 51 (-1)


Taken entirely after Manafort/Cohen news.

This is the highest number I’ve seen for Trump in a live caller poll.

You did not provide a link to the poll. That is one of the rules I set for you. And so it took some work to find out your factual statement was false. So I am infracting this post as trolling. In addition, I want you to put up the dates during which the polling was done. Consider that another rule. Honestly, LL, you would be better off not participating in these polling threads. You have already been banned from doing it on the Congressional Board. You keep this up, and you will not be permitted to do it here either, either because Muon2 plays with the software to prevent it, or because I just start automatically deleting all of your posts on polling threads. LL, you are not taking me seriously, and that hurts my feelings.

[LimoLiberal]

I legitimately didn't read the rest of the write-up because I was in a rush... sorry. I think the way NBC presented it on social media was a bit confusing. I saw "Trump approval ratings steady after Cohen/Manafort", clicked, saw 46-51, and thought that was the only number. So I apologize.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

God bless you, LimoLiberal. 

[Torie]

I legitimately didn't read the rest of the write-up because I was in a rush... sorry. I think the way NBC presented it on social media was a bit confusing. I saw "Trump approval ratings steady after Cohen/Manafort", clicked, saw 46-51, and thought that was the only number. So I apologize.

OK, but you also forgot to provide the link, which is what resulted in the infraction. You should print out a list of all of the rules I set for you, so that when you "are in a rush" you don't slip up. I think there may have been a more recent poll published prior to the date you put up your poll with more negative numbers for Trump, which you didn't note, which would be an additional violation. The moral of the story, is that don't post here when in a rush. Rather, do it only when you have the time, and consider that given your history, it is like navigating through a minefield, so all the i's need to be dotted, and "t's crossed.

It would be easier for me to just tell you not to post on this thread at all. But I am trying to be fair to you, and give you a chance. I want you to stop being a high maintenance poster for me.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Here are the details on the two NBC polls from last week.  First, their regular monthly(ish) poll: Aug. 18-22, 900 RV (change from previous month):

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_creative/18798NBCWSJAugustPoll.pdf

Approve 46 (+1)
Disapprove 51 (-1)

Strongly approve 30 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 44 (nc)

Then they did a flash poll later in the week: Aug 22-25, 600 RV (change from the first poll):

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_creative/18852NBCWSJAugustN=600FlashPoll.pdf

Approve 44 (-2)
Disapprove 52 (+1)

Strongly approve 31 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 43 (-1)

Suggestion for the troll: take time to find all the facts before being in such a hurry to push your narrative.  You squander whatever credibility might attach to your point by being wrong.

[LimoLiberal]

Here are the details on the two NBC polls from last week.  First, their regular monthly(ish) poll: Aug. 18-22, 900 RV (change from previous month):

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_creative/18798NBCWSJAugustPoll.pdf

Approve 46 (+1)
Disapprove 51 (-1)

Strongly approve 30 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 44 (nc)

Then they did a flash poll later in the week: Aug 22-25, 600 RV (change from the first poll):

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_creative/18852NBCWSJAugustN=600FlashPoll.pdf

Approve 44 (-2)
Disapprove 52 (+1)

Strongly approve 31 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 43 (-1)

Suggestion for the troll: take time to find all the facts before being in such a hurry to push your narrative.  You squander whatever credibility might attach to your point by being wrong.

Request for Georgia Moderate: Name another instance this year (or last year for that matter) in which a polling company did two consecutive polls and wrote up both of them instead of just doing just one.

[Badger]

Here are the details on the two NBC polls from last week.  First, their regular monthly(ish) poll: Aug. 18-22, 900 RV (change from previous month):

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_creative/18798NBCWSJAugustPoll.pdf

Approve 46 (+1)
Disapprove 51 (-1)

Strongly approve 30 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 44 (nc)

Then they did a flash poll later in the week: Aug 22-25, 600 RV (change from the first poll):

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_creative/18852NBCWSJAugustN=600FlashPoll.pdf

Approve 44 (-2)
Disapprove 52 (+1)

Strongly approve 31 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 43 (-1)

Suggestion for the troll: take time to find all the facts before being in such a hurry to push your narrative.  You squander whatever credibility might attach to your point by being wrong.

Request for Georgia Moderate: Name another instance this year (or last year for that matter) in which a polling company did two consecutive polls and wrote up both of them instead of just doing just one.

Request for Andrew, aka Limo "Liberal", name two consecutive posts you've made in the last heard (or last year for that matter) in which you werent trolling.

[pbrower2a]

As a general rule I do not predict how polls will change. I comment after change -- perhaps about reaction to events, but especially after a collapse or miraculous rise. Putrid results in unlikely places (let us say a 45-51 approval rating in Kansas) should a be warning signal, and unusually good results in unlikely places (let us say 45-51 in Connecticut) should be causes for delight for a Republican President.  With President Trump, approval polls started mediocre and have largely stabilized at 'awful'. Barring freakish circumstances, he will need miracles to rescue his Presidency from defeat in his re-election bid. Whoops -- miracles are themselves freakish circumstances. 

I know what many say. First, we have the adage that the only poll that really matters is the electoral result. But voting relies heavily upon either identity or upon the perception of performance. A low approval rating indicates often  that one is either a poor match for the cultural climate (and, yes, that can change to the detriment of any politician -- and it rarely works in his favor!) or that he is not satisfying the electorate. Maybe he can't achieve his promises... or he is neglecting them. Another is that things are going spectacularly wrong -- military and diplomatic debacles, or a severe economic downturn.

Before someone tells us that Donald Trump is doing about as badly as Ronald Reagan did at roughly this time in 1982... Reagan was giving America harsh economic medicine that Jimmy Carter lacked the guts to do. The solution to stagflation is to get people to do more work, and to do it cheaper. So just to survive, people with crappy, low-paying jobs that the hated took second crappy, low-paying jobs that they hated  and got a little more income while keeping stores open more hours and staffing restaurants with people who in good times think such beneath them.

Real hourly pay may have fallen, but productivity rose. It was a raw deal, but one can't argue with the electoral results of 1984.

I doubt that Reaganomics would work similarly well in 2020 as it did in 1984. Trump economic policy is a muddle -- and then there is his foreign policy. Is Trump the new Reagan? Not in the least.   

[GeorgiaModerate]

As a general rule I do not predict how polls will change. I comment after change -- perhaps about reaction to events, but especially after a collapse or miraculous rise. Putrid results in unlikely places (let us say a 45-51 approval rating in Kansas) should a be warning signal, and unusually good results in unlikely places (let us say 45-51 in Connecticut) should be causes for delight for a Republican President.  With President Trump, approval polls started mediocre and have largely stabilized at 'awful'. Barring freakish circumstances, he will need miracles to rescue his Presidency from defeat in his re-election bid. Whoops -- miracles are themselves freakish circumstances. 

I know what many say. First, we have the adage that the only poll that really matters is the electoral result. But voting relies heavily upon either identity or upon the perception of performance. A low approval rating indicates often  that one is either a poor match for the cultural climate (and, yes, that can change to the detriment of any politician -- and it rarely works in his favor!) or that he is not satisfying the electorate. Maybe he can't achieve his promises... or he is neglecting them. Another is that things are going spectacularly wrong -- military and diplomatic debacles, or a severe economic downturn.

Before someone tells us that Donald Trump is doing about as badly as Ronald Reagan did at roughly this time in 1982... Reagan was giving America harsh economic medicine that Jimmy Carter lacked the guts to do. The solution to stagflation is to get people to do more work, and to do it cheaper. So just to survive, people with crappy, low-paying jobs that the hated took second crappy, low-paying jobs that they hated  and got a little more income while keeping stores open more hours and staffing restaurants with people who in good times think such beneath them.

Real hourly pay may have fallen, but productivity rose. It was a raw deal, but one can't argue with the electoral results of 1984.

I doubt that Reaganomics would work similarly well in 2020 as it did in 1984. Trump economic policy is a muddle -- and then there is his foreign policy. Is Trump the new Reagan? Not in the least.   

While it's true that Trump's overall ratings are similar to those of Reagan or Clinton at similar points in their terms, Trump's strong disapproval ratings are much higher than theirs were.  Trump has alienated a very large segment of the electorate to the point that it would be almost impossible for him to win them over.  In contrast, Reagan and Clinton's opposition was much softer.  Also, Reagan and Clinton were both masterful politicians and genuinely likable people who had the skills to win back a big chunk of those who disapproved of them.  Trump doesn't have the personality or skills to do the same thing.

[twenty42]

As a general rule I do not predict how polls will change. I comment after change -- perhaps about reaction to events, but especially after a collapse or miraculous rise. Putrid results in unlikely places (let us say a 45-51 approval rating in Kansas) should a be warning signal, and unusually good results in unlikely places (let us say 45-51 in Connecticut) should be causes for delight for a Republican President.  With President Trump, approval polls started mediocre and have largely stabilized at 'awful'. Barring freakish circumstances, he will need miracles to rescue his Presidency from defeat in his re-election bid. Whoops -- miracles are themselves freakish circumstances. 

I know what many say. First, we have the adage that the only poll that really matters is the electoral result. But voting relies heavily upon either identity or upon the perception of performance. A low approval rating indicates often  that one is either a poor match for the cultural climate (and, yes, that can change to the detriment of any politician -- and it rarely works in his favor!) or that he is not satisfying the electorate. Maybe he can't achieve his promises... or he is neglecting them. Another is that things are going spectacularly wrong -- military and diplomatic debacles, or a severe economic downturn.

Before someone tells us that Donald Trump is doing about as badly as Ronald Reagan did at roughly this time in 1982... Reagan was giving America harsh economic medicine that Jimmy Carter lacked the guts to do. The solution to stagflation is to get people to do more work, and to do it cheaper. So just to survive, people with crappy, low-paying jobs that the hated took second crappy, low-paying jobs that they hated  and got a little more income while keeping stores open more hours and staffing restaurants with people who in good times think such beneath them.

Real hourly pay may have fallen, but productivity rose. It was a raw deal, but one can't argue with the electoral results of 1984.

I doubt that Reaganomics would work similarly well in 2020 as it did in 1984. Trump economic policy is a muddle -- and then there is his foreign policy. Is Trump the new Reagan? Not in the least.   

While it's true that Trump's overall ratings are similar to those of Reagan or Clinton at similar points in their terms, Trump's strong disapproval ratings are much higher than theirs were.  Trump has alienated a very large segment of the electorate to the point that it would be almost impossible for him to win them over.  In contrast, Reagan and Clinton's opposition was much softer.  Also, Reagan and Clinton were both masterful politicians and genuinely likable people who had the skills to win back a big chunk of those who disapproved of them.  Trump doesn't have the personality or skills to do the same thing.

You do realize that Trump trailed Clinton by 20 points when he entered the race in 2015, right? I think it is fair to say that he won over some people in the 2016 election who previously disapproved of him.

[Reaganfan]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

[pbrower2a]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

44% approval and 47% disapproval? An incumbent can win with that. Obama did, and he exemplifies what it takes -- a well-run, spirited campaign able to turn undecided voters into squishy support. A vote is just the same whether it comes from fanatical or squishy support. 44% approval and 52% disapproval? Nothing works. Campaign efforts such as canvassing backfire. Ad campaigns are either preaching to the choir or ludicrous failures.

If you are for Trump, then you must recognize how stable his ratings are at a low level.  I'm not saying that they will get worse after the Manafort conviction and the Cohen plea bargain; I think that he has gone as far down as he can. "Good news" will not be enough to rescue him. Change in the political culture? He's trying to force it through his loud campaign rallies. That does not work. With Ronald Reagan the change in political culture was the rise of Protestant fundamentalists who took on reactionary values in social and economic values that made the near-sweep of 49 states possible.

He has offended people on issues that have seemingly no connection -- reproductive rights, gun control, and the environment. He has not pitted them against each other; he has united them. His tariffs are likely to hurt the blue-collar workers that he picked off from Democrats in 2016 with vague promises of infrastructure, and perhaps farmers and ranchers who usually vote Republican out of a concern for taxes.
  
The Trump economic policy is nothing more than crony capitalism running amok, with high tariffs as a compensation for huge tax cuts for the Master Class.

Trump is not Obama. He's not Clinton or Reagan. His opponents think him horrible, and they are more numerous than those of Obama.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

It took Bush 2 terms of disasters to get there. Trump is little over a quarter through his first term

[pbrower2a]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

It took Bush 2 terms of disasters to get there. Trump is little over a quarter through his first term

Actually, about a third. The economy has yet to melt down on this President, and there are not great numbers of body bags returning from an American war.

This President has a core support that seems to accept him no matter what he does, and that explains why he does not yet have disapproval below the high 30s nationwide at any time, and that his disapproval ratings are remarkably stable (if unusually high for a president after a year and a half).

[Inmate Trump]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

It took Bush 2 terms of disasters to get there. Trump is little over a quarter through his first term

Actually, about a third. The economy has yet to melt down on this President, and there are not great numbers of body bags returning from an American war.

This President has a core support that seems to accept him no matter what he does, and that explains why he does not yet have disapproval below the high 30s nationwide at any time, and that his disapproval ratings are remarkably stable (if unusually high for a president after a year and a half).

Considering the economy is pretty good, I’m actually surprised his poll numbers aren’t higher.  If he would stop tweeting every stupid thought in his head, his numbers would probably be higher.  That’s impossible for him to do though.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Montana: WPA Intelligence (R), Aug. 20-22, 600 likely voters

Approve 54
Disapprove 44

[GeorgiaModerate]

Texas: Emerson, Aug. 22-25, 550 registered voters

Approve 44
Disapprove 46

[GeorgiaModerate]

Gallup weekly:

Approve 41 (-1)
Disapprove 54 (+2)

[The Mikado]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

It took Bush 2 terms of disasters to get there. Trump is little over a quarter through his first term

Today exactly marks the 40% point of Trump's (first?) term.

[twenty42]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

The difference we had actual dumpster fires going on in 2007-2008 and not manufactured ones. The economy was going down the toilet, the two wars were at the height of their unpopularity, and Capitol Hill gridlock was tighter than a bad back. We had much bigger problems at the end of Bush's administration than the president using naughty words on Twitter or eating two pieces of cake instead of one.

[Dr. Arch]

I do find it amazing how Bush's approval rating was over 20 pts lower than a guy who has all three networks and 2/3 cable networks talking scandal, impeachment, Watergate-style stories on him 24/7. In todays day and age, I see 44-50% approvals and I kinda shrug and say, "Meh". If it was 22% or 24%, then I'd be like, "Holy cow."

The difference we had actual dumpster fires going on in 2007-2008 and not manufactured ones. The economy was going down the toilet, the two wars were at the height of their unpopularity, and Capitol Hill gridlock was tighter than a bad back. We had much bigger problems at the end of Bush's administration than the president using naughty words on Twitter or eating two pieces of cake instead of one.

"Two pieces of cake intead of one"... As far as disingenuous and misrepresentative statements go, this one takes the cake (pun intended). There are far larger ethical and human rights concerns with this farce of a president than what food he puts into his mouth.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

Gallup weekly:

Approve 41 (-1)
Disapprove 54 (+2)

Good to see numbers before the inevitable  NAFTA bump coming up. The Midwest will revert to 2016 levels from that victory.