Trump approval ratings thread 1.5

[Person Man]

I think OH and maybe FL may tilt Democratic this time

I wish. That poll about the economy definitely weakens Trump's biggest asset as a narrative, but that's still way too optimistic.

AP has always been a good counter to Rassy. It's just too bad that Rassy is everyday.

I can but that he probably right between 39 and 47% approval rating. Probably slightly closer to 42 than 43, though. 538 is the prognosticator I turn to right now. Even when they are wrong, they are the least wrong.

At this rate, he probably loses the popular vote between 2 (to do better than this, he would have to have the Democrats to run the worse campaign in applicable history) and 8 points (Democrats actually run a really good campaign).

[GeorgiaModerate]

CNN/SSRS, June 28-30, 1613 adults including 1466 RV (1-month change)

Adults:

Approve 43 (nc)
Disapprove 52 (-1)

RV:

Approve 45 (+2)
Disapprove 51 (-2)

[pbrower2a]

I think OH and maybe FL may tilt Democratic this time

I wish. That poll about the economy definitely weakens Trump's biggest asset as a narrative, but that's still way too optimistic.

AP has always been a good counter to Rassy. It's just too bad that Rassy is everyday.

I can but that he probably right between 39 and 47% approval rating. Probably slightly closer to 42 than 43, though. 538 is the prognosticator I turn to right now. Even when they are wrong, they are the least wrong.

At this rate, he probably loses the popular vote between 2 (to do better than this, he would have to have the Democrats to run the worse campaign in applicable history) and 8 points (Democrats actually run a really good campaign).

I have been using approval and disapproval as proxies for The Donald's chance of re-election since January 2017 as a prediction of how the vote would go. Of course this is less significant than "vote for/vote against". A year from now, approval and disapproval will be afterthoughts because there will be a likely Democratic nominee and we will see whether Trump can do better in campaigns when he can no longer get away with speaking only to fanatical supporters.  

At first I had only favorability (so people expect the best of him?); then it became approval. In fact I preferred my own convoluted metric as 100-DIS, figuring that Trump will not win over those who disapprove of him but would have some chance of winning over the undecided. Thus if I saw his numbers as

47 approve, 49 disapprove

in Ohio in accordance with a respectable poll, then Trump would win the undecided and end up winning Ohio 51-49. Obviously there is some possibility for events to shape things to the benefit of a pol, and there is the pesky margin of error in even the best polling. (OK, Obama was at 45-51 in one respectable poll in Ohio while Osama bin Laden was still alive. Obama ended up winning Ohio in 2012, but even that was within the margin of error. Besides, it is easier to win if one has a tangible achievement behind one, especially if that tangible achievement is the dead body of the most reviled terrorist in world history.

Trump is riding what looks like a strong economy, but that cannot solve all his problems. He is still an arrogant, corrupt, unforgiving man who sees any criticism of his objectives or methods as gross disloyalty. Knowing what I know about the late Fidel Castro (I do not attribute corruption to him; he may have done far better in hiding a sybaritic life than Trump has been) I see far more in common between Trump and Castro than between Obama and Castro.

(A warning -- this fits the "hostile witness" category):

https://www.pacificpundit.com/2019/03/02/nbc-ken-dilanian-compares-trump-to-castro/

Someone who actually had been in one of Castro's prisons on an extended stay:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Y4aj0DJ7Co

[GeorgiaModerate]

Gallup, June 19-30, 1018 adults (2-week change)

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

Strongly approve 29
Strongly disapprove 44

(No priors for "strongly")

Should Trump be impeached and removed from office?

Yes 45
No 53

[GeorgiaModerate]

The Economist/YouGov weekly tracker, June 30-July 2, 1500 adults including 1265 RV


Adults:

Approve 41 (-1)
Disapprove 49 (+1)

Strongly approve 23 (-2)
Strongly disapprove 39 (+2)

Generic D 43 (+5), Trump 34 (-1)


RV:

Approve 44 (nc)
Disapprove 53 (+2)

Strongly approve 27 (-2)
Strongly disapprove 44 (+2)

Generic D 49 (+3), Trump 39 (-1)

GCB (RV only): D 48 (+2), R 39 (-2)

[Person Man]

Gallup, June 19-30, 1018 adults (2-week change)

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

Strongly approve 29
Strongly disapprove 44

(No priors for "strongly")

Should Trump be impeached and removed from office?

Yes 45
No 53

So there you have it. 45% will definitely voting Democrat and 41% will definitely be voting for him.
14% are either right smack in the middle or don't have an opinion but still want to vote.

If Trump wins them 2:1, He will do about about as well as W or Obama did when they got reelected.
If the Democrat wins them 2:1, He will be somewhere in McCain, Dukakis, or Dole territory.

We all know the narrative.

If he's winning. The few randos that bring it up will be like "Gee.. Obama's an idiot! Obamacare is socialism, right? I'm perfectly happy with what the company is giving me but its good that people have more options if they aren't getting it, I guess.  But hey!  Romney is kind of weird and makes me uncomfortable. I mean 47% of us are takers?! Give me a break!  Heck it! I'm voting for Obama..again I really want someone new to be president and maybe they will put someone up there in 4 years worth voting for, right?"

or quite simply "Anybody but Bush, but Kerry!"

Once I even heard at 6 oclock on Election Night, "I was ready to vote for Kerry but when I got in the voting booth, a voice told me to vote for Bush".

 

[Person Man]

The Economist/YouGov weekly tracker, June 30-July 2, 1500 adults including 1265 RV


Adults:

Approve 41 (-1)
Disapprove 49 (+1)

Strongly approve 23 (-2)
Strongly disapprove 39 (+2)

Generic D 43 (+5), Trump 34 (-1)


RV:

Approve 44 (nc)
Disapprove 53 (+2)

Strongly approve 27 (-2)
Strongly disapprove 44 (+2)

Generic D 49 (+3), Trump 39 (-1)

GCB (RV only): D 48 (+2), R 39 (-2)

There's been a lot D-friendly samples. The press has been sucking up to Trump for DAYS now trying to portray him as some economic and foreign policy genius but there also has been the concentration camp thing.

[pbrower2a]

Keating Research for the Denver Post. Favorability, so I won't show it on the map.

Trump 42-55, which is close to the most recent approval rating for Colorado. It does give letter grades, and how I interpret those

A (strongly approve) 24%
B (somewhat approve) 17%
C (mediocre) 11%
D (somewhat disapprove) 12%
F (strongly disapprove) 37% 

Favorability for Senator Cory Gardner is at 40% with 39% unfavorable. 

 

[President Johnson]

Keating Research for the Denver Post. Favorability, so I won't show it on the map.

Trump 42-55, which is close to the most recent approval rating for Colorado. It does give letter grades, and how I interpret those

A (strongly approve) 24%
B (somewhat approve) 17%
C (mediocre) 11%
D (somewhat disapprove) 12%
F (strongly disapprove) 37% 

Favorability for Senator Cory Gardner is at 40% with 39% unfavorable. 

 

Both will obviously lose Colorado. Trump by eight to ten points, Gardner by five or so.

[pbrower2a]

Morning Consult, June 2019

Net approval

-10 or higher
-5 to -9
-1 to -4
tie (white)
+1 to +4
+5 to +9
+10 or higher

DC? Not shown, but don't be stupid. 90% red.

I am not making distinctions above 10.

Note that the net approval for Trump is at +1 in Indiana. No Republican has won nationwide for a century without winning  Indiana by at least 10%, and this includes the two elections in which the Republican won the Electoral College without winning a plurality of total votes. My estimate for Indiana based upon getting everything that dos not disapprove of Trump is that he would win the Hoosier State by 53-47 and would lose nationwide.

(in 1970 and 2012 the Republican won Indiana with slightly more than 10% of a margin and still lost to the Democrat).  

Trump would lose NE-02 and would be at risk of losing NE-01.

I do not yet call a collapse of this Presidency, but I can see its potential. At this stage I see Obama 2008 as the general look of a Presidential election held now. A Democrat picking up everything in any shade of red,  white, or the palest shade of blue, and the Democrat is winning much like Eisenhower in the 1950s. I have frequently compared Obama to Eisenhower for temperament and character, with Obama winning with maps more like those for Eisenhower than those of anyone else's wins.  

[Person Man]

Keating Research for the Denver Post. Favorability, so I won't show it on the map.

Trump 42-55, which is close to the most recent approval rating for Colorado. It does give letter grades, and how I interpret those

A (strongly approve) 24%
B (somewhat approve) 17%
C (mediocre) 11%
D (somewhat disapprove) 12%
F (strongly disapprove) 37% 

Favorability for Senator Cory Gardner is at 40% with 39% unfavorable. 

 

Both will obviously lose Colorado. Trump by eight to ten points, Gardner by five or so.

Though Trump is ahead of him by 1.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Gallup, June 19-30, 1018 adults (2-week change)

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

Strongly approve 29
Strongly disapprove 44

(No priors for "strongly")

Should Trump be impeached and removed from office?

Yes 45
No 53

So there you have it. 45% will definitely voting Democrat and 41% will definitely be voting for him.
14% are either right smack in the middle or don't have an opinion but still want to vote.

If Trump wins them 2:1, He will do about about as well as W or Obama did when they got reelected.
If the Democrat wins them 2:1, He will be somewhere in McCain, Dukakis, or Dole territory.

We all know the narrative.

If he's winning. The few randos that bring it up will be like "Gee.. Obama's an idiot! Obamacare is socialism, right? I'm perfectly happy with what the company is giving me but its good that people have more options if they aren't getting it, I guess.  But hey!  Romney is kind of weird and makes me uncomfortable. I mean 47% of us are takers?! Give me a break!  Heck it! I'm voting for Obama..again I really want someone new to be president and maybe they will put someone up there in 4 years worth voting for, right?"

or quite simply "Anybody but Bush, but Kerry!"

Once I even heard at 6 oclock on Election Night, "I was ready to vote for Kerry but when I got in the voting booth, a voice told me to vote for Bush".

 

Never overestimate undecided voters!

[Person Man]

Gallup, June 19-30, 1018 adults (2-week change)

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

Strongly approve 29
Strongly disapprove 44

(No priors for "strongly")

Should Trump be impeached and removed from office?

Yes 45
No 53

So there you have it. 45% will definitely voting Democrat and 41% will definitely be voting for him.
14% are either right smack in the middle or don't have an opinion but still want to vote.

If Trump wins them 2:1, He will do about about as well as W or Obama did when they got reelected.
If the Democrat wins them 2:1, He will be somewhere in McCain, Dukakis, or Dole territory.

We all know the narrative.

If he's winning. The few randos that bring it up will be like "Gee.. Obama's an idiot! Obamacare is socialism, right? I'm perfectly happy with what the company is giving me but its good that people have more options if they aren't getting it, I guess.  But hey!  Romney is kind of weird and makes me uncomfortable. I mean 47% of us are takers?! Give me a break!  Heck it! I'm voting for Obama..again I really want someone new to be president and maybe they will put someone up there in 4 years worth voting for, right?"

or quite simply "Anybody but Bush, but Kerry!"

Once I even heard at 6 oclock on Election Night, "I was ready to vote for Kerry but when I got in the voting booth, a voice told me to vote for Bush".

 

Never overestimate undecided voters!

It’s really sad to be that person who thinks that they have to vote for someone they hate. I would almost tell people in these sort of situations not to vote but that would be wrong.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Washington Post/ABC News, June 28-July 1, 1008 adults including 875 RV (change from late April)

Adults:

Approve 44 (+5)
Disapprove 53 (-1)

Strongly approve 32 (+4)
Strongly disapprove 45 (nc)

RV:

Approve 47
Disapprove 50

This is Trump's best-ever approval in this poll. There were also several GE matchups polled; see https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=323675.0 for details.

[Person Man]

Washington Post/ABC News, June 28-July 1, 1008 adults including 875 RV (change from late April)

Adults:

Approve 44 (+5)
Disapprove 53 (-1)

Strongly approve 32 (+4)
Strongly disapprove 45 (nc)

RV:

Approve 47
Disapprove 50

This is Trump's best-ever approval in this poll. There were also several GE matchups polled; see https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=323675.0 for details.

Maybe more people identifying as Republicans because everybody’s making money but me? But seriously. This is probably  a statistical noise.

[Annatar]

The poll has a D+6 sample, electorate in both 2016 and 2018 was D+4 according to exit polls, so this ABC poll is bit dem heavy in terms of sample.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

The poll has a D+6 sample, electorate in both 2016 and 2018 was D+4 according to exit polls, so this ABC poll is bit dem heavy in terms of sample.

Haha, no.

[Annatar]

The poll has a D+6 sample, electorate in both 2016 and 2018 was D+4 according to exit polls, so this ABC poll is bit dem heavy in terms of sample.

Haha, no.

Look at the sample in the poll, its available on page 11 of it, 23% GOP, 29% dem, 37% Independent, that is a D+6 sample.

[GeorgiaModerate]

The poll has a D+6 sample, electorate in both 2016 and 2018 was D+4 according to exit polls, so this ABC poll is bit dem heavy in terms of sample.

Haha, no.

Look at the sample in the poll, its available on page 11 of it, 23% GOP, 29% dem, 37% Independent, that is a D+6 sample.

With independents being larger than either party here, that comparison is meaningless.

FWIW, I checked their previous polls, and this sample is in line with most of them over the last year except for the one before this, which was a bit more R-friendly:

Date D R I
7/7/19 29 23 37
4/25/19 29 26 36
1/24/19 32 24 37
11/1/18 32 25 35
10/11/18 33 26 35
8/29/18 33 25 37
4/11/18 32 25 35

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

When was the last time it wasn't true? I'm almost 46, and I don't remember it ever being any other way.

[GeorgiaModerate]

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

When was the last time it wasn't true? I'm almost 46, and I don't remember it ever being any other way.

In the graph at https://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/, it looks like the last time was during the Clinton administration, although it was very close for a while under GW Bush.

[Annatar]

The poll has a D+6 sample, electorate in both 2016 and 2018 was D+4 according to exit polls, so this ABC poll is bit dem heavy in terms of sample.

Haha, no.

Look at the sample in the poll, its available on page 11 of it, 23% GOP, 29% dem, 37% Independent, that is a D+6 sample.

With independents being larger than either party here, that comparison is meaningless.

FWIW, I checked their previous polls, and this sample is in line with most of them over the last year except for the one before this, which was a bit more R-friendly:

Date D R I
7/7/19 29 23 37
4/25/19 29 26 36
1/24/19 32 24 37
11/1/18 32 25 35
10/11/18 33 26 35
8/29/18 33 25 37
4/11/18 32 25 35

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

I agree more Americans identify as democrats, its a D+4 advantage as both the 2016 and 2018 exit polls show, this poll however is D+6 which is more than the D+4 electorate which showed up in 2016 and 2018.

[pbrower2a]

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

When was the last time it wasn't true? I'm almost 46, and I don't remember it ever being any other way.

Start of the Great Depression. What has often happened is that southern Democrats such as Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby went Republican and took their constituencies with them  at the voting booth without those people having to admit that they were for all practical purposes Republicans. Of course there are now many Southern whites who have never identified as Democrats while voting age.  

[Person Man]

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

When was the last time it wasn't true? I'm almost 46, and I don't remember it ever being any other way.

Start of the Great Depression. What has often happened is that southern Democrats such as Jeff Sessions and Richard Sessions went Republican and took their constituencies with them  at the voting booth without those people having to admit that they were for all practical purposes Republicans. Of course there are now many Southern whites who have never identified as Democrats while voting age.  

That's pretty much it. A lot of it has been offset by moderate to liberal Republicans in New England, the Great Lakes, the West Coast, and now increasingly the more developed areas of the interior west. 100 years ago, the constituencies that gave the plurality or perhaps a small majority of the GOP vote were the only voters to be Democrats.

The entire thing is pretty stupid if you ask me. You have all of these brainwashed 20something (something tells me that these kids should have been taken by DFS or something) archconservative kids in rural and recently developed areas who keep saying that they are actually MORE progressive than democrats because that Robert Byrd was in the KKK. Of course, I say that Planned Parenthood, NAACP, and the ACLU were all founded by Republicans and then they miss the point entirely by saying that those organizations were all just invented to get rid of blackie and brownie.

[pbrower2a]

The simple fact is that more Americans identify as Democrats than Republicans.  This has been true for some time now.

When was the last time it wasn't true? I'm almost 46, and I don't remember it ever being any other way.

Start of the Great Depression. What has often happened is that southern Democrats such as Jeff Sessions and Richard Sessions went Republican and took their constituencies with them  at the voting booth without those people having to admit that they were for all practical purposes Republicans. Of course there are now many Southern whites who have never identified as Democrats while voting age. 

That's pretty much it. A lot of it has been offset by moderate to liberal Republicans in New England, the Great Lakes, the West Coast, and now increasingly the more developed areas of the interior west. 100 years ago, the constituencies that gave the plurality or perhaps a small majority of the GOP vote were the only voters to be Democrats.

The entire thing is pretty stupid if you ask me. You have all of these brainwashed 20something (something tells me that these kids should have been taken by DFS or something) arch-conservative kids in rural and recently developed areas who keep saying that they are actually MORE progressive than democrats because that Robert Byrd was in the KKK. Of course, I say that Planned Parenthood, NAACP, and the ACLU were all founded by Republicans and then they miss the point entirely by saying that those organizations were all just invented to get rid of blackie and brownie.

An illustration: between Lincoln and FDR the Republican party had every President except Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson. Republicans established the 'corporate welfare state' that supposedly brought peace, prosperity, and progress' until the model failed so dramatically. I could make the case that FDR kept America from splintering into a divide between fascism o0f the KKK type and a proletarian revolution.

FDR acceded to the idea that working people had to be participants in the bounty of capitalism and not merely producers. The Tennessee Valley Authority allowed the modernization of the Mountain South, and white Southerners (the Mountain South was very white and still is)  gave credit to Democrats so long as there were many people who remembered that. Thus there could be relative liberals such as Al Gore and Bill Clinton, either of whom would be wiped out electorally if they tried to run again in their states.

Note well: the often-racist populists of the Mountain South were politically incompatible with the "Rockefeller" or "Eisenhower" Republicans up north. They still are. American politics is coalition politics, and as Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy brought the often-racist populists of the South into the Republican fold, the more patrician "Eisenhower/Rockefeller" Republicans started leaving the GOP.

It is always possible to see ulterior motives in any reformer. Planned Parenthood? Gigantic (then largely Catholic) families in the urban proletariat were destined to extreme poverty, an observation that held well for Polish-Americans and Italian-Americans until World War II which was effective in the extreme of exposing hidden talent that proved vital to winning a war against the demonic enemies known as the Axis powers. When the NAACP was founded, blacks were heavily Republicans who gave credit to the Party of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator. (FDR co-opted Lincoln in the New Deal and especially World War II as a model of what America stood for against the slave system of the old South and the slave systems of the Devil's Reich and Thug Japan as the antithesis of everything fascist. The ACLU's formal predecessor got its start in opposing the degradation of civil liberties during World War I under the Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Add another -- the Sierra Club, founded by Republicans to resist the drive to turn practically every valley in the Sierra watershed into a source of water for California urbanization and agriculture.   

I look at a composite map of elections of Obama and Eisenhower and see that, except for the Great Plains, Obama did well where Eisenhower did well. The three toughest Northern states for Democrats to win between 1928 and 1988 based on whom they voted for -- Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode Island -- went twice for Eisenhower. Massachusetts and Rhode Island were the only states outside of the South to vote for Al Smith in 1928, and Massachusetts and Minnesota were the only two states to vote against the Nixon landslide of 1972 or the Reagan landslide of 1984 -- as somehow the 49th-best and 50th-best (sole loss) for the winners of 49-state landslides, while Rhode Island was 47th in both years. Eisenhower was the first Republican to win Virginia since Herbert Hoover, and Obama was the first Democrat to win Virginia since the LBJ blowout.