Trump approval ratings thread 1.6

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Well, those 2 new polls just busted Gallup's bubble all over its face.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Well, those 2 new polls just busted Gallup's bubble all over its face.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1225159360084660225

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

The  Unskewing 2.0...


Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

[pbrower2a]

I do not predict polling results, but polls from this weekend should be interesting. 

[GeorgiaModerate]

The  Unskewing 2.0...


Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

I would have posted that tweet even if it was the other way around.  If you've read my posts for the last several years, you should know that I post polls and interesting items about polling regardless of which side they favor.

[wbrocks67]

The  Unskewing 2.0...


Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

No, because we've had many many many instances in the past of Trump going down below 40%. It would not be realistic. However, we have a number of polls having him around the same spot (40-44) and then we have like 2 having him at 49-50%. It's just common sense. Not to mention the facts (the Gallup poll DID oversample Republicans)

[Arizona Iced Tea]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Isn't Trump orange though?

[Badger]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

I got it! New York Millennial sock. Good to have you back buddy!

[Pericles]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Ordinary citizens have fair trials, Donald Trump did not.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

The  Unskewing 2.0...


Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

I would have posted that tweet even if it was the other way around.  If you've read my posts for the last several years, you should know that I post polls and interesting items about polling regardless of which side they favor.

I don't know man, I really don't know. You seem to post a lot of polls, even if they were partially mentioned in the thread, bur nor Gallup, nor ABC/WaPo pollsters... Both are live Gold Standard, both showed Removal under water and Trump gaining momentum... 


With that said, yes, these polls were of course outlier'ish and likely to bounce back, but if the same polls that showed Trump at ~40% a year ago shows him now at ~47% it tells you something.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Trump is gonna get a bump from his speech, once again, Trump approvals aren't 41%, and the turnout in the primary is the same as it was in 2016. Meaning that Dems PVI wise are in track to match Hilary's 2 point performance. But EC vote wise, flip WI, PA and MI. Trump can also seek out a 270-268 and still lose the PVI by 2.

Pelosi tore up Trump's speech, wasnt the right thing to do, as Trump's praise to the mother and her son, was heartfelt,  due to the father being killed in War

[GeorgiaModerate]

The  Unskewing 2.0...


Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

I would have posted that tweet even if it was the other way around.  If you've read my posts for the last several years, you should know that I post polls and interesting items about polling regardless of which side they favor.

I don't know man, I really don't know. You seem to post a lot of polls, even if they were partially mentioned in the thread, bur nor Gallup, nor ABC/WaPo pollsters... Both are live Gold Standard, both showed Removal under water and Trump gaining momentum... 


With that said, yes, these polls were of course outlier'ish and likely to bounce back, but if the same polls that showed Trump at ~40% a year ago shows him now at ~47% it tells you something.

Take a look at the record.  I've posted tons of Gallup and WaPo polls, but wasn't the one to post the two recent ones only because somebody else did it first.  I post all new ones that I find (with a few exceptions, below) but I don't have an exclusive franchise on polls and do have a life that occasionally keeps me busy doing other things.

Exceptions: I don't post any daily trackers unless they start showing unusual trends.  And I don't post McLaughlin or Zogby unless they do something particularly LOLworthy.

[pbrower2a]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Racism against Trump because he is white?

No. If I am bigoted against anything it is against bad character. It is no more racist to find Donald Trump abominable than it was to find Idi Amin or Ferdinand Marcos abominable. OK, so perhaps it isn't bigotry if it has justification. I went from seeing Bill Cosby as a hero to being a villain in a short time, and it was on a blatant pattern of horrible misdeeds, to wit, date rape.

Personal character has no connection to race, class, ethnicity, or religious heritage. It is not antisemitic to despise Bernie Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein, or Harvey Weinstein. It is not anti-Hispanic to despise Richard Ramirez, Angel Resendiz, or Ariel Castro. Rogue characters are dangerous. It is not anti-white to condemn John Gacy, Ted Bundy, or Aileen Wuornos.

I challenge anyone to show what virtues Donald Trump has as a person. I see him as a rogue, a narcissist verging on a sociopath. Don't tell me about his talents, his power, or his talents. People with bad character abuse those.

As said Heraclitus in classical Greek times, character is destiny. Human character has changed little, and the consequences of bad behavior and on the other side heroism and integrity have changed little. Most of the same vices in Classical Greece have the same consequences to both the vice-holder and his victims. Donald Trump has horrible character.

That rich, powerful people can get away with far more than can migrant farm workers demonstrates only that the rich and powerful can do far more personal harm. It is bad enough that rich, powerful, influential people be hollow; when they become rogues their worst tendencies have monstrous power behind them. If you cannot see the difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump in character, then you are morally blind.

People who will be in positions of power, wealth, and influence need to have solid character. They must learn early that there is more to life than gain, indulgence, sex, pop culture, and bureaucratic power. One must have limits if one is to not be a monster.  

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

The  Unskewing 2.0...



Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

I would have posted that tweet even if it was the other way around.  If you've read my posts for the last several years, you should know that I post polls and interesting items about polling regardless of which side they favor.

I don't know man, I really don't know. You seem to post a lot of polls, even if they were partially mentioned in the thread, bur nor Gallup, nor ABC/WaPo pollsters... Both are live Gold Standard, both showed Removal under water and Trump gaining momentum... 


With that said, yes, these polls were of course outlier'ish and likely to bounce back, but if the same polls that showed Trump at ~40% a year ago shows him now at ~47% it tells you something.

GeorgiaModerate is arguably one of the best posters when it comes to posting without injecting commentary. 

[pbrower2a]

The  Unskewing 2.0...



Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

I would have posted that tweet even if it was the other way around.  If you've read my posts for the last several years, you should know that I post polls and interesting items about polling regardless of which side they favor.

I don't know man, I really don't know. You seem to post a lot of polls, even if they were partially mentioned in the thread, bur nor Gallup, nor ABC/WaPo pollsters... Both are live Gold Standard, both showed Removal under water and Trump gaining momentum... 


With that said, yes, these polls were of course outlier'ish and likely to bounce back, but if the same polls that showed Trump at ~40% a year ago shows him now at ~47% it tells you something.

GeorgiaModerate is arguably one of the best posters when it comes to posting without injecting commentary. 

I can go along with that. I try to see patterns -- but I warn people now: we are now in uncharted waters, at least if one sees things with "American" blinders. I see ugly parallels elsewhere in time and place. 

[atheist4thecause]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Racism against Trump because he is white?

No. If I am bigoted against anything it is against bad character. It is no more racist to find Donald Trump abominable than it was to find Idi Amin or Ferdinand Marcos abominable. OK, so perhaps it isn't bigotry if it has justification. I went from seeing Bill Cosby as a hero to being a villain in a short time, and it was on a blatant pattern of horrible misdeeds, to wit, date rape.

Personal character has no connection to race, class, ethnicity, or religious heritage. It is not antisemitic to despise Bernie Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein, or Harvey Weinstein. It is not anti-Hispanic to despise Richard Ramirez, Angel Resendiz, or Ariel Castro. Rogue characters are dangerous. It is not anti-white to condemn John Gacy, Ted Bundy, or Aileen Wuornos.

I challenge anyone to show what virtues Donald Trump has as a person. I see him as a rogue, a narcissist verging on a sociopath. Don't tell me about his talents, his power, or his talents. People with bad character abuse those.

As said Heraclitus in classical Greek times, character is destiny. Human character has changed little, and the consequences of bad behavior and on the other side heroism and integrity have changed little. Most of the same vices in Classical Greece have the same consequences to both the vice-holder and his victims. Donald Trump has horrible character.

That rich, powerful people can get away with far more than can migrant farm workers demonstrates only that the rich and powerful can do far more personal harm. It is bad enough that rich, powerful, influential people be hollow; when they become rogues their worst tendencies have monstrous power behind them. If you cannot see the difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump in character, then you are morally blind.

People who will be in positions of power, wealth, and influence need to have solid character. They must learn early that there is more to life than gain, indulgence, sex, pop culture, and bureaucratic power. One must have limits if one is to not be a monster.  

You accused President Trump of being guilty even after the non guilty verdict. I pointed out that this has historically been done against Black people, and especially Democrats were quick to point out racism. Now you sit here accusing President Trump of being guilty even though he was proven to be not guilty. I doubt you would be doing that to a Black President, because that would be seen as racist. Because Trump is White, you see no problem with it. Trump's character has nothing to do with accusing him of being guilty of a crime he was proven to be not guilty of.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

The  Unskewing 2.0...


Guys, would you try this hard if the polls showed the opposite, like Trump going down under 40%?

I would have posted that tweet even if it was the other way around.  If you've read my posts for the last several years, you should know that I post polls and interesting items about polling regardless of which side they favor.

I don't know man, I really don't know. You seem to post a lot of polls, even if they were partially mentioned in the thread, bur nor Gallup, nor ABC/WaPo pollsters... Both are live Gold Standard, both showed Removal under water and Trump gaining momentum... 


With that said, yes, these polls were of course outlier'ish and likely to bounce back, but if the same polls that showed Trump at ~40% a year ago shows him now at ~47% it tells you something.

Take a look at the record.  I've posted tons of Gallup and WaPo polls, but wasn't the one to post the two recent ones only because somebody else did it first.  I post all new ones that I find (with a few exceptions, below) but I don't have an exclusive franchise on polls and do have a life that occasionally keeps me busy doing other things.

Exceptions: I don't post any daily trackers unless they start showing unusual trends.  And I don't post McLaughlin or Zogby unless they do something particularly LOLworthy.

<sub>You usually post the full results/trends even if someone mentions some results. ABC/WaPo published their poll 23th. The guy with 1 post posted some numbers 24th and then I posted the full results 26th. May be I'm paranoid, but this poll showed really newsworthy trends (even if they're likely to be very outlier'ish, at least to some degree).


Ok. It is a really off-topic. Besides that as a Trump supporter it is my duty to see Deep State everywhere</sub> 




On topic>>>

A "B" Online pollster:
https://researchco.ca/2020/02/06/sotu2020/

FEB 5, 2020
B
Research Co.
1,000   A


Approve 45 (+7 since JAN 11-13, 2019)
Disapprove 51 (-7)
Not sure 4 (=)


!! Compared to their 1-year old poll. Not January 2020.



Other information>>>

All things considered, do you think Donald Trump deserves re-election as president?

Does – 41%
Does not – 55%
Not sure – 4%

As you may know, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ripped her copy of Trump’s State of the Union address in half when he finished. All things considered, do you think Speaker Pelosi’s actions were justified or unjustified?

Justified – 42%
Unjustified – 47%
Not sure – 11%

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Pelosi has the highest homeless rate in San Francisco, I lived in her district and she wants to keep attention on protecting Biden and Ukraine. That's why Trump is at 49% not at 41 approvals and can still win

[pbrower2a]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Racism against Trump because he is white?

No. If I am bigoted against anything it is against bad character. It is no more racist to find Donald Trump abominable than it was to find Idi Amin or Ferdinand Marcos abominable. OK, so perhaps it isn't bigotry if it has justification. I went from seeing Bill Cosby as a hero to being a villain in a short time, and it was on a blatant pattern of horrible misdeeds, to wit, date rape.

Personal character has no connection to race, class, ethnicity, or religious heritage. It is not antisemitic to despise Bernie Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein, or Harvey Weinstein. It is not anti-Hispanic to despise Richard Ramirez, Angel Resendiz, or Ariel Castro. Rogue characters are dangerous. It is not anti-white to condemn John Gacy, Ted Bundy, or Aileen Wuornos.

I challenge anyone to show what virtues Donald Trump has as a person. I see him as a rogue, a narcissist verging on a sociopath. Don't tell me about his talents, his power, or his talents. People with bad character abuse those.

As said Heraclitus in classical Greek times, character is destiny. Human character has changed little, and the consequences of bad behavior and on the other side heroism and integrity have changed little. Most of the same vices in Classical Greece have the same consequences to both the vice-holder and his victims. Donald Trump has horrible character.

That rich, powerful people can get away with far more than can migrant farm workers demonstrates only that the rich and powerful can do far more personal harm. It is bad enough that rich, powerful, influential people be hollow; when they become rogues their worst tendencies have monstrous power behind them. If you cannot see the difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump in character, then you are morally blind.

People who will be in positions of power, wealth, and influence need to have solid character. They must learn early that there is more to life than gain, indulgence, sex, pop culture, and bureaucratic power. One must have limits if one is to not be a monster.  

You accused President Trump of being guilty even after the non guilty verdict. I pointed out that this has historically been done against Black people, and especially Democrats were quick to point out racism. Now you sit here accusing President Trump of being guilty even though he was proven to be not guilty. I doubt you would be doing that to a Black President, because that would be seen as racist. Because Trump is White, you see no problem with it. Trump's character has nothing to do with accusing him of being guilty of a crime he was proven to be not guilty of.

If there is any comparison (an impeachment is not a criminal conviction) than it is to all-white Southern juries that got instructions to not take their KKK robes to court during the session. (It wasn't a lynching; it was protection of white womanhood). Impeachment could be over a deed unlikely to be prosecuted in a criminal trial, let us say spitting at a foreign diplomat or Head of State. 

Trump was acquitted; I expected such. I see the Republican Party operating on the Commie practice of democratic centralism, the essence of lockstep politics by a Communist Party. (Decisions made at the top are final -- beyond discussion and not to be changed).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=38&v=DgxZr6LLS34&feature=emb_logo

[Associate Justice PiT]

Pelosi has the highest homeless rate in San Francisco, I lived in her district and she wants to keep attention on protecting Biden and Ukraine. That's why Trump is at 49% not at 41 approvals and can still win

     Democrats are oftentimes their own worst enemies, and they don't seem to see this. Being "not Trump" isn't sufficient to win an election.

[atheist4thecause]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Racism against Trump because he is white?

No. If I am bigoted against anything it is against bad character. It is no more racist to find Donald Trump abominable than it was to find Idi Amin or Ferdinand Marcos abominable. OK, so perhaps it isn't bigotry if it has justification. I went from seeing Bill Cosby as a hero to being a villain in a short time, and it was on a blatant pattern of horrible misdeeds, to wit, date rape.

Personal character has no connection to race, class, ethnicity, or religious heritage. It is not antisemitic to despise Bernie Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein, or Harvey Weinstein. It is not anti-Hispanic to despise Richard Ramirez, Angel Resendiz, or Ariel Castro. Rogue characters are dangerous. It is not anti-white to condemn John Gacy, Ted Bundy, or Aileen Wuornos.

I challenge anyone to show what virtues Donald Trump has as a person. I see him as a rogue, a narcissist verging on a sociopath. Don't tell me about his talents, his power, or his talents. People with bad character abuse those.

As said Heraclitus in classical Greek times, character is destiny. Human character has changed little, and the consequences of bad behavior and on the other side heroism and integrity have changed little. Most of the same vices in Classical Greece have the same consequences to both the vice-holder and his victims. Donald Trump has horrible character.

That rich, powerful people can get away with far more than can migrant farm workers demonstrates only that the rich and powerful can do far more personal harm. It is bad enough that rich, powerful, influential people be hollow; when they become rogues their worst tendencies have monstrous power behind them. If you cannot see the difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump in character, then you are morally blind.

People who will be in positions of power, wealth, and influence need to have solid character. They must learn early that there is more to life than gain, indulgence, sex, pop culture, and bureaucratic power. One must have limits if one is to not be a monster.  

You accused President Trump of being guilty even after the non guilty verdict. I pointed out that this has historically been done against Black people, and especially Democrats were quick to point out racism. Now you sit here accusing President Trump of being guilty even though he was proven to be not guilty. I doubt you would be doing that to a Black President, because that would be seen as racist. Because Trump is White, you see no problem with it. Trump's character has nothing to do with accusing him of being guilty of a crime he was proven to be not guilty of.

If there is any comparison (an impeachment is not a criminal conviction) than it is to all-white Southern juries that got instructions to not take their KKK robes to court during the session. (It wasn't a lynching; it was protection of white womanhood). Impeachment could be over a deed unlikely to be prosecuted in a criminal trial, let us say spitting at a foreign diplomat or Head of State. 

Trump was acquitted; I expected such. I see the Republican Party operating on the Commie practice of democratic centralism, the essence of lockstep politics by a Communist Party. (Decisions made at the top are final -- beyond discussion and not to be changed).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=38&v=DgxZr6LLS34&feature=emb_logo

Ironic given no Dems switched sides but one Republican did. MM also said he doesn't direct committees what to look into.

One movie says Republicans didn't agree with Dems because they only vote for the Party. There other movie says Dems didn't prove their case. Remember, Dems had motive to falsely accuse the President.

[GeorgiaModerate]

North Dakota: DFM Research, Jan. 28-Feb. 1, 600 adults

Approve 62
Disapprove 34

Strongly approve 48
Strongly disapprove 28

GE matchups (second pair of numbers is among LV, but the subsample size is not listed)

Trump 59, Biden 34 (57/38)
Trump 61, Sanders 32 (60/35)
Trump 59, Klobuchar 33 (57/36)
Trump 59, Bloomberg 32 (56/36)
Trump 62, Warren 31 (59/34)
Trump 59, Buttigieg 31 (57/34)

[The Dowager Mod]

One thing is different this time: Trump has been in campaign mode even after being elected. So can he pick things up by staying much the same?

I suspect that as usual, Trump rallied his supporters and offended his detractors. After the whitewash of his obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors" I expect him express his vindication.

I remember when Democrats used to say that calling someone acquitted of a crime guilty is racist. Now they call Trump guilty after he was acquitted. Oh, I forgot, he's White so racism against him is okay.

Racism against Trump because he is white?

No. If I am bigoted against anything it is against bad character. It is no more racist to find Donald Trump abominable than it was to find Idi Amin or Ferdinand Marcos abominable. OK, so perhaps it isn't bigotry if it has justification. I went from seeing Bill Cosby as a hero to being a villain in a short time, and it was on a blatant pattern of horrible misdeeds, to wit, date rape.

Personal character has no connection to race, class, ethnicity, or religious heritage. It is not antisemitic to despise Bernie Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein, or Harvey Weinstein. It is not anti-Hispanic to despise Richard Ramirez, Angel Resendiz, or Ariel Castro. Rogue characters are dangerous. It is not anti-white to condemn John Gacy, Ted Bundy, or Aileen Wuornos.

I challenge anyone to show what virtues Donald Trump has as a person. I see him as a rogue, a narcissist verging on a sociopath. Don't tell me about his talents, his power, or his talents. People with bad character abuse those.

As said Heraclitus in classical Greek times, character is destiny. Human character has changed little, and the consequences of bad behavior and on the other side heroism and integrity have changed little. Most of the same vices in Classical Greece have the same consequences to both the vice-holder and his victims. Donald Trump has horrible character.

That rich, powerful people can get away with far more than can migrant farm workers demonstrates only that the rich and powerful can do far more personal harm. It is bad enough that rich, powerful, influential people be hollow; when they become rogues their worst tendencies have monstrous power behind them. If you cannot see the difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump in character, then you are morally blind.

People who will be in positions of power, wealth, and influence need to have solid character. They must learn early that there is more to life than gain, indulgence, sex, pop culture, and bureaucratic power. One must have limits if one is to not be a monster.  

You accused President Trump of being guilty even after the non guilty verdict. I pointed out that this has historically been done against Black people, and especially Democrats were quick to point out racism. Now you sit here accusing President Trump of being guilty even though he was proven to be not guilty. I doubt you would be doing that to a Black President, because that would be seen as racist. Because Trump is White, you see no problem with it. Trump's character has nothing to do with accusing him of being guilty of a crime he was proven to be not guilty of.

If there is any comparison (an impeachment is not a criminal conviction) than it is to all-white Southern juries that got instructions to not take their KKK robes to court during the session. (It wasn't a lynching; it was protection of white womanhood). Impeachment could be over a deed unlikely to be prosecuted in a criminal trial, let us say spitting at a foreign diplomat or Head of State. 

Trump was acquitted; I expected such. I see the Republican Party operating on the Commie practice of democratic centralism, the essence of lockstep politics by a Communist Party. (Decisions made at the top are final -- beyond discussion and not to be changed).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=38&v=DgxZr6LLS34&feature=emb_logo

Ironic given no Dems switched sides but one Republican did. MM also said he doesn't direct committees what to look into.

One movie says Republicans didn't agree with Dems because they only vote for the Party. There other movie says Dems didn't prove their case. Remember, Dems had motive to falsely accuse the President.

If you could stop derailing the thread that would be peachy, K thanx.

[The Dowager Mod]

Do it again i dare you.