Trump approval ratings thread 1.1

[pbrower2a]

If Trump's current disapproval ratings in each of the states listed are any indication of his 2020 performance, he'll be absolutely destroyed in the Northeast. The West isn't looking too good for him either. I'm curious how he'll perform in Utah; no doubt he'll win it, but by how much? And the fact that Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin have an effectively equal disapproval of Trump is very interesting.

The disapproval numbers alone show that President Trump is not doing what Presidents do to get re-elected.  A successful President in getting re-election typically picks off some states to compensate for his losses... 

But of the president's barest losses (CO, ME, MN, NV, NH, and VA) he shows no signs of gaining ground.  The Minnesota poll is really old, taken while the President still had approvals in the mid-to-high 40s -- and I would expect a new poll of Minnesota to look even worse for the President.  Look at Colorado, New Hampshire, and Virginia: they seem to be solidifying -- for a Democrat in 2020. Does anyone want to bet big money that Trump wins Maine in 2020?

He is faring badly -- really badly -- in Michigan and Pennsylvania, two states infamous as industrial wrecks. Donald Trump promised to 'Make America Great Again' -- which the marginal voters may have interpreted as 'restore the prowess and importance of manufacturing in American economics'. I question whether any policies can recreate that sort of America; Donald Trump is irresponsible for making such a suggestion. Politicians who make promises that they do nothing to deliver (and aren't simply stopped by political reality) lose the component to whom they made such promises. 

If that isn't bad enough, three other states that he barely won (Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Florida) are well underwater. Because he will lose Michigan and Pennsylvania and has no real chances for gains elsewhere, he stands to lose even more. I don't know whether he could really lose Texas, but his polling there is awful -- and it is corroborated in two polls. Sure, it's Texas, and Texas is the difference between about 400 and 435 electoral votes. But I have no idea of what is going on in Ohio, and the poll of Arizona is really old. 

He needs (or Pence will need) miracles with which to get re-elected. No economic miracle is at hand.   

[Virginiá]

Gallup (July 3rd)

Approve 37% (-2)
Disapprove 57% (+1)

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Gallup (July 3rd)

Approve 37% (-2)
Disapprove 57% (+1)

Happy July 4th Emperor Drumpf!

[user12345]

Who would have ever thought that Utah would have a high disapproval rating of a Republican president than Nevada.

[pbrower2a]

Who would have ever thought that Utah would have a high disapproval rating of a Republican president than Nevada.

Donald Trump certainly does not have Mormon family values.

[windjammer]

Gallup (July 3rd)

Approve 37% (-2)
Disapprove 57% (+1)

I wonder if he could go down under 35%.

[JA]

Gallup (July 3rd)

Approve 37% (-2)
Disapprove 57% (+1)

I wonder if he could go down under 35%.

Oh, he will. I'm just curious what causes it.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I guess these things happen when The Media supports everything you do.

The Media doesn't like Trump. Most members of the media are Democrats.

Yes, billionaires who are owners or majority shareholders in media companies are notoriously liberal Democrats.

If the media reports on a team that hasn't scored a run all year as having a lousy offense, do they have a bias against the local team or are they just reporting a disaster in the making? Now apply that to the presidency and get it through your skull that he is a walking dumpster fire on every conceivable level. He is indefensible. For anyone with common sense of a toad that is. Join the club of those who surpass that level.

Your whining about the media is pathetic, tired, and baseless. Grow up.

And that's directed it pretty much a third of the Forum, not just Hopper.

Are you surprised they think this way? For almost two years they got comfortable with the media's fabrication that Hillary Clinton was just as bad. For every legitimately horrible thing Trump did, they dragged up tired bullish-t to slam her with too.

The media has been irresponsible, but hilariously not at all in the way the Trumpists like to claim.

[pbrower2a]

Gallup (July 3rd)

Approve 37% (-2)
Disapprove 57% (+1)

I wonder if he could go down under 35%.

He could, but will take something drastic. Maybe a North Korean missile striking Okinawa? A 2000-point fall in the Dow-Jones average?  Bad news that he can't claim is fake?

Approval of the President has typically been close to the partisan divide since the effect of 9/11 faded -- in good times.  So it has been with Dubya and with Obama. For approval to go below about 45%, something bad has to happen.

There's not much 'squishy' support. Once one gets below 45% approval, one is starting to lose the support of strong partisans. Non-achievement can take one to 40% and incompetence perhaps to 33%. To go below 33% one needs an economic meltdown, a sex scandal, a diplomatic disaster, mishandling of a natural disaster, or a military catastrophe.

Economic meltdown? That would more likely be choices in the Fed. The Federal Reserve is unlikely to start a depression just to defeat a President. A Greek-style economic problem, as when the IMF dictates that America must devalue its currency, raise taxes, cut the money supply,  cut wages, and cut federal spending?  We're nowhere near that. 

Hurricane season is on the way, but most of the States with vulnerability to a hurricane voted Republican in 2016. The "Big One" in California or an eruption of Mount Rainier in Washington? God help us! Obama may have made sure to give quick and generous aid to very conservative communities in the wake of tornadoes irrespective of the way those communities voted. I wouldn't trust President Trump to give any aid to liberal communities that underwent some natural disaster unless on unacceptable terms.

President Trump has gotten away with much so far. So how does he do it?  He has leaned a trick of extremists and tyrants -- violate the sensibilities of opponents and then fault the opponents for expressing their denials, distress, or disgust. At the extreme think of the propaganda of (eventually convicted Nazi war criminal) Julius Streicher against the Jews. He blamed the Jews for practically anything bad even if there was no logical connection, or accused them of horrible deeds contrary to their character. When they complained, he blamed their 'evil' for opposing the falsehoods that Streicher offered as truth.

Many people fall for this. American politicians have typically avoided playing to this, but Donald Trump is a gross abnormality in American political history. He does not play by the rules that such disparate Presidents as Reagan and Obama would.

[Virginiá]

Approval of the President has typically been close to the partisan divide since the effect of 9/11 faded -- in good times.  So it has been with Dubya and with Obama. For approval to go below about 45%, something bad has to happen.

There's not much 'squishy' support. Once one gets below 45% approval, one is starting to lose the support of strong partisans. Non-achievement can take one to 40% and incompetence perhaps to 33%. To go below 33% one needs an economic meltdown, a sex scandal, a diplomatic disaster, mishandling of a natural disaster, or a military catastrophe.

I don't know if 'partisan' is the right word for some of those people. They mostly just hate the other party, but would probably vote for a credible 3rd party candidate. I'm not talking about a 'Johnson' or 'Stein'-type, I mean a legitimately well-funded, competent person who is reasonable and has a unique appeal. Doubly so if one of the major party candidates is a weak challenger.

[Inmate Trump]

If Trump's current disapproval ratings in each of the states listed are any indication of his 2020 performance, he'll be absolutely destroyed in the Northeast. The West isn't looking too good for him either. I'm curious how he'll perform in Utah; no doubt he'll win it, but by how much? And the fact that Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin have an effectively equal disapproval of Trump is very interesting.

You also have to consider Russia's role in 2020.

They helped him win (barely) in 2016, and they will be back...especially since we aren't doing anything to stop them.

[Sir Mohamed]

If Trump's current disapproval ratings in each of the states listed are any indication of his 2020 performance, he'll be absolutely destroyed in the Northeast. The West isn't looking too good for him either. I'm curious how he'll perform in Utah; no doubt he'll win it, but by how much? And the fact that Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin have an effectively equal disapproval of Trump is very interesting.

He'll win UT by double digits, probably by more than 20 points. Democrats have de facto no chance to carry the state. 30% is the absolute ceiling. UT may not be safe Trump, but it's still safe not D.

[cvparty]

If Trump's current disapproval ratings in each of the states listed are any indication of his 2020 performance, he'll be absolutely destroyed in the Northeast. The West isn't looking too good for him either. I'm curious how he'll perform in Utah; no doubt he'll win it, but by how much? And the fact that Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin have an effectively equal disapproval of Trump is very interesting.

He'll win UT by double digits, probably by more than 20 points. Democrats have de facto no chance to carry the state. 30% is the absolute ceiling. UT may not be safe Trump, but it's still safe not D.

could be interesting if Evan runs again

[pbrower2a]

If Trump's current disapproval ratings in each of the states listed are any indication of his 2020 performance, he'll be absolutely destroyed in the Northeast. The West isn't looking too good for him either. I'm curious how he'll perform in Utah; no doubt he'll win it, but by how much? And the fact that Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin have an effectively equal disapproval of Trump is very interesting.

He'll win UT by double digits, probably by more than 20 points. Democrats have de facto no chance to carry the state. 30% is the absolute ceiling. UT may not be safe Trump, but it's still safe not D.

You suggested a qualification. I can easily imagine Utah (and especially the powerful Church of Latter-Day Saints (a/k/a LDS or Mormons)  going for someone like Ross Perot as a clean-government Christian conservative in a 40-35-25 split (the Democrat getting 25% of the vote). Mormons take their religious beliefs seriously. That is still non-D. But remember: an  unpopular President is vulnerable to independent and third-party challenges from the same side of the political spectrum of the incumbent. Donald Trump offends so many Mormon values that he is vulnerable to any opponent who gets the tacit blessing of the LDS Church.

If I were in the LDS  hierarchy I would want to send a message to any Presidential nominee -- offend Mormon values and lose Utah. But even if the Republican nominee does not offend Mormon values... even Mormons will reject a Republican nominee who can be cast as a proponent of reckless adventurism (it did go for LBJ in 1964). 

[Virginiá]

Gallup (July 5th)

Approve 37% (-/-)
Disapprove 57% (-/-)


(no poll for july 4th)

[BlueSwan]

89% of republicans are that dense. Amazing.

[Technocracy Timmy]

89% of republicans are that dense. Amazing.

Not at all surprising if you talk to Republican voters in your daily life

[cvparty]

so he's -20 in approval, how would this translate if the election were held today? how many of the disapproving would vote for him?

[Yank2133]

so he's -20 in approval, how would this translate if the election were held today? how many of the disapproving would vote for him?

It depends on the Democratic nominee.

If the nominee has terrible favorablities like Hillary did, then Trump would have a good chance of winning. But if the nominee's personal favorablities are in good shape, then Trump is extremely vulnerable.

[GeorgiaModerate]

so he's -20 in approval, how would this translate if the election were held today? how many of the disapproving would vote for him?

It depends on his opponent, of course.  In 2016 he had the benefit of facing an opponent who was also unpopular.  Against a more popular and inspiring candidate (and I don't have any names in mind), Trump would get flattened.  If he ran against HRC or someone with equivalent baggage, it would be much closer.

[pbrower2a]

so he's -20 in approval, how would this translate if the election were held today? how many of the disapproving would vote for him?

It depends on the Democratic nominee.

If the nominee has terrible favorablities like Hillary did, then Trump would have a good chance of winning. But if the nominee's personal favorablities are in good shape, then Trump is extremely vulnerable.

-20 in approval gives about a 60-40. split The average electoral winner has proved that he could win the office, and of course that he is an adequate campaigner. He did win!

But incumbents can lose. Against the average challenger President Trump would probably win about 54-46 in 2020 assuming that President Trump does nothing on net to make things better or worse. 

He is already a failed President, and he will not have time to make things better. He has been in campaign mode; he has no legislative achievements, and the one that he proposes would make things worse for multitudes.

So he starts about 60-40 and maybe gains about 3% just for being the incumbent. He would have powerful, well-heeled interests behind him. He would certainly get plenty of contributions to his campaign.

I think he would lose about 54-46 in the popular vote.  That's not as bad as Carter or Hoover, but it is worse than Ford. The elder Bush? That Bush did not have anywhere near the negatives.

A 53-47 split of the popular vote in a highly-polarized country gives about the result of Obama 2008 for the Democratic nominee.  Less polarized, things go like Bush in 1988 or even FDR in 1944. The Democrat wins anywhere from about 375 electoral votes to 435 electoral votes.

Things really go bad for Trump -- about a 60-40 split -- if the Democrats  have someone as effective a campaigner as FDR, Ronald Reagan, or Barack Obama. That's about the level of the 1932 or 1980 elections.

[Person Man]

so he's -20 in approval, how would this translate if the election were held today? how many of the disapproving would vote for him?

It depends on the Democratic nominee.

If the nominee has terrible favorablities like Hillary did, then Trump would have a good chance of winning. But if the nominee's personal favorablities are in good shape, then Trump is extremely vulnerable.

Even to someone like Kerry or Romney. I can see Trump losing by about my prediction map if that is the case. Even against a Dole or Dukakis, I can see him not winning any freiwal states.

To even a Gore like person, I can see him losing at least one of North Carolina, Arizona, or Georgia.

To a good candidate, #BattlegroundTexas and maybe even Ohio will keep its ill deserved bellwether status. I can't see Iowa falling but stranger things have happened.

Trump can win but only if the DNC is the new Florida Democratic Party.

[pbrower2a]

so he's -20 in approval, how would this translate if the election were held today? how many of the disapproving would vote for him?

Here's how I think a Democratic loser  does by losing 60-40 in the popular vote in 2020. I'm showing only the wins:

124 electoral votes, as these are the states and districts that go 60% or more for the Democrat in a good year. The Democrat is winning most of these just barely, but there are few that he is losing just barely -- maybe Illinois. New Jersey and Connecticut are going about 52-47 for Trump in such a case.  He's losing such states as Minnesota, New Mexico, Virginia, and Washington by about ten points and such states as Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by low double-digits. He's losing a bunch of states by 70-30 margins.  This is only for symmetry. 

The only reason that the Democrat doesn't end up with 50 or so electoral votes is that California (55) and New York (29) are a lock for a Democrat practically guaranteed the 84 electoral votes of  two of the largest states in electoral votes. Except for Maryland and Massachusetts (22 altogether)  the Democrat picks up no other states with more than  four electoral votes. 

Now let's try a 60-40 loss for Trump. Showing only his wins in deep blue,

That's 51 electoral votes, signaling a disaster by Trump. Utah has voted for a third-Party conservative alternative that hierarchy of the Church of Latter-Day Saints (LDS, a/k/a Mormons) has endorsed, with Utah Democrats voting in line with most Mormons.

If you are wondering about some states, the Trump campaign is in a real mess even in the High Plains. Mississippi? The white vote is still for Trump, but only about 75-25. The black vote decides Mississippi. Louisiana? Louisiana recently elected a Democratic Governor, so it can conceivably vote for a Democratic President. The difference between Mississippi and Alabama is that Mississippi has more blacks.  NE-03 is one of the most conservative districts in America, and it goes R.

I need not show the rest; in a 60-40 split of the popular vote, assume that the Democrat wins most states that Obama won by 8% or more in 2008 offer only slight gains over that, that the Democrat gets modest gains over Obama 2008 where he won or lost by less than 5%, and larger gains in the states that Obama lost by 8% or more.

At a 57-43 split of the popular vote, Trump wins the High Plains except Texas and NE-02. Added Trump wins in this scenario are in medium blue.

   

[Virginiá]

Gallup (July 6th)

Approve 37% (-/-)
Disapprove 57% (-/-)

[krazen1211]

Trump is soaring in the polls!

Link

President Donald Trump’s personal ratings are also up -- a bit:  47 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of him.