Trump approval ratings thread 1.1

[pbrower2a]

Blank map.

This Gallup average for fifty states is priceless for showing data that I do not have for 22 states altogether, including five states with ten or more electoral votes. of those five states, only Illinois was no mystery...  I expected execrable results in polling of Illinois for Donald Trump and found them (36-58). I was very curious about Georgia (16), Indiana (11), Missouri (10), and especially Ohio (18) and now I have averages from January to July.


In any event, a polling average from January to July  is effectively an estimate of a poll from mid-April. But I have polls from as early as January, and no matter how germane the polls from then were they are less germane than this data.

In any event

(1) I get data that I have never had for 22 of 50 states
(2) The data is objective and relevant, even if dated
(3) I can cast off some old data
(4) I can cast off data from polls that I suspect for being from advocacy groups, favorability polls, and polls with confusing categories such as "Excellent-Good-Fair-Poor", or a composite (which I have for Massachusetts, an estimate that I had based upon several questions on specific issues).
(5) I no longer have the excuse "beggars can't be choosers" for accepting a poll from an advocacy group (unless I trust the pollster).    

Is it completely reliable? No, due to obsolescence. As with a road map which is obsolete even as it is published so is a political poll. But if I am in the middle of nowhere and lost I might use a four-year-old road map to get myself out of a tight spot if something happens to the newer map.

Gallup's daily trackers have been going downward for the President, and the latest data are the right ones. If there is any distortion it is that an average from January to July is closer to an average from April than from now.

I can use some signal to indicate that a poll shown on a national map is from a Gallup average from April.  

So here is the Gallup data, with everything but the District of Columbia and the individual districts of Maine and Nebraska:

Blue, positive and 40-43%  20% saturation
............................ 44-47%  40%
............................ 48-50%  50%
............................ 51-55%  70%
............................ 56%+     90%

Red, negative and  48-50%  20% (raw approval or favorability)
..........................  44-47%  30%
..........................  40-43%  50%
..........................  35-39%  70%
.......................under  35%  90%

White - tie.

...If anything, this map may be too sympathetic to President Trump. Gallup tracking polls have trended downward from January, but they didn't start out well for him, either.  I am not going to calibrate polls of the states downward to adjust for this.  Who knows? The Gallup  average for the states between January-July (average presumed to mean "April") may be more relevant in September than now should events go better for him. I have at most seat-of-the-pants ideas of what may have gone on in states with no other polls (yes, President Trump is in trouble in Indiana and Ohio -- probably worse than this map shows) but that is not how I show polling data. I'm showing polling data and not my estimates.

Besides, you may not like my 'intuitive' estimates, and you would have good cause (my extreme partisanship shows in my prose elsewhere).

I do not dispute Gallup data; I simply put it in different categories that I consider more relevant to predictions of electoral results.  

This becomes a start, and hardly a last word. There are more recent polls, and more relevant ones. Most of them will look worse than what I have on the map.

[Sir Mohamed]

He's deeper underwater in TX than NV and/or OH?

[GeorgiaModerate]

He's deeper underwater in TX than NV and/or OH?

Yes:

OH 47/48 (-1)
NV 44/50 (-6)
TX 42/51 (-9)

[windjammer]

Paging pbrower2a: Gallup daily tracking poll averages of approvals in all 50 states

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WV (60), ND (59), and SD (57) are Trump's best states, while VT (26), MA (29), CA & MD (30 each) are his worst.

These kind of 50 states polls are almost always garbage for the record.

[Gass3268]

Paging pbrower2a: Gallup daily tracking poll averages of approvals in all 50 states

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WV (60), ND (59), and SD (57) are Trump's best states, while VT (26), MA (29), CA & MD (30 each) are his worst.

These kind of 50 states polls are almost always garbage for the record.

It's a overtime (January-June) accumulation of data. So the number of respondents should be good, but it's over too long of a time period to matter now and it shouldn't be used in place of currently polling. But it will be good to compare it to the numbers that should come out in January.

[pbrower2a]

Gallup 7/24

58% Disapprove (+3)
37% Approve (-2)

Sad!

He's still above water in Missouri and Mississippi though (if barely)!

My map will show that for now, but I would make no predictions with any claim to precision. Those are a January-to-July average. The tracking polls are worse for the President now than they were in January or April. Draw your own conclusions; I will not make those for you.

Paging pbrower2a: Gallup daily tracking poll averages of approvals in all 50 states

You must be logged in to read this quote.

These kind of 50 states polls are almost always garbage for the record.

It's a overtime (January-June) accumulation of data. So the number of respondents should be good, but it's over too long of a time period to matter now and it shouldn't be used in place of currently polling. But it will be good to compare it to the numbers that should come out in January.

I recognize fully the weakness of such a running poll -- most obviously its obsolescence. But such will be all the data that I have for 22 states for which I had no data and more recent or desirable data. I have some polls from March or earlier, for which this data is more germane; I can also reject some favorability polls.

Besides, the statewide data is by the same pollster, same methods between states, and effectively the same time. It is good for contrasting states.

This can be the foundation upon which I show some of the later polls that I already have. Gallup data is probably as good as any.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Gallup 7/24

58% Disapprove (+3)
37% Approve (-2)

Sad!

Oops!

[pbrower2a]

A few comments before I update the map based upon Gallup data averaging April with later, more germane polls:

1. This map has the virtue of showing (1) all states, (2) with the same methodology, and (3) by the same pollster, (4) over the same time. We can compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. We need not question whether one prefers PPP to Quinnipiac  or says "Gravis -- yuck" or "ARG -aargh!"    

2. I have suggested that the better that people know Donald Trump the less that they like him. I am guessing that the three states in which he is best known as a businessman are New York, New Jersey (in both states,  polling of him has been execrable), and Connecticut: I now have some polling of Connecticut, and this confirms my suspicion. This should be a fair warning. Political figures usually have some affinities at the least of culture to the areas in which they live. Although it is possible to do badly in one's own state or in one in which people have obvious connections due to a poor fit to the partisan trend in that state (Mitt Romney did not fare well in California, Michigan, or Massachusetts in the general election of 2012), the execrable polling results for Trump in New York and New Jersey could be portents of political calamity.  

3. My surprise at Trump doing badly in Texas in polls by Texas Lyceum is weakened with Gallup data. I'm guessing that Donald Trump is the worst possible match for Texas within the Republican Party. That Trump won Texas by high-single instead of the double-digit margins characteristic of Republican nominees for President in the 1980s and from 2000 to 2012 may indicate trends away from the GOP in Texas. But I also see Trump. Texas used to be toward the bottom in economic and social demographics -- but it is now close to the middle in educational achievement, income, public health. With the exception of Virginia it is the former Confederate State  with the best living standards.

Figure that (1) Texas is very urban, (2) that it has large minority populations that hold his anti-intellectualism in contempt, and (3) it has a large percentage of renters, and renters generally do not have warm relationships with their landlords -- and Trump is a stereotype of the rent-collector that puts a crimp in living standards. Indications that Trump could be in more trouble in Texas than in more recent swing states in 2020 is a very bad sign for him. The second-largest electoral prize in America, Texas is bigger than Iowa, Ohio, and Wisconsin together.

4. President Trump may have a 'Mormon problem'. Sure, Utah and Idaho are the states with the most obvious Mormon influence in electoral politics, and they have 'only' ten electoral votes together. But that is as many electoral votes as Minnesota has, and if Minnesota were showing signs of going Republican, Democrats would have cause for concern. More significantly,  even lukewarm Mormon support for the Republican ticket in Arizona could swing twelve electoral votes Democratic in a state usually at best on the fringe of contention for Democrats. Arizona was competitive in 2016.

What's the problem? He fits Mormon values badly, having been involved in gambling casinos, the sorts of places that Mormons must consider just slightly more honorable than whorehouses for the gambling itself and all the liquor and smoking. His family life is hardly a model of Mormon behavior. Mormons believe in quality education (although I would never study archeology at BYU because of distortions of anthropology to fit Mormon theology) that President Trump disparages. Although Mormons are internationalists because of their missionary enterprises they are also patriots. Offend Mormon sensibilities in Utah, and you lose elections.

5. I can discard many polls older than this average in any subsequent maps, and I can signal that the Gallup polling average for the states in which I show it are the oldest statewide polling data for any state for which it is used.  

Blue, positive and 40-43%  20% saturation
............................ 44-47%  40%
............................ 48-50%  50%
............................ 51-55%  70%
............................ 56%+     90%

Red, negative and  48-50%  20% (raw approval or favorability)
..........................  44-47%  30%
..........................  40-43%  50%
..........................  35-39%  70%
.......................under  35%  90%

White - tie.

6. I can also show disapproval ratings from this data for at least 22 more states.



Now for the theme of disapproval as shown in the Gallup data:

navy under 40
blue 40-43
light blue 44-47
white 48 or 49
pink 50-54
red 55-59
maroon 60 or higher

[Virginiá]

Well, one of the good things I see here is that Trump's approvals are so low in Connecticut that it could still enable a relatively easy hold on the Govs office / state legislature even despite local economic issues. His numbers in Illinois do not do Rauner any favors, either.

[Sir Mohamed]

Well, one of the good things I see here is that Trump's approvals are so low in Connecticut that it could still enable a relatively easy hold on the Govs office / state legislature even despite local economic issues. His numbers in Illinois do not do Rauner any favors, either.

True, but Rauner always distanced himself from Trump and did not vote for him. Although he's a billionaire as well, he's a completely different personality and has different views. Trump's numbers in MA and MD are even worse, but I think that both Governor Baker (R-MA) and Governor Hogan (R-MD) are favored to win reelection next year. IL is a toss-up.

[Person Man]

A few comments before I update the map based upon Gallup data averaging April with later, more germane polls:

1. This map has the virtue of showing (1) all states, (2) with the same methodology, and (3) by the same pollster, (4) over the same time. We can compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. We need not question whether one prefers PPP to Quinnipiac  or says "Gravis -- yuck" or "ARG -aargh!"    

2. I have suggested that the better that people know Donald Trump the less that they like him. I am guessing that the three states in which he is best known as a businessman are New York, New Jersey (in both states,  polling of him has been execrable), and Connecticut: I now have some polling of Connecticut, and this confirms my suspicion. This should be a fair warning. Political figures usually have some affinities at the least of culture to the areas in which they live. Although it is possible to do badly in one's own state or in one in which people have obvious connections due to a poor fit to the partisan trend in that state (Mitt Romney did not fare well in California, Michigan, or Massachusetts in the general election of 2012), the execrable polling results for Trump in New York and New Jersey could be portents of political calamity.  

3. My surprise at Trump doing badly in Texas in polls by Texas Lyceum is weakened with Gallup data. I'm guessing that Donald Trump is the worst possible match for Texas within the Republican Party. That Trump won Texas by high-single instead of the double-digit margins characteristic of Republican nominees for President in the 1980s and from 2000 to 2012 may indicate trends away from the GOP in Texas. But I also see Trump. Texas used to be toward the bottom in economic and social demographics -- but it is now close to the middle in educational achievement, income, public health. With the exception of Virginia it is the former Confederate State  with the best living standards.

Figure that (1) Texas is very urban, (2) that it has large minority populations that hold his anti-intellectualism in contempt, and (3) it has a large percentage of renters, and renters generally do not have warm relationships with their landlords -- and Trump is a stereotype of the rent-collector that puts a crimp in living standards. Indications that Trump could be in more trouble in Texas than in more recent swing states in 2020 is a very bad sign for him. The second-largest electoral prize in America, Texas is bigger than Iowa, Ohio, and Wisconsin together.

4. President Trump may have a 'Mormon problem'. Sure, Utah and Idaho are the states with the most obvious Mormon influence in electoral politics, and they have 'only' ten electoral votes together. But that is as many electoral votes as Minnesota has, and if Minnesota were showing signs of going Republican, Democrats would have cause for concern. More significantly,  even lukewarm Mormon support for the Republican ticket in Arizona could swing twelve electoral votes Democratic in a state usually at best on the fringe of contention for Democrats. Arizona was competitive in 2016.

What's the problem? He fits Mormon values badly, having been involved in gambling casinos, the sorts of places that Mormons must consider just slightly more honorable than whorehouses for the gambling itself and all the liquor and smoking. His family life is hardly a model of Mormon behavior. Mormons believe in quality education (although I would never study archeology at BYU because of distortions of anthropology to fit Mormon theology) that President Trump disparages. Although Mormons are internationalists because of their missionary enterprises they are also patriots. Offend Mormon sensibilities in Utah, and you lose elections.

5. I can discard many polls older than this average in any subsequent maps, and I can signal that the Gallup polling average for the states in which I show it are the oldest statewide polling data for any state for which it is used.  

Blue, positive and 40-43%  20% saturation
............................ 44-47%  40%
............................ 48-50%  50%
............................ 51-55%  70%
............................ 56%+     90%

Red, negative and  48-50%  20% (raw approval or favorability)
..........................  44-47%  30%
..........................  40-43%  50%
..........................  35-39%  70%
.......................under  35%  90%

White - tie.

6. I can also show disapproval ratings from this data for at least 22 more states.



Now for the theme of disapproval as shown in the Gallup data:

navy under 40
blue 40-43
light blue 44-47
white 48 or 49
pink 50-54
red 55-59
maroon 60 or higher

If these maps mean anything at all, it could be that if Trump is winning, he is also winning the blue states that are less disapproving that the least approving red state. If he is losing, he is then probably losing every state that is majority disapproval.

[Virginiá]

True, but Rauner always distanced himself from Trump and did not vote for him. Although he's a billionaire as well, he's a completely different personality and has different views. Trump's numbers in MA and MD are even worse, but I think that both Governor Baker (R-MA) and Governor Hogan (R-MD) are favored to win reelection next year. IL is a toss-up.

I guess, but that only goes so far, imo. Lots of politicians from both sides have tried to distance themselves from the head of the party during times where that incumbent was unpopular and it rarely works. At the end of the day, Rauner is still an unpopular Republican Governor under an unpopular Republican president in a deep blue state that has had a lot of turbulence as of late. I think for Rauner to have a good shot at staying on, he needs at least one of those things I listed above^ to be in his favor.

Instead, the only thing he has going for him is money, and if Pritzker is the nominee, he won't even have that. Given that Rauner will have to face an electorate shaped by disproportionate partisan enthusiasm in favor of Democrats, it's hard for me to see a light at the end of the tunnel for him.

[Person Man]

True, but Rauner always distanced himself from Trump and did not vote for him. Although he's a billionaire as well, he's a completely different personality and has different views. Trump's numbers in MA and MD are even worse, but I think that both Governor Baker (R-MA) and Governor Hogan (R-MD) are favored to win reelection next year. IL is a toss-up.

I guess, but that only goes so far, imo. Lots of politicians from both sides have tried to distance themselves from the head of the party during times where that incumbent was unpopular and it rarely works. At the end of the day, Rauner is still an unpopular Republican Governor under an unpopular Republican president in a deep blue state that has had a lot of turbulence as of late. I think for Rauner to have a good shot at staying on, he needs at least one of those things I listed above^ to be in his favor.

Instead, the only thing he has going for him is money, and if Pritzker is the nominee, he won't even have that. Given that Rauner will have to face an electorate shaped by disproportionate partisan enthusiasm in favor of Democrats, it's hard for me to see a light at the end of the tunnel for him.

Something something... Blanche Lincoln....or at best, Tom Daschle.

[Brittain33]

Gallup 7/24

58% Disapprove (+3)
37% Approve (-2)

Sad!

I feel stupider every time I click on a Gallup daily result.

[Person Man]

Gallup 7/24

58% Disapprove (+3)
37% Approve (-2)

Sad!

I feel stupider every time I click on a Gallup daily result.

yup

[GeorgiaModerate]

WaPo analyzes the 50-state Gallup data and notes that his approval in 47 states is lower then his share of the vote in November (the exceptions are Hawaii, Montana, and Utah).  The states where his approval is at least 50% add up to only 99 electoral votes; lowering the threshold to 45% brings him to only 154 EV.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/07/24/in-47-states-a-smaller-part-of-the-population-now-approves-of-trump-than-voted-for-him

[pbrower2a]

Now with updates since late April:

Arkansas -- Talk Business/Harding College 50-47
Utah -- Salt Lake Tribune/Dan Jones  48-50
Iowa -- Des Moines Register/Selzer 43-52
Colorado  --  Save My Care(D)/PPP 40-56
North Carolina -- Save My Care (D)/PPP 46-50
(an Iowa poll from this group is supplanted by a later one)
New Hampshire --  ARG 27-60
Tennessee -- Vanderbilt University, 52-42
Wisconsin -- Marquette Law School, 41-51
Texas -- Texas Lyceum, 43-51
Virginia -- Quinnipiac, 40-57
Alaska -- Save My Care (D)/PPP , 44-48
Nevada    Save My Care (D)/PPP, 45-50
West Virginia -- Save My Care (D)/PPP. 55-36
California --San Jose Mercury-News, PPIC. 33-63 (likely voters)
Hawaii -- Civil Beat. 32-59
Michigan, EPIC/MRI. 32-61
Pennsylvania, Franklin&Marshall. 36-62

To distinguish the states for which I have only the Gallup data that pose potential controversy, I can shaded those to orange from red and green from blue. (Yellow would apply to ties, but I have no ties in that category).    Those that were shown within the pink and medium-red categories to orange; those   in the light or medium shades of blue will be shaded to green. The outliers like Vermont and Wyoming do not get shaded to green or orange because they are unlikely to create controversy.

Blue, positive and 40-43%  20% saturation
............................ 44-47%  40%
............................ 48-50%  50%
............................ 51-55%  70%
............................ 56%+     90%

Red, negative and  48-50%  20% (raw approval or favorability)
..........................  44-47%  30%
..........................  40-43%  50%
..........................  35-39%  70%
.......................under  35%  90%

White - tie.


Now for the theme of disapproval as shown in the Gallup data:

navy under 40
blue 40-43
light blue 44-47
white 48 or 49
pink 50-54
red 55-59
maroon 60 or higher

Again I am shading the states in the lightest-intensity colors and white toward orange from red, green from blue, or yellow from white if I rely only upon the Gallup polling data for a state with  
between 40% and 54% disapproval.

That yellowing is for one-time use. I don't like this color scheme.  

[PragmaticPopulist]

Based on the Gallup 50-state poll and the partisan lean of states, here's what a battleground map might look like if the election were held now:

I find it hard to believe Trump is in negative territory in Indiana and Texas, and just barely in positive territory in Missouri and Mississippi. I'm also skeptical that he's +5 in Utah. A lot of Mormons just voted for him as an anti-Clinton vote.

[pbrower2a]

But back to the more normal color scheme of red to blue

Blue, positive and 40-43%  20% saturation
............................ 44-47%  40%
............................ 48-50%  50%
............................ 51-55%  70%
............................ 56%+     90%

Red, negative and  48-50%  20% (raw approval or favorability)
..........................  44-47%  30%
..........................  40-43%  50%
..........................  35-39%  70%
.......................under  35%  90%

White - tie.


Now for the theme of disapproval as shown in the Gallup data:

navy under 40
blue 40-43
light blue 44-47
white 48 or 49
pink 50-54
red 55-59
maroon 60 or higher

[Beet]

People "disapprove" of Trump yet will support him politically when it actually counts.

[Inmate Trump]

People "disapprove" of Trump yet will support him politically when it actually counts.

I doubt Michigan and Pennsylvania will do so again.

Numbers for him there are appalling and more than enough to turn them back to blue.

Of course, nothing really matters if Trump colludes with Putin again.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Gallup 7/24

58% Disapprove (+3)
37% Approve (-2)

Sad!

Trumpmentum cut short. Bad!

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

People "disapprove" of Trump yet will support him politically when it actually counts.

The main alternative in '16 also had very poor favorability numbers. Millions, if not tens of Millions of Trump's votes were not for him, but rather against Hillary.

[The Mikado]

People "disapprove" of Trump yet will support him politically when it actually counts.

The main alternative in '16 also had very poor favorability numbers. Millions, if not tens of Millions of Trump's votes were not for him, but rather against Hillary.

Wulfric raises a good point. Trump cleaned up among voters who disapproved of both candidates.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

People "disapprove" of Trump yet will support him politically when it actually counts.

I doubt Michigan and Pennsylvania will do so again.

Numbers for him there are appalling and more than enough to turn them back to blue.

Of course, nothing really matters if Trump colludes with Putin again.

Agree. I honestly cannot see him winning PA and MI again.