Trump approval ratings thread, 1.4

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1060931485514022913
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1060931986431324160

[pbrower2a]

President Trump tried to push an infrastructure program. The first part was to infuse what already existed with a huge, guaranteed profit into what has been available at low cost. First you raise the rates for water, electricity, and other such necessities, and add new tolls to existing highways. Then in the sweet bye and bye the elite profiteers will have the incentive to improve things as captive customers will be paying far more, and of course there will be cause to make bigger profits from modest investments.

Even when Republicans had a House as well as a Senate majority and Republicans held a majority of Governorships enough Republicans saw such as politically suicidal. The proposal failed.

Will the President offer the same again? Maybe. It is his character. Will he try to sweeten it more with some guarantees of good results? He thought that the addition of a layer of profit would be enough.

A House Democratic majority and a majority of Gubernatorial offices in the hands of Democrats changes the political reality significantly It does not assure anyone that the President will himself change his behavior.

This may explain why I had started "Trump approval ratings thread 1.5". I will wait until January 3 to start Trump approval ratings thread 2.0 as the composition of the House changes. New Democratic governors have little to lose by opposing him on issues. I have yet to be convinced that he now has a strong chance of re-election.


I am starting over on Trump approvals in this thread because the electoral results change much -- if not the personality of the President.  He had hesitant Republicans as his greatest opposition for nearly two years. Now he has a Democratic House and a majority of Democratic Governors as objects of opposition -- and his usual tirades.

It is possible that he will mellow out. It is also possible that he will find new advisors more willing to conciliate than to excoriate. I doubt that he will drop his plutocratic ideology, one that looks like a Commie stereotype of a capitalist exploiter. Donald Trump is still the dominant figure in American politics, and he still has a huge and poerful following. Institutional power is on his side.

How people see this President may change little until the Lame Duck era for the current Congress is over. If you want my prediction: the fur and feathers will fly.
 

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1061254733371973632

[pbrower2a]

Some exit polls from November 6:



The source is CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls

Other telling details:

Gender

Male 47-51 Female 40-59

This is a huge gender gap.

Age (voting Republican or Democratic)

18-29  32-67
30-44  39-58
45-64  50-49
55+     50-48

Trump is turning young adults away from the GOP, and older voters are almost evenly split.

Race, approval of Trump

non-Hispanic white  54-45
other 22-76

R/D splits

high-school diploma or less 51-48
some college 47-50
associate degree 50-47
bachelors degree 43-55
advanced degree 34-65

college degree 39-59
no degree 49-49

(Trump and the current GOP have practically no intellectual appeal)

ethnicity and education

white, no degree 61-37
white, college degree 45-53
other, no degree 22-76
other, college degree 22-77

(The stereotypes that you see at news coverage of a Trump rally look valid. Although whites with college degrees are more likely to be Republicans, white people without degrees seem to support Trump and the GOP strongly. With non-whites, there is little difference between  having or not having a degree and supporting Trump and the GOP. I am tempted to believe that black. Latino, and Asian people of limited education are in line with the educational elites in politics. The black, Latino, and Asian bourgeoisie seem to look out for the interests of their underclass. The white bourgeoisie and middle class do not look out for the interests of poor white people. I am tempted to believe that Trump and the current GOP succeed with atomized people).

Income

$30K or less 34-63
$30-50K     41-57
$50-100K   47-52
$100-200K  51-47
over $200K   52-47

(Low income gives one less of a stake in the Trump agenda, and this may have connection to ethnicity. People with low educational levels are largely in low-income jobs).

Parent

Yes 44-54
No  43-55      

(Insignificant difference. Might as well ask about sport fandom, pet ownership, smoking/non-smoking)

Gun ownership

Yes 61-36
No  26-72

(The Right is more scared of losing guns than of crime committed with guns... go figure).

Military

Veteran 58-41
Non-vet 43-56

(probably a divide on education, gender, and region)

Religion:

Protestant  61-38
Catholic 49-50
other Christian 52-47
all Christian  56-42
Jewish 17-79
Muslim (too few to count)
other 28-70
none  28-70

(Latino populations are heavily Catholic)


LGBT

yes 17-82
no 47-51

(homophobic bigotry will not work in 2020. Advice to Republicans in 2020; do not disparage LGBT people!)

Urban/suburban/rural divide:

The American population is

17% rural 65-32
51% suburban 49-49
32% urban 42-56

This probably relates to much else, like home ownership. Real-estate investors (landlords) take a bigger bite out an urban or suburban middle-class person than does the tax collector. Well-educated urban and suburban professionals may admire innovative capitalists in high technology, media, manufacturing, and even banking and retailing, but not their landlords. Rural residents are more likely to own their own homes and pay taxes directly to a local government. Nobody wants to be a cash cow for what they see as rich, powerful people. 


 

[GeorgiaModerate]

R/D splits
...
Urban/suburban/rural divide:

The American population is

17% rural 32-65
51% suburban 49-49
32% urban 56-42

Surely this group is backwards (D/R rather than R/D)?

[pbrower2a]

Some exit polls from November 6:

Trump approval/disapproval in exit polls in key states
Overall 45-54

AZ  51-47
FL   51-48
GA  52-47
MI  44-56
MT  51-48
NV  48-51
OH  52-47
PA   45-55
TX   49-48
VA  43-57
WI  48-52

others

CA 37-60
IN 55-44
MN 46-53
MO 53-46
MS 60-39
ND 61-38
NJ  41-58
NY 38-61
TN 59-41
WV 63-35

(the entire set from CNN. Curious about other states? Find some other source. I have nothing on Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, North Carolina, or New Hampshire).  

Trump edge:

dark blue 10% or more
middle blue 5-9%
pale blue under 5%
effective tie (1% either way, both approval and disapproval under 50%)
pink under 5%, but disapproval 50% or higher or at least 1%
red 5-10%
dark red 10% or more

Do not confuse this with approval polls already here. I am starting over on those, as those are obsolete and unreliable. How many people saw polls for Democrats that looked like leads, but the Democrat lost?

With these exit polls, I do not see President Trump in danger of a landslide loss in 2020. I do not see him winning, either.

He cannot win the Presidential election when his approval polls are where they are in Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. He might barely lose, but he will lose.  With the Iowa delegation splitting 3-1 Democratic, I see no reason to believe that he will win Iowa.

...First-time voters in midterm elections (which probably skews young) voted heavily Democratic. If you are a Republican, you want to discourage them from further voting.  

[pbrower2a]

R/D splits
...
Urban/suburban/rural divide:

The American population is

17% rural 32-65
51% suburban 49-49
32% urban 56-42

Surely this group is backwards (D/R rather than R/D)?

Correction made. Thank you.

[pbrower2a]

Pbrower2a, are you sure he can't win with those numbers assuming the economy holds up?  48-52 in Wisconsin is awfully close and that's all he need if he gets OH/FL/NC/IA which all look positive (especially IA if he gets a symbolic trade war victory with China). It also says nothing about his competition.  If the Dems pick a Midwesterner with good cultural ties to the region or someone like Biden they should definitely win a close one.  If they pick someone like Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren I see them as underdogs.

We are in new territory with this President -- someone with huge failures of ethics.  It may be difficult to compare ethical failures to a depression (Hoover) or stagflation (Carter), or even having no idea of what to do next (the elder Bush). Those are the last three Presidents to get clobbered in a bid for re-election.

Trump has one huge asset: the Right tolerates his foibles. Liberals would never tolerate craziness, corruption, or cruelty by their own -- but right-wingers do. A paper that I read suggested that people decidedly right-of-center can moralize about any offense of liberals and radicals but tolerate moral rottenness from their own. Among people actually voting in the 2018 election, the divide between approval and disapproval for the President is a horrid 45-54  The pattern of voting is consistent with the President getting 45% of the popular vote, as shown in races for the House and Governorships. The Senate? Republicans had far more opportunities for gain than loss and did not gain as much as they would have had the President been more popular.

Take away 1% of the popular vote from Trump in an even swing from 2016, and weaken  the vote for the Green Party, and the Democratic nominee wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin at the least. Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Ohio, and even Texas -- none of which Trump can afford to see flip -- get iffy.

Right-wingers tend to have severe pessimism about human nature, believing that behind the civilized veneer of people is a monster of dishonesty, lust, betrayal, greed, and unruliness. They expect the worst in human nature and are not disappointed when they find it. Distrustful as they are, one might expect them  to be more cautious in their business dealings -- but instead they show gullibility in refusing to abandon an alluring opportunity. They accept the rogue as the norm instead of someone to avoided at all costs, because the rogue might be useful.

Liberals may accept a former rogue who shows convincing contrition. Redemption is possible, but difficult. Typically one must assert that what one did in the past was wrong, that one would discourage anyone from doing the same, and perhaps even that such behavior is no longer good for the person. Destroying objects associated with a bad cause (like  Nazi, KKK, or commie $#!+), breaking old connections with suspect causes, repudiating people associated with such a cause, and changing old patterns of language are overt signs.

Here's something that I posted two years ago on another website related to historical patterns.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't broadly disagree with what you are saying but I do think there are other factors at play than just Trump's personality.  

The three presidents you mention all faced recessions, HW Bush likely wouldn't have lost without the 1991-1992 downturn.  His reaction to it was dismissive and that gave Clinton an opportunity to seem far more in touch with people's struggles.

As you might see from the data from exit polls, Trump is having trouble with groups that used to be reliably Republican -- like suburban voters, white women, Asian-Americans, and people with college degrees. Obama did better with these groups in a Presidential election that started close and ended up as a landslide with opponents very different from Donald Trump. It could be that my opinion is that Trump is far more objectionable than either McCain or Romney -- but Trump won. It could be that Obama's personality is more typical of a Republican of the past than like those of recent Democrats. Personality matters in elections.

Trump's abrasive personality and dismissive attitude toward minorities and educated 'elites' got him the right votes in the right places in 2016. In 2020 people will see the results. Trump still has a strong appeal to white people with low educations and with rural voters but he has substandard performance with others.  Note that only 17% of the electorate in 2018 was rural.

This is not to say that he will lose the most urban state in America (surprise -- it is Utah, which has about 90% of its population within ten miles of Interstate 15) or win the most rural state in America (Vermont, which has no really-large cities). Trump will do fine among white people with low education, the atomized 'low-information voters' that he says that he loves. The exit poll of Texas suggests trouble for President Trump in 2020... Texas is becoming increasingly urban and suburban, and his ideal white voter with little formal education is becoming a shrinking part of the state's electorate. Note that Beto O'Rourke came close to winning a Senate seat against an incumbent despite having no experience in statewide elections.

The 2016 election and the 2018 election did not show that 'the economy is everything'. Considering that the economy was in far better shape in 2016 than in 2008 (how could things be much worse politically than people dreading another Great Depression, except for having another Great Depression?), Hillary Clinton should have beaten Donald Trump handily.

I am not predicting a recession. There is no economic bubble to burst, so there is little chance of a financial panic of the sort that America endured in 1857, 1929, or 2008.  Should there be a recession, then President Trump and Republicans in general will surely cast blame on Democrats for failing to accept tax cuts, privatization, and union-crushing as necessary but painful solutions. Donald Trump, as I have said many times before, is practically a Marxist stereotype of a capitalist exploiter and as a politician and an enabler of capitalism at its worst. It is not yet clear who would get the blame in the 2020 election. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

For many white people, the word rhymes with "triggers". We need be honest about that. Racism is a political reality, and it becomes more troublesome for white people who see evidence of successful black, Asian, or Latino people. But notice also how atomized poor white people are. They might go to church, but that is about it. Well-off white people do not look out for poor white people, which is a big difference from the reality with well-off black, Asian, or Latino people.

I have noticed in the exit polls that although non-whites vote much the same irrespective of educational achievement (in other words, the black bourgeoisie which is well educated  votes much like poor blacks who generally are ill-educated), white people with college degrees vote much more Democratic than do people without college degrees and especially with a high-school education or less.

It is possible that the political and economic system offers less to poor white people, especially in the Mountain and Deep South -- and that supporting right-wing demagogues is one way for such people to lash out at people not their political or economic allies. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Our economic system is making people more disposable and expendable, and people who used to make a middle income through industrial labor are finding that the jobs are vanishing. Such people find that their kids are paying the price for such a change. The post-industrial world offers little to ill-educated people of any kind. Donald Trump has learned to play their resentments without offering solutions. When he implodes, will such people be amenable to a left-wing populist like the late Hugo Chavez in Venezuela? The resentments will still be there, and populists of all kind from Hitler to Castro exploit such resentments.

Scary, huh? If I were in Venezuela I would be on the Right! 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Such is a problem with populist demagogues of any kind: they make contradictory promises that cannot be fulfilled simultaneously or even in succession. The approval polls that had Donald Trump at 60% disapproval suggested that he was going to lose to an opponent who would get 350 or more electoral votes.  But 54% disapproval? He could still get about 46% of the popular vote, and if the Democrat simply runs up the vote in sure-win votes while losing competitive states, we have a replay of 2016 -- with Democrats losing their House majority. Say hello to a new America in which a coalition of fundamentalist Protestants and rapacious plutocrats are able to get permanent majorities that make America great for only a few.

Above all, I cannot yet predict how Trump will behave with a Democratic majority in the House and more Democratic governors. The Democratic Governors may have more impact upon the Presidential race because they owe nothing to President Trump.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I am a right-wing Republican, then the last thing I would want is for low-education voters to get access to cheap internet that allows them to see something other than the pablum that they get from televangelists and right-wing politicians. Donald Trump had an infrastructure plan, and its first concern was to throw new tolls and rate hikes at the common man so that the owners would have cause to make improvements. The immediate infrastructure for highways would simply be toll gantries, probably subsidized with the federal treasury. People accustomed to taking a freeway on a commute to work would find themselves with a $20 toll for twenty miles each way each day before they would see any improvement in the highway or even any effort to improve the highway. People would find their rates for utilities skyrocketing. Trump's infrastructure thus imploded in Congress.

...I live in Michigan, and our freeway system is mostly old. I am not convinced of the desirability of building new urban expressways; those, after all, facilitated the decline of Detroit by facilitating commutes to the suburbs. Turning I-94, one of the most heavily-traveled four-lane Interstate highways in America into a six-lane route makes sense. Such a road would be safer than what we now have. Blood Alleys along US 127 north of Lansing and US 131 south of Kalamazoo need to be replaced or improved to Interstate standards. US 131 between Holland and Muskegon is being replaced. An Interstate route across the Upper Peninsula would serve a part of the country that has no such route (and it could be part of an I-98 that serves Duluth, Grand Forks, Minot, and Williston).  But anyone can draw lines on a map.

[henster]

FOX seems to have exit polls for all 50 states, they along with AP did their own exits and the JA seem different than the ones on CNN. Lower in WI/MN/NV. In WI it's 43/56, in MN 41/58, in NV 45/54. The Fox results seem to jive more with the election results in those states, no R in MN really got more than 42%, Heller/Laxalt got around 45%, Vukmir got around 45%.

https://www.foxnews.com/midterms-2018/voter-analysis

[Sorenroy]

FOX seems to have exit polls for all 50 states, they along with AP did their own exits and the JA seem different than the ones on CNN. Lower in WI/MN/NV. In WI it's 43/56, in MN 41/58, in NV 45/54. The Fox results seem to jive more with the election results in those states, no R in MN really got more than 42%, Heller/Laxalt got around 45%, Vukmir got around 45%.

https://www.foxnews.com/midterms-2018/voter-analysis

Only 47 states, not all 50:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That being said, North Carolina (I didn't look at the other two) did have several statewide elections. A Supreme Court seat, 3 Appeals Court seats, and 6 Constitutional Amendments were on the ballot statewide.

[pbrower2a]

FOX seems to have exit polls for all 50 states, they along with AP did their own exits and the JA seem different than the ones on CNN. Lower in WI/MN/NV. In WI it's 43/56, in MN 41/58, in NV 45/54. The Fox results seem to jive more with the election results in those states, no R in MN really got more than 42%, Heller/Laxalt got around 45%, Vukmir got around 45%.

https://www.foxnews.com/midterms-2018/voter-analysis

Only 47 states, not all 50:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That being said, North Carolina (I didn't look at the other two) did have several statewide elections. A Supreme Court seat, 3 Appeals Court seats, and 6 Constitutional Amendments were on the ballot statewide.

47 is far closer to my satisfaction than the 20 that I have. I'd love to see all 47 so that I have an apples-to-apples reading. That means one source. So far as I am concerned, anything before the 2018 election is now obsolete.  That includes every poll that I have already recorded.

Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, and New Hampshire each had gubernatorial races -- and those are usually considered important to most voters. Judicial races and state constitutional amendments are not so 'sexy' to marginal voters who usually stay home from midterm elections.   

[GeorgiaModerate]

Gallup weekly:

Approve 38 (-2)
Disapprove 56 (+2)

[Person Man]

Gallup weekly:

Approve 38 (-2)
Disapprove 56 (+2)

I guess they stopped coming home.

[Gone to Carolina]

Here's a margin map I whipped up of the Fox / AP exit/survey results.

[pbrower2a]

Strictly speaking, this is not a poll, but it does involve votes cast in 2018. All states cast votes for House seats.

This may be different from a Presidential election as House seats often reflect the quality of House candidates and their campaigns.

The cumulative House vote for all states except Florida as a predictor of the Presidency. ME-02 is still undecided, so I am treating it as a tossup. Republicans won all three House seats in Nebraska, so I am going with those as percentages.

Draw your conclusions about how much you expect the electorate to expand in in what partisan direction. A larger percentage of eligible voters voted in this midterm election than any in a long time. More people vote in Presidential elections than in midterms, and I would guess that the habit of voting, once started, does not end. Rationales for voting in 2018 but not in 2020 such as "I am voting for my cousin the county sheriff, but I might not vote in 2020" at the personal level are rare.

The new voters are heavily young and Democratic-leaning. The rap on the Millennial Generation is that they have not been voting. That is probably at an end.

I'm going to give a wild guess that the District of Columbia votes strongly against Trump.

Alabama

Republican: 972,927 (58.8%) (1 uncontested race)
Democrats: 675,269 (40.8%)

Alaska

Republican: 128,516 (53.7%)
Democrats: 109,615 (45.8%)

Arizona

Democrats: 999,328 (49.8%)
Republicans: 989,802 (49.3%) (1 uncontested race)

Arkansas

Republicans: 553,536 (62.6%)
Democrats: 310,572 (35.1%)

California

Democrats: 5,041,566 (63.7%) (1 race with no candidate)
Republicans: 2,747,904 (34.7%) (8 races with no candidate)

Colorado

Democrats: 1,252,603 (52.4%)
Republicans: 1,050,938 (44.0%)

Connecticut

Democrats: 811,194 (61.0%)
Republicans: 508,669 (38.3%)

Delaware

Democrats: 227,353 (64.5%)
Republicans: 125,384 (35.5%)

(Florida -- votes are still being found and discovered, so no count. I am treating it as a tossup).

Georgia

Republicans: 1,981,713 (52.4%) (1 uncontested race)
Democrats: 1,802,475 (47.6%) (1 uncontested race)

Hawaii

Democrats: 287,735 (75.3%)
Republicans: 87,296 (22.8%)

Idaho

Republicans: 366,054 (62.0%)
Democrats: 204,020 (34.6%)

Illinois

Democrats: 2,651,012 (60.4%)
Republicans: 1,714,804 (39.1%)

Indiana

Republicans: 1,178,371 (56.6%)
Democrats: 897,632 (43.1%)

Iowa

Democrats: 656,986 (50.4%)
Republicans: 607,827 (46.6%)

Kansas

Republicans: 549,563 (53.9%)
Democrats: 447,134 (43.9%)

Kentucky

Republicans: 935,565 (59.6%)
Democrats: 613,070 (39.0%)

Louisiana

Republicans: 835,603 (57.2%) (1 uncontested race)
Democrats: 553,008 (37.9%)

Maine

Democrats: 328,409 (52.7%)
Republicans: 241,180 (38.7%)

Maryland

Democrats: 1,414,473 (64.9%)
Republicans: 717,945 (32.9%)

Massachusetts

Democrats: 1,529,641 (74.9%)
Republicans: 486,192 (23.8%) (4 uncontested races)

Michigan

Democrats: 2,108,119 (52.0%)
Republicans: 1,826,335 (45.1%) (1 uncontested race)

Minnesota

Democrats: 1,420,669 (55.2%)
Republicans: 1,125,569 (43.7%)

Mississippi

Republicans: 444,092 (50.6%) (1 uncontested race)
Democrats: 369,782 (42.1%)

Missouri

Republicans: 1,318,481 (55.1%)
Democrats: 1,016,096 (42.5%)

Montana

Republicans: 251,611 (51.1%)
Democrats: 227,036 (46.1%)

Nebraska

Republicans: 424,682 (62.5%)
Democrats: 255,053 (37.5%)

Nevada

Democrats: 491,004 (51.1%)
Republicans: 439,401 (45.8%)

New Hampshire

Democrats: 310,320 (54.4%)
Republicans: 249,714 (43.8%)

New Jersey

Democrats: 1,731,037 (59.6%)
Republicans: 1,139,101 (39.2%)

New Mexico

Democrats: 398,753 (58.2%)
Republicans: 262,138 (38.3%)

New York

Democrats: 3,664,970 (66.6%)
Republicans: 1,751,620 (31.8%) (6 uncontested races)

North Carolina

Republicans: 1,830,219 (50.5%)
Democrats: 1,748,018 (48.2%) (1 uncontested race)

North Dakota

Republicans: 192,733 (60.3%)
Democrats: 113,891 (35.6%)

Ohio

Republicans: 2,245,403 (52.3%)
Democrats: 2,019,120 (47.0%)

Oklahoma

Republicans: 730,531 (62.0%)
Democrats: 428,452 (36.3%)

Oregon

Democrats: 1,034,344 (57.4%)
Republicans: 686,952 (38.1%)

Pennsylvania

Democrats: 2,669,469 (54.9%)
Republicans: 2,179,246 (44.8%) (1 uncontested race)

Rhode Island

Democrats: 239,694 (65.0%)
Republicans: 128,831 (35.0%)

South Carolina

Republicans: 927,504 (54.3%)
Democrats: 757,499 (44.3%)

South Dakota

Republicans: 202,673 (60.3%)
Democrats: 121,002 (36.0%)

Tennessee

Republicans: 1,276,040 (59.2%)
Democrats: 843,658 (39.2%)

Texas

Republicans: 4,104,555 (50.4%) (4 uncontested races)
Democrats: 3,824,300 (47.0%)

Utah

Republicans: 510,244 (58.7%)
Democrats: 307,151 (35.4%)

Vermont

Democrats: 188,547 (69.2%)
Republicans: 70,705 (26.0%)

Virginia

Democrats: 1,864,483 (56.3%)
Republicans: 1,407,791 (42.5%) (1 uncontested race)

Washington

Democrats: 1,734,775 (62.8%)
Republicans: 947,374 (34.3%) (2 races with no candidate)

West Virginia

Republicans: 335,791 (58.4%)
Democrats: 232,856 (40.5%)

Wisconsin

Democrats: 1,358,156 (53.1%)
Republicans: 1,171,456 (45.8%) (1 uncontested race)

Wyoming

Republicans: 127,882 (63.7%)
Democrats: 59,929 (29.8%)

Trump edge:

dark blue 10% or more (really dark for 40% or more --  Nebraska's third Congressional district)
middle blue 5-9%
pale blue under 5%
effective tie (1% either way, both approval and disapproval under 50%)
pink under 5%, but disapproval 50% or higher or at least 1%
red 5-10%
dark red 10% or more (really dark for 40% or more -- District of Columbia and Massachusetts)

Maine 1 is in the southwestern part of the state and Maine 2 is all else.
Nebraska districts are shown 1, 2, and 3 left to right even if they are geographically 3, 1, and 2 left to right (west to east).

[GeorgiaModerate]

Ipsos/Reuters, Nov. 6-12, 2131 adults

Approve 41 (-2)
Disapprove 54 (+3)

[Oryxslayer]

Your map colored IL wrong

[pbrower2a]

Ipsos/Reuters, Nov. 6-12, 2131 adults

Approve 41 (-2)
Disapprove 54 (+3)

Election day and six following days. It should not be long before we start seeing polls relating only to time after the election.

[GeorgiaModerate]

We got polls!

CNN/SSRS, Nov. 8-12, 677 adults.  According to the text, the same respondents were interviewed the previous week.

Approve 42 (+3)
Disapprove 56 (+1)

Strongly approve 30 (nc)
Strongly disapprove 48 (+3)


Monmouth, Nov. 9-12, 802 adults (change from August)

Approve 43 (nc)
Disapprove 49 (-1)

Looking ahead to the 2020 election for President, do you think that Donald Trump should
be re-elected, or do you think that it is time to have someone else in office?

Re-elect Trump 36
Someone else 59


YouGov, Nov. 11-13, 1500 adults including 1284 RV

Adults:

Approve 41 (+1)
Disapprove 51 (+2)

Strongly approve 25 (nc)
Strongly disapprove 41 (+4)

RV:

Approve 45 (nc)
Disapprove 54 (+2)

Strongly approve 30 (+2)
Strongly disapprove 46 (+2)

[pbrower2a]

We got polls!

CNN/SSRS, Nov. 8-12, 677 adults.  According to the text, the same respondents were interviewed the previous week.

Approve 42 (+3)
Disapprove 56 (+1)

Strongly approve 30 (nc)
Strongly disapprove 48 (+3)

I'm guessing that some undecided conservative voters from the week of the election have gotten cold feet about rejecting President Trump. But 56% disapproval indicates that some rather conservative people dislike the President. Nearly a majority 'strongly disapproves'. CNN suggests that opinions are nearly set with practically no wiggle room.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Raw approval and disapproval numbers aren't so hideous in this poll, and it is possible for an incumbent winning while facing 49% disapproval. Simply pick up everyone who does not disapprove, which explains Obama in 2012.

The approval and disapproval numbers for the President may not be that bad on the surface -- but these numbers suggest a six-year itch after two years, which is not the spot that Obama was in in 2010. In 2010, America was returning to conservative norms in political identity after Obama did everything that everyone thought he needed to do.  Trump is in a worse spot. The news media hold him in contempt. His biggest achievement in foreign policy can implode at any moment. The President has too many scandals for anyone to handle except as a prosecutor or investigator. It is theoretically possible that President Trump could learn from his mistakes, but I have yet to see any evidence of such. He so far has been more adept at casting blame than at solving problems. 

The historical floor for a President getting re-elected in a binary election is about 40% (Hoover; Carter got 41% with  John Anderson getting 6% (which looks much like a part of the Democratic coalition that they would have in 1992 but never had before then).

"Someone else" probably does not mean the eventual Democratic nominee of 2020 to at least 4% of the electorate. I can't imagine any Democratic nominee for President getting more than 55% of the vote under any circumstances other than a severe recession or a botched war.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Different pollster, and although the approval number is just short of his share of the popular vote that he got in 2016, the high level of disapproval suggests that 45% is close to his ceiling.

45% of the popular vote does not win. That is not enough with which to win his three barest wins in 2016 (Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), and probably not Iowa. It won't give him either of the four closest states to going for him in 2016 (Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, and Nevada). "Strongly disapprove" is already ahead of "approve (at any level)" in this poll.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Pew Research American Trends Panel, Nov. 7-13, 9451 adults (change from Sep. 24-Oct. 7)

Approve 41 (+3)
Disapprove 58 (-3)

A post facto GCB poll (asked of 7703 voters):

In the elections this November for the U.S. House of Representatives, did you vote for [Show
in order of response: “the Republican Party’s candidate” OR “the Democratic Party’s
candidate”] for Congress in your district? [RANDOMIZE ORDER OF RESPONSE OPTIONS
1 AND 2]


Democratic candidate 52
Republican candidate 45
Another party 2

[Annatar]

Although there was no exit poll of Iowa by Edison Research, we do have a exit poll from Public Policy Polling, a dem leaning firm but still some data is better then nothing. It found Trump approval at 49%, disapproval 48% with a partisan split of 37R/35D/28I.  The numbers in the cross-tabs seem to check out so the 49% approve, 48% disapprove number is likely true.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392695469/Exit-Poll-Iowa-Voters-11-6-11-7-2018

[pbrower2a]

Some exit polls from November 6:

Trump approval/disapproval in exit polls in key states
Overall 45-54

AZ  51-47
FL   51-48
GA  52-47
MI  44-56
MT  51-48
NV  48-51
OH  52-47
PA   45-55
TX   49-48
VA  43-57
WI  48-52

others

CA 37-60
IN 55-44
MN 46-53
MO 53-46
MS 60-39
ND 61-38
NJ  41-58
NY 38-61
TN 59-41
WV 63-35

(the entire set from CNN. Curious about other states? Find some other source. I have nothing on Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, North Carolina, or New Hampshire).

Although there was no exit poll of Iowa by Edison Research, we do have a exit poll from Public Policy Polling, a dem leaning firm but still some data is better then nothing. It found Trump approval at 49%, disapproval 48% with a partisan split of 37R/35D/28I.  The numbers in the cross-tabs seem to check out so the 49% approve, 48% disapprove number is likely true.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392695469/Exit-Poll-Iowa-Voters-11-6-11-7-2018

Iowans re-elected the incumbent Republican governor, but they flipped two of three House seats from R to D, so we have some ambiguity on whether Iowa is a 'Red' or 'Blue' state in a midterm election. Midterm elections are usually more R than presidential elections, but this one is much more D than the Presidential election of 2016, at least in Iowa.

Note the 49-41 split in voters on how they voted in 2016, which reflects that people who voted in 2016 and 2018 were not different from the 2016 electorate. New voters made a huge difference.

Not distinguishing between exit polls, which are polls of actual voters, I can add Iowa, which will be an important state in deciding the Presidential election and control of the Senate in 2020:   

Trump edge:

dark blue 10% or more
middle blue 5-9%
pale blue under 5%
effective tie (1% either way, both approval and disapproval under 50%)
pink under 5%, but disapproval 50% or higher or at least 1%
red 5-10%
dark red 10% or more

I said earlier:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note that Presidential elections are usually more favorable to Democrats than to Republicans than the preceding election, the most obvious exception being 1982 to 1984. Personalities, policies, and economic conditions matter greatly in deciding who can win and who cannot. This poll suggests that Donald Trump's 9% victory margin in Iowa was a freak, and that Iowa should be at least as friendly to just about any Democratic nominee for President as it was in 2000 or 2004.   

[henster]

Although there was no exit poll of Iowa by Edison Research, we do have a exit poll from Public Policy Polling, a dem leaning firm but still some data is better then nothing. It found Trump approval at 49%, disapproval 48% with a partisan split of 37R/35D/28I.  The numbers in the cross-tabs seem to check out so the 49% approve, 48% disapprove number is likely true.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392695469/Exit-Poll-Iowa-Voters-11-6-11-7-2018

FOX/AP exit poll which is different from Edison had him at 46/54.

https://www.foxnews.com/midterms-2018/voter-analysis?filter=IA&type=G

[pbrower2a]

Although there was no exit poll of Iowa by Edison Research, we do have a exit poll from Public Policy Polling, a dem leaning firm but still some data is better then nothing. It found Trump approval at 49%, disapproval 48% with a partisan split of 37R/35D/28I.  The numbers in the cross-tabs seem to check out so the 49% approve, 48% disapprove number is likely true.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392695469/Exit-Poll-Iowa-Voters-11-6-11-7-2018

FOX/AP exit poll which is different from Edison had him at 46/54.

https://www.foxnews.com/midterms-2018/voter-analysis?filter=IA&type=G

This was a poll of favorability, a different critter.

I would not have a problem with a map showing favorability as an like-to-like basis. But I am not comparing favorability to approval. Favorabiliity is about expectations, and approval is about achievements.