Trump approval ratings thread, 1.4

[BudgieForce]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

I'm surprised Trump hasn't tweeted about this yet.

Probably busy making the graphic.

[GeorgiaModerate]

SurveyMonkey weekly tracker, July 26-Aug 1, 9275 adults including 8161 registered voters

Among adults:

Approve 44 (+1)
Disapprove 54 (-1)

Strongly approve 26 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 43 (-1)

Among RV:

Approve 46 (+2)
Disapprove 54 (-1)

Strongly approve 28 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 44 (-2)

[twenty42]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

Wasn’t Rasmussen the most accurate poll of the 2016 election?

[BudgieForce]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

Wasn’t Rasmussen the most accurate poll of the 2016 election?

No, they werent. I'm not getting into this stupid fight with you again.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

LOL Trashmussen has his approval amongst blacks at nearly 30%

[twenty42]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

Wasn’t Rasmussen the most accurate poll of the 2016 election?

No, they werent. I'm not getting into this stupid fight with you again.

Yes they were.

[BudgieForce]

There's just something about posters with blue Pennsylvania avatars and my ignore list.

[Person Man]

There's just something about posters with blue Pennsylvania avatars and my ignore list.

[Badger]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

Wasn’t Rasmussen the most accurate poll of the 2016 election?

No, they werent. I'm not getting into this stupid fight with you again.

Yes they were.

Then why did you ask?

[GeorgiaModerate]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

Wasn’t Rasmussen the most accurate poll of the 2016 election?

No, they werent. I'm not getting into this stupid fight with you again.

Yes they were.

Then why did you ask?

And PPP was the most accurate pollster in 2012.  Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

But if Rasmussen's record in 2016 is that significant, consider this: for most of the campaign, they (virtually alone among pollsters) showed a significant Trump lead in the PV; it was only at the very end that they came around to a small Clinton lead that was close to the final margin.  Therefore, we can reasonably conclude that Rasmussen is only accurate at the end of a campaign, and that earlier in a campaign they significantly overestimate the Republican!

(I wrote that as a snark, but considering that Ras is currently a very Trump-friendly outlier compared to almost all other polls, there may be a grain of truth in it.)

[twenty42]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

Wasn’t Rasmussen the most accurate poll of the 2016 election?

No, they werent. I'm not getting into this stupid fight with you again.

Yes they were.

Then why did you ask?

Because my thesis can’t be disproven no matter how many names you call me. The vast majority of pollsters were predicting Clinton +4-6 on Tuesday afternoon, and only “Trashmussen” and MAYBE Marist predicted Clinton +2. I’ll continue to bring this up until Rasmussen is as wrong on an Election Day as YouGov, Quinnipiac, Gallup, or any other of the left-leaning polls you people adore.

[pbrower2a]

The question at the end is often which electorate model is valid. Which people vote -- or do not vote?

One way to win what would otherwise be a close election is to campaign with the objective of demoralizing the opposition. Thus the campaign tries to make voting seem futile. ":It's not your turn". "We have the money and that is all that matters in politics".  "Only losers  vote for your nominees".  Or "Admit it now -- your candidates either are crooks or don't know what they are doing -- we know better than you what is best for you".

This time we have a President that many Americans thoroughly hate. We have never had that. We have had failed Presidents like Hoover, Carter, and Dubya, but nobody for which the contempt is so strong.

Even with the caveat that who votes matters, any large new constituency (let us say young people with a new political culture), any migration of voters in large numbers (let us say from California to Arizona or Texas), the dying-off of a generation (such as voters of the New Deal era as they got very old), or any large group of people that changes its pattern of voting (think of Mormons as Eisenhower cultivated them in the 1950s or well-educated people in the latter part of the Double-Zero Decade),

Donald Trump and the GOP did an excellent job in 2016 not so much in selling what would eventually be a failed Presidency and a dubious agenda but in demoralizing the usual voters for the Democratic Party.  What he cannot do in 2020 will be to run from a record of failure -- including either stagflation or an economic meltdown.   

 

[twenty42]

The question at the end is often which electorate model is valid. Which people vote -- or do not vote?

One way to win what would otherwise be a close election is to campaign with the objective of demoralizing the opposition. Thus the campaign tries to make voting seem futile. ":It's not your turn". "We have the money and that is all that matters in politics".  "Only losers  vote for your nominees".  Or "Admit it now -- your candidates either are crooks or don't know what they are doing -- we know better than you what is best for you".

This time we have a President that many Americans thoroughly hate. We have never had that. We have had failed Presidents like Hoover, Carter, and Dubya, but nobody for which the contempt is so strong.

Even with the caveat that who votes matters, any large new constituency (let us say young people with a new political culture), any migration of voters in large numbers (let us say from California to Arizona or Texas), the dying-off of a generation (such as voters of the New Deal era as they got very old), or any large group of people that changes its pattern of voting (think of Mormons as Eisenhower cultivated them in the 1950s or well-educated people in the latter part of the Double-Zero Decade),

Donald Trump and the GOP did an excellent job in 2016 not so much in selling what would eventually be a failed Presidency and a dubious agenda but in demoralizing the usual voters for the Democratic Party.  What he cannot do in 2020 will be to run from a record of failure -- including either stagflation or an economic meltdown.   

 

I like your detailed posts, pBrower, but what exactly will Democrats’ plan be if the economy is still humming in 2020? American people don’t like to think too much, so I think you’d have a hard time convincing them that an incumbent with a good economy is a “failure.”

BTW, if you’re getting tired of hearing this question, just know that I’m just as tired of asking it. It’s just that nobody on Atlas can give me an answer on it without calling me a nazi idiot.

[Sir Mohamed]

FWI Trump’s at 50/49 in Rasmussen. You may now point and laugh

If they ever wonder why no one is donating to their GoFundMe, its that.

I'm surprised Trump hasn't tweeted about this yet.

LOL he already has.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1025069677108711424

[BudgieForce]

It was clearly a fundraising push by Rasmussen. They posted a fundraiser link right after their Twitter shenanigans. But no one with any modicum of trust in polling is going to give Rasmussen money.

Just my two cents anyway.

[Thunder98]

Yep he is celebrating his 50% Rasmussen approval ratings on Instagram.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Well, the 50% approval didn't last long.  Ras is back to 48/50 today, the same as Tuesday and Wednesday.

[pbrower2a]

The question at the end is often which electorate model is valid. Which people vote -- or do not vote?

One way to win what would otherwise be a close election is to campaign with the objective of demoralizing the opposition. Thus the campaign tries to make voting seem futile. ":It's not your turn". "We have the money and that is all that matters in politics".  "Only losers  vote for your nominees".  Or "Admit it now -- your candidates either are crooks or don't know what they are doing -- we know better than you what is best for you".

This time we have a President that many Americans thoroughly hate. We have never had that. We have had failed Presidents like Hoover, Carter, and Dubya, but nobody for which the contempt is so strong.

Even with the caveat that who votes matters, any large new constituency (let us say young people with a new political culture), any migration of voters in large numbers (let us say from California to Arizona or Texas), the dying-off of a generation (such as voters of the New Deal era as they got very old), or any large group of people that changes its pattern of voting (think of Mormons as Eisenhower cultivated them in the 1950s or well-educated people in the latter part of the Double-Zero Decade),

Donald Trump and the GOP did an excellent job in 2016 not so much in selling what would eventually be a failed Presidency and a dubious agenda but in demoralizing the usual voters for the Democratic Party.  What he cannot do in 2020 will be to run from a record of failure -- including either stagflation or an economic meltdown.   

 

I like your detailed posts, pBrower, but what exactly will Democrats’ plan be if the economy is still humming in 2020? American people don’t like to think too much, so I think you’d have a hard time convincing them that an incumbent with a good economy is a “failure.”

BTW, if you’re getting tired of hearing this question, just know that I’m just as tired of asking it. It’s just that nobody on Atlas can give me an answer on it without calling me a nazi idiot.

Democrats will go after the cruelty, corruption, and incompetence of the Trump regime.  Tying President Trump to his pointless liaison with a bloodthirsty, kleptocratic dictator will be easy. Most Americans prefer democratic leaders abroad.

The big risk is to bet on the economy humming along. The world economy has been an intricate machine -- a cell phone instead of an abacus. One can repair an abacus, but not a cell phone beyond its casing. One buys a new cell phone.

But if the President's tariffs create a trade war? We have to replace the cell phone, and not simply repair an abacus. People not intended to be victims will be victims of generalized stagflation (Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter lost due to that, and it took Ronald Reagan to impress on many the need to lower their expectations, working harder and more for less to undo the stagflation)... and Reagan was successful. But Trump has shattered even 'Reaganomics' as an assumption. Reaganomics meant that people with college degrees who hated the low pay in the jobs that they got out of college as retail clerks to simply get another job as perhaps a fast-food counter-person, which rally did increase income. Those college graduates may have still hated their lives until they got jobs as clerk-typists or bartenders, but the economy improved because more was being produced. 

With Trump we have a situation that the rest of the world can simply expect to wait out. Foreign powers have decided to make some usual Republican constituencies pay for voting for Trump -- including farmers and ranchers who have enough numbers in some swing states of 2016 (MI, PA, and WI) on their own to swing Rust Belt states Democratic by voting 50-40 R instead of 70-30 R. "Farmer  and rancher" is still one of the largest occupations in America. If they go 50-50 R, then the Republican party loses a raft of states that they usually win, as well as Iowa.

Having to pay $2000 for an iPhone instead of $1000 while wages are stagnant will not go well with many Americans. Add also prices of aftermarket parts for imported cars or cars manufactured with imported parts, and automobile collisions will become more expensive. That will be reflected in insurance premiums.

Stagflation allowed Jimmy Carter to become President and caused him to lose his re-election bid. Trump will be the cause of any stagflation (which American somehow consider more objectionable than a transitory recession) that will doom his regime. I hate to use the word regime, but we are no longer in normal times in view of the incessant, mean-spirited  demagoguery of this President. 

[YE]

Let's dispel this fiction that the economy is good when the middle class is vanishing and has been for 30 or 40 years and the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen.

[pbrower2a]

Oregon -- Clout Research. Trump favorability, 44-53. It is favorability, so it is apples to oranges and I am not using it on the map. Oddly, the Republican has a chance to win the Governorship from an incumbent Democrat.

http://cloutpolitical.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2018/08/OR-Statewide-Poll-Final-Topline-Report-8-1-2018.pdf

[pbrower2a]

Arizona -- Politico/AARP:

Another poll suggesting that Arizona is not going the Trump way. 44 approval, 54 disapproval, indistinguishable statistically from what I have already seen in the state. Arizona voters over 50 are more sympathetic to Trump and on the whole would vote for them -- but that is a whiter and richer demographic. The fast-growing Hispanic sector of the electorate is younger than the average, which I suspect is the difference. 

[Mr. Smith]

The question at the end is often which electorate model is valid. Which people vote -- or do not vote?

One way to win what would otherwise be a close election is to campaign with the objective of demoralizing the opposition. Thus the campaign tries to make voting seem futile. ":It's not your turn". "We have the money and that is all that matters in politics".  "Only losers  vote for your nominees".  Or "Admit it now -- your candidates either are crooks or don't know what they are doing -- we know better than you what is best for you".

This time we have a President that many Americans thoroughly hate. We have never had that. We have had failed Presidents like Hoover, Carter, and Dubya, but nobody for which the contempt is so strong.

Even with the caveat that who votes matters, any large new constituency (let us say young people with a new political culture), any migration of voters in large numbers (let us say from California to Arizona or Texas), the dying-off of a generation (such as voters of the New Deal era as they got very old), or any large group of people that changes its pattern of voting (think of Mormons as Eisenhower cultivated them in the 1950s or well-educated people in the latter part of the Double-Zero Decade),

Donald Trump and the GOP did an excellent job in 2016 not so much in selling what would eventually be a failed Presidency and a dubious agenda but in demoralizing the usual voters for the Democratic Party.  What he cannot do in 2020 will be to run from a record of failure -- including either stagflation or an economic meltdown.   

 

I like your detailed posts, pBrower, but what exactly will Democrats’ plan be if the economy is still humming in 2020? American people don’t like to think too much, so I think you’d have a hard time convincing them that an incumbent with a good economy is a “failure.”

BTW, if you’re getting tired of hearing this question, just know that I’m just as tired of asking it. It’s just that nobody on Atlas can give me an answer on it without calling me a nazi idiot.

That's if the economy stays good, which isn't guaranteed at this point. Also, it would be pretty easy to make a point about the economy coming back wrong and talking about "forgotten people".

And that's assuming there isn't some other hot-button topic that eclipses the economy that takes stage.

Voters are short-sighted and blame the top guy first, so he has to hope not to end up on the wrong side of the October Surprise [as happened to Hillary, even with the "good economy"]

[GeorgiaModerate]

Ipsos/Reuters, July 29-Aug. 2, 1583 adults

Approve 40 (-2)
Disapprove 56 (+3)

[GeorgiaModerate]

IBD/TIPP, July 26 - Aug. 2, 939 adults (change from late June)

Approve 41 (nc)
Disapprove 53 (-1)

[BudgieForce]

IBD/TIPP, July 26 - Aug. 2, 939 adults (change from late June)

Approve 40 (-1)
Disapprove 56 (+2)

The link says its 41/50.