Trump approval ratings thread 1.5

[pbrower2a]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=297289.0
Old thread.

This will soon be the new thread for polling involving Donald Trump. When I start this thread (and I am not opening it until after the old thread has 1950 or so posts -- it is just past 1900) I want something that contains 'my' utilities and perhaps yours, as well as the latest compilations of data relevant in the new thread.

But "1.4" is moribund due to getting filled. The 2000th, "witching post" is fast approaching. Things might get interesting when much of the Mueller report is available for us to  (ahem!) mull over, but that will probably appear heavily in this thread.

Please do not post here until I fully open this thread.  For now I do not welcome your posts. I have my own stuff to install, including utilities and historical basics. I am going to open and close this thread until I put in it what I consider necessary as a start. Keep using "1.4" to report polls and polling data.    

Modification on June 15:

Here is some statistical data that belongs here. When we run out of space on "Thread 1.5", this will be highly useful. From Electoral-vote.com:





   

[pbrower2a]

Tarrance polling, Virginia:

Trump:

strong approval, 31%
approval  13%
disapproval 8%
strong disapproval 44%

deserves re-election 38%
give new person a chance 57%

https://www.tarrance.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/BG-64-questionnaire.pdf

https://twitter.com/MULawPoll/status/1116031148327616519
https://twitter.com/MULawPoll/status/1116031431027896321

Definitely+Probably vote 42/54



https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2019/04/10/new-marquette-law-school-poll-finds-little-change-in-views-of-trump-as-mueller-probe-ends-opinions-shift-on-confidence-in-mueller-on-state-issues-majorities-support-legal-marijuana-higher-special/

Favorability ratings:
Donald Trump   45/51

This supports a trend in recent polls that I find quite interesting.  The intention to vote for or against Trump has been running several points below his approval rating in most polls that ask both questions.  Generally for an incumbent, I would expect them to get a vote share that's at least as high as their approval numbers, and probably a bit better; voters might not be crazy about an incumbent, but might not dislike him enough to turn him out.  In Trump's case, it may be that some voters think he's done an OK job as President, but are turned off enough by his personality, scandals, and other baggage that they'd rather have someone new.

I think of Nixon, who was recognized as having done some good things (and for many people -- with Trump -- that means sticking it to the educated middle class and to ethnic or religious minorities, which is hardly my idea of goodness) but started to get scary. The downfall of this President will be abuse of power. With Nixon, the abuse of power was strictly for partisan ends. I can't imagine a President being in a stronger position politically than he was in 1972 when he had conservative Southern Democrats on his side on most political issues -- but he chose to go after them. With Trump it is his own bigotry and his elitist economics.

This also seems to apply to the recent Virginia poll.

California, Quinnipiac -- 59% definitely not... enough said. California disapproval 60%...

The highest category that I have for Trump disapproval is "above 55%", which allows no distinction for disapproval in the 60's. The States elect the President, and the margin makes no difference in any state. If Trump should lose California by an 80-20 margin, then the Democrat would win the state as if getting only 53% of the popular vote. Of course, if one projects Trump to lose California by only a 52-47 margin that obviously means that the Democrats would have a problem elsewhere, as in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.


Approval and disapproval ratings of Donald Trump:

With cumulative electoral vote totals in each category.

55% and higher 8
50-54% 9
49% or less and positive 38
tie (white)
44-49% and negative 91
40-43% 35
under 40%  144

An asterisk will be applied to any state in which the President's approval rating is above 43% for which the disapproval rating is 50% or higher.

No segregation of districts in Maine and Nebraska -- yet.

27 more states, and 193 electoral votes to go!    

To Trump or not to Trump, as I put it:

8% or higher margin against Trump -- maroon
4-7.9% against Trump -- medium red
under 4% margin against Trump -- pink

I have yet to see exact ties or 'better' for Trump.

[pbrower2a]

https://twitter.com/MULawPoll/status/1116031148327616519
https://twitter.com/MULawPoll/status/1116031431027896321

Definitely+Probably vote 42/54



https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2019/04/10/new-marquette-law-school-poll-finds-little-change-in-views-of-trump-as-mueller-probe-ends-opinions-shift-on-confidence-in-mueller-on-state-issues-majorities-support-legal-marijuana-higher-special/

Favorability ratings:
Donald Trump   45/51

This supports a trend in recent polls that I find quite interesting.  The intention to vote for or against Trump has been running several points below his approval rating in most polls that ask both questions.  Generally for an incumbent, I would expect them to get a vote share that's at least as high as their approval numbers, and probably a bit better; voters might not be crazy about an incumbent, but might not dislike him enough to turn him out.  In Trump's case, it may be that some voters think he's done an OK job as President, but are turned off enough by his personality, scandals, and other baggage that they'd rather have someone new.

Didn’t Obama have the same problem? A lot of voters were frustrated with the drama and liked to think of themselves as keeping an open mind. A few million eventually defected but with the countercurrents caused by his opponent, he was still able to maintain half of his margin.

Obama had more of a margin  that he could lose. The Obama margin went from 7.26% in 2008 to 3.86%, a decrease of 3.40% Trump won with less than a national plurality in the popular vote, so what does a 3.40% deterioration do to his chances of winning re-election?

He loses four states -- Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Florida that he won in 2016, while barely holding onto Arizona and North Carolina.

My "to Trump or not to Trump" maps so far suggest Trump losing at best for the Republican Party like the elder Bush in 1992 or at worst like Carter 1980 or Hoover 1932. My simple approval-disapproval maps suggest a not-so-severe Trump loss.  President Trump needs miracles or a rigged election to get re-elected. 

[pbrower2a]

I can't figure why Georgia could become more hostile to Trump than are Florida or North Carolina.  It looks as if Georgia pols can grab onto the coattails of Trump... and drown (figuratively, of course).

AJC Poll for Georgia:

Trump approval:

Approve: 40
Disapprove: 56

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/ajc-poll-kemp-approval-ratings-the-rise-trump-still-underwater/5EDalXwOSNvonieS90ixEN/

I doubt his approval is actually anywhere near that low but I am more optimistic about GA flipping than NC. Call me crazy but I think GA is a legitimate tossup.

I've seen mostly horrid polls for Trump in Georgia.

Approval and disapproval ratings of Donald Trump:

With cumulative electoral vote totals in each category.

55% and higher 8
50-54% 9
49% or less and positive 38
tie (white)
44-49% and negative 76
40-43% 51
under 40%  144

An asterisk will be applied to any state in which the President's approval rating is above 43% for which the disapproval rating is 50% or higher.

No segregation of districts in Maine and Nebraska -- yet.

27 more states, and 193 electoral votes to go!    

To Trump or not to Trump, as I put it:

8% or higher margin against Trump -- maroon
4-7.9% against Trump -- medium red
under 4% margin against Trump -- pink

I have yet to see exact ties or 'better' for Trump.

[pbrower2a]

Poorly-educated people do not understand statistics. Statistics are not particularly difficult math, except for calculations.

They don't understand probability well, either. 

[pbrower2a]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=297289.0
Old thread.

This will soon be the new thread for polling involving Donald Trump. When I start this thread (and I am not opening it until after the old thread has 1950 or so posts -- it is just past 1900) I want something that contains 'my' utilities and perhaps yours, as well as the latest compilations of data relevant in the new thread.

But "1.4" is moribund due to getting filled. The 2000th, "witching post" is fast approaching. Things might get interesting when much of the Mueller report is available for us to  (ahem!) mull over, but that will probably appear heavily in this thread.

Please do not post here until I fully open this thread.  For now I do not welcome your posts. I have my own stuff to install, including utilities and historical basics. I am going to open and close this thread until I put in it what I consider necessary as a start. Keep using "1.4" to report polls and polling data.      

[pbrower2a]

Blank map for your use.

Without electoral votes and with no distinction for districts:

[pbrower2a]

The fundamental beginning of the 2020 Presidential campaign -- states and districts within 10% of being even in the 2016 Presidential election:


2016 result among states decided by 10% or less:

8% or more -- saturation 7
4% to 7.99% -- saturation 5
1.5% to 2.99% -- saturation 3
under 1.5% -- saturation 2

States in gray look too far away to be affected by a shift in votes from 2016 to polling in 2018. Should any such state go into play, then differences between 2016 and 2020 ar profound in the extreme. This range of states is between 203 and 413 electoral votes. Remember that if such a state as Oregon goes into play for Trump, then the Democrat is in supreme trouble and at risk of losing a landslide. On the other side, if a state such as Missouri goes into play, then Trump is at risk of a landslide loss.

[pbrower2a]

Assumptions that we can all reasonably make, lest everything be void:

1. That Donald Trump will be the nominee for President -- that he will not decide not to run, that he will not die in office, and that he will not removed for diminished capacity (as after entering an irreversible coma).

2. That we will not have a military coup. Sure, we have never had one. But Seven Days in May is becoming much more plausible with this President, if for very different reasons. Doddering old leader? Check. Highly unpopular leader? Check. "Too liberal"? The opposite. "Too squeamish about taking harsh measures"? Exactly the opposite.

I would not rule out that the military would turn on him rather than soil itself in aggressive war against Iran or Venezuela. Yes, the military has not intervened in the government at any time  in American history, and 240 years of civilian control of the military will come to an end only under exceptional circumstances.

So imagine that you are a four-star general and you must choose between overthrowing Donald Trump or becoming complicit in war crimes. You don't know what you would do? Even I can't speak for myself.

3. That the elections of 2020 will not be rigged. The 2018 Congressional, Senatorial, and Gubernatorial elections looked clean enough.

4. That the Democrat will not be exposed in having done something discreditable -- insider trading, having sex with minors, being involved in a business failure the result of malfeasance, having a dishonorable discharge from the military, or having a criminal record. That is clearly in the category of 'unforeseen events'  that have nothing to do with polling.

5. That we can derive any conclusions from polling. By November 2010 we could see Obama within easy reach of winning re-election even if his Party was severely defeated in the midterm election -- it would take a spirited campaign by him and competent strategy as a candidate to turn approval in the 45-47% range into either a bare majority or even a plurality. It is a reasonable assumption that a spirited campaign and good campaign strategy were good for turning something like 45% approval into 51% of the vote. Obama ran a competent enough campaign with which to win despite a disapproval rating in the mid 40s around September 1 (just after the Republican national convention, I guess).  44% + 7% = 51%, so it looks as if he did what he needed.  

I look at recent polling numbers for Donald Trump, and he will be lucky to get 46% of the popular vote. Sure, he won with 46% of the popular vote because Hillary Clinton ran up the vote totals in places like California and New York -- but just look at the polling for Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Those look really bad. The poll of Pennsylvania had Trump disapproval in the mid-fifties.

That disapproval of a nominee is in the 50s may not assure that that nominee will lose 54-46 to the opponent. Maybe it will be more like 49-46-5, which only looks sort of close.

6. That Democrats will not be facing a strong left-wing alternative that guts their support. This is the most likely thing to go wrong for the Democratic nominee for President. I cannot yet rule it out.

7. That there will be no event that changes American political culture by identifying the President with some rush of patriotism or a movement toward a right-wing 'religious revival' to the benefit of 'conservative' politics.  I see nothing of the sort. Today's young adults are seemingly abandoning religion.    

But I can't completely rule out such things as an invasion from outer space, an eruption of a supervolcano or meteor strike that does great damage to human populations, a zombie apocalypse, or the Coming of a Messiah, either.  Any of these makse the Presidential election an irrelevant concern. Were I to get a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer with a prognosis of three months to live, I would be finding better things to do with my life than posting here.

[pbrower2a]

This is the (apparently) objective Lichtman test that has usually been right in determining which party wins the majority of the popular vote in a Presidential election. To be sure our system of electing the President has the States, and not the People, electing the President, so a winner of less than the plurality can get elected President, as in 2000 and 2016. It is still theoretically possible for Donald Trump to win reelection with a Democratic majority of the vote as Democrats run up huge majorities for President in states with 9 to 55 electoral votes (CO, MD, MA, WA, VA,  NJ, IL, NY, and CA) while barely losing some critical states as Hillary Clinton did in 2016.  But -- if the Democrats get an even swing of 1% of the vote from 2016 to 2020, then Trump loses Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and his re-election bid. To be sure, even swings do not happen.  


.................

(revision: I consider the statement of former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld that he is running for the nomination for President through the Republican Party unambiguous evidence that Trump faces a serious primary challenge from someone with bona fide credentials as an elected Republican with a significant history of public service. I am also calling the President's anti-immigration stance an effective change in American politics even if I find it abominable. Lichtman does not ask whether the change that a President effects  (such as a large tariff) is to the good or bad of the country.    

1.    Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
2.    Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
3.   Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
4.    Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
5.    Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
6.    Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
7.    Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
8.    Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
9.    Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
10.    Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
11.    Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
12.   Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
13.   Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

1. GIGANTIC NEGATIVE. We now have a definitive answer on November 6, 2018. The GOP not only lost seats in the House of Representatives, but also its majority. This is usually a negative for practically any administration,
2. NOW NEGATIVE There could be, but that is yet well enough into the future that we can't say anything.
 
I'm not saying that Bill Weld will succeed in knocking out Trump, but his campaign will weaken Trump. This has become an unambiguous negative, and it could get worse for the President. The last two incumbent Presidents who faced a serious primary challenge (Ford and Carter) lost their re-election bids. In view of his experience, Bill Weld is a serious candidate. Effective Presidents do not face primary challenges. To be sure, I cannot yet say that Weld is as effective as Reagan in 1976 or Ted Kennedy in 1980 -- but he demonstrates a weakness of this President. Some GOP constituencies dislike Trump. The primary challenges to LBJ in 1968 created chaos.
 
Rivals for the nomination  are rarely effective in bringing all their early breakaway supporters back to the fold.
  
3. A Republican will be President in 2020 and the incumbent will be running even if something happens to President Trump. Pence would run for re-election.
4. I think that there will be, but that is too far into the future for any discussion yet.
5. Way too early to tell. Ask again in August or September 2020.
6. The Obama economy had a growth rate unusually high, as it was a recovery from a nasty recession. This will be impossible to meet.
7. NOW POSITIVE -- if for all the wrong reasons He hasn't yet. The tax bill is it. I expect more efforts at deregulation of industry, union-cracking, and privatization even if those prove unpopular. In view of the anti-immigrant policy that our President has, he now gets a positive. Lichtman does not judge whether the effects are good or bad, as in the past with a huge tariff bill. Consequences could lead to the strengthening of negatives, as in domestic unrest.
8. GIGANTIC NEGATIVE.  Sure, the President did not directly inspire one of his supporters to send bombs to Democratic politicians and celebrities, but he consider himself lucky that none of them blew up a target. Donald Trump may be no antisemite (Nazi-style antisemitism is racist), but the creep who mowed down eleven Jews in a Pittsburgh synagogue did so out of a concern that the  specific Jews had been  supporting immigration of non-white people. The frequent polite demonstrations from the Women's March on have not been unrest, but they can certainly call attention to his awfulness and aid in organizing an electoral opposition.  
9. GIGANTIC NEGATIVE.  This is the most systematically and severely corrupt Administration in American history. The legal problems keep piling up.
10. Likely but it has yet to happen. NOW NEGATIVE. I do not trust the deal with North Korea, and this President is insulting so many of America's traditional allies that something will go bad. The tariff is a disaster waiting to happen. I'm calling it now for reasons shown above on America's loss of credibility among its traditional allies. This is a matter of timing, and I could have done it earlier.  I do so now, not that anything has changed abruptly. Remember how badly he bungled the response to the deaths of four Special Forces soldiers in Niger? Maybe not, but I saw that as a portent of trouble. 
11. The nuke deal with North Korea? There is no enforcement in place. The President would need China and ideally also Russia as an enforcer.
12. Trump already seems much less charismatic now than in 2016. He still has charisma with his cult. That will not be enough.
13. We have no idea who the Democratic nominee will be.

Two clear blue, six red, four green (has not happened yet but still can), one purple (ambiguous). He now has no room for any one of them going red.

Any bad result from the Mueller report or exposure of misdeeds involving Assange merely intensifies the ninth key already in flaming Atlas red.


The Lichtman test is not of my making, and it offers ambiguities for interpretation -- but  I have been slow to recognize any one of these turning against the President, choosing to recognize them only when they have become irrevocable  -- if only in my opinion. I am tempted to believe that pervasive corruption will be enough (as with an economic meltdown for Hoover or with catastrophes of foreign policy or continuing stagflation for Carter) to make this President unsuited to re-election in itself. Trump is on the margin of failure as it is, in accordance with the Lichtman test.

(Please do not comment in this thread until I invite discussion.  I am still setting up my utilities and historical data for now, and I will not even put up polling data until I am ready to open this thread and close "1.4").  

[pbrower2a]

Aggregate vote in contested House races statewide in 2016:

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).

The voting advantage for Democrats in the House in November 2016 suggest 295 or 296 electoral votes for the Democrat, with 278 outside the margin of error (Iowa is barely within the margin of error, and Arizona offers a razor-thin, insignificant advantage for Democrats. Georgia and North Carolina are just inside the margin of error, too.
  

[pbrower2a]

Timing of the election reports as polls close (assuming no change from 2016):

...and a reminder on how the votes come in as polls close in the various states:



This assumes no change before 2020, which could be invalid.

[pbrower2a]

I was polled in Michigan -- Presidency, Senate, Congress, and higher taxes for highways.

[pbrower2a]

I was polled in Michigan -- Presidency, Senate, Congress, and higher taxes for highways.

Who was the pollster?

I did not hear. The poll or Trump is approval-disapproval and of the Senate was favorable-unfavorable) and incumbent vs. challenger.

[pbrower2a]

Two of the least-interesting states in American politics, but they comprise  84 electoral votes.

California voters disapprove 64 - 30 percent of the job Trump is doing, one of the president's worst grades in any Quinnipiac University nationwide or state poll since he was elected.

Yawn!

https://poll.qu.edu/california/release-detail?ReleaseID=2615

New York (state), Siena:

President Trump has a negative 38-59 percent favorability rating, up slightly from 36-60 percent last month. His job performance rating climbed to negative 35-65 percent, up from 31-68 percent in March.

“Trump remains unpopular with his home state voters largely because of how ‘blue’ New York is. More than three-quarters of Democrats and a majority of independents both view him unfavorably and give him a negative job performance rating,” Greenberg said. “However, Republicans are bullish on the President, with 74 percent viewing him favorably and 70 percent giving him a positive job performance rating.”

# # #
This Siena College Poll was conducted April 8-11, 2019 by telephone calls conducted in English to 735 New York State registered voters.

It does not change the map. I'd guess that the "to Trump or not to Trump" question would get a horrid result for Trump in New York State, but I don't put my guesses on the map.

We are running low on available posts in this Forum, so prepare yourself for that eventuality.  

Approval and disapproval ratings of Donald Trump:

With cumulative electoral vote totals in each category.

55% and higher 8
50-54% 9
49% or less and positive 38
tie (white)
44-49% and negative 76
40-43% 51
under 40%  144

An asterisk will be applied to any state in which the President's approval rating is above 43% for which the disapproval rating is 50% or higher.

No segregation of districts in Maine and Nebraska -- yet.

27 more states, and 193 electoral votes to go!    

To Trump or not to Trump, as I put it:

8% or higher margin against Trump -- maroon
4-7.9% against Trump -- medium red
under 4% margin against Trump -- pink

I have yet to see exact ties or 'better' for Trump.

[pbrower2a]

Trumps long range trend has been up.
2015- 35% favorable, losing to Hillary 35%-55%
2016- still 35% favorable, but within striking range (3-5) of Hillary
2016 (postelection)- 40% favorable, 40% approval
2017- high 30's to low 40's favorable
2018- low 40's to mid 40's favorable
2019- rising again

Same in the 2016 campaign. He started out losing the Iowa caucus to Ted Cruz. Then he started consistently winning, but in the 20's and low 30's. Then he started getting into the high 30's. Then he started getting 40's. Then he started getting 50's and his last opponents dropped out.

Try again. Sure, it is only one poll, and perhaps not the ideal. But we do not yet have 'ideal', and the 'definitive' will be the 2020 election:

Monmouth University, 11-15 April

40/54 (vs 44/51 month ago)

RV: 40/54 (vs 44/52)

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_041719.pdf/

So much for the 'surge' in Trump support or erosion of mass contempt for him and his policies. Trump support has been remarkably stable.

Don't get me wrong: I expect the Trump campaign to trawl for the worst in human nature  in 2020, debasing political discourse and transforming politics as much into a sickening miasma to drive away people who dislike dirty politics. I expect him to give our system illegal hits, the equivalents of clipping in football, crosschecks in ice hockey, and hitting below the belt in boxing. His sort depends on the disappearance of normal standards of political decency and intellectual integrity. I already see a failed Presidency even without an economic meltdown or a diplomatic/military debacle.

We Americans may not be at our all-time best, but I am not sure that we need an experience that compels us to be the best by making such our only desperate chance for personal, cultural, national, and political survival. I hope that Democrats will turn his depravity and dishonesty against him without adopting any trace of those.

Truth may be inconvenient and  unsettling. It is all that we have for making wise, sustainable solutions to any problem that we have. It merits the sacrifice even of personal esteem.

[pbrower2a]

It will be close -- or it won't.

The 'average' win for a President is about 62% of the electoral vote, which is about what Obama did in 2012.

You might expect electoral results to cluster around a mean in the area of 60% of the electoral vote, but such does not happen very often. Since 1900 the results have either been 65% or more or 57% or less in all but one Presidential election. Obama had about the most average win either for his initial election or a re-election, but his is the only one in between.  In 2012 I predicted that Obama would lose Florida because such would put him at a more reasonable 303 electoral votes... close to JFK in 1960.

Here's how I see it. If a Presidential nominee sees himself projecting to lose 280-258, he rarely panics. He presses in states where he is just a bit behind and tries to solidify bare leads where he thinks he is winning. He can broaden the map without putting too much at risk. 310-228? He needs to be more daring. 330-228? At this point it is panic time.  The candidate behind must take desperate measures just to see himself in the fray.  He might have to put some sure states at risk to pick up something on his fringe. One of two things happens: the candidate behind actually makes things close -- or fails to get what he wants, but loses what might have been a state supposedly in the bag. Thus 330-228 goes quickly to 370-288 or 290-248. That might describe Truman in 1948, whom all the 'smart people of the time' thought was sure to lose.  

And what he is losing 370-158 or worse? He's already composing his concession speech so that he can remain relevant and maintain some dignity.

Congratulations, Tom Dewey
You won by a landslide today
Through thick and through thin
We knew you would win
'Cause who'd ever vote to let
Truman stay in!
Congratulations, Tom Dewey!
Your Republican dreams have come true!
Here's a victory roar
For President number Thirty-Four
The White House is waiting... for You

(riff to Hail to the Chief)

In effect, the zone between 310 and 360 electoral votes is highly unstable.

[pbrower2a]

The Mueller report is out, and some people will be reading it. Good Friday is a good day for reading about high-profile people that I can at my most charitable describe as dupes, including the current President.

I doubt that many polls will be made over the Holy Weekend.

Let's put it this way: Judas Iscariot was horribly underpaid for his betrayal of Jesus. 

[pbrower2a]

The witching post (#2000) is rapidly approaching, and in view of the Mueller report, this might be a good time to start moving some of your favorite posts (especially if theory or a utility) to "Trump approval ratings thread, 1.6". Why 1.6 and not 1.5? Because 1.5 got absorbed into 1.4.  At #2000, any thread gets closed, and we will have exactly 80 left after I post this.

I do not believe at this point that the Mueller report will significantly effect change in polling numbers. Trump supporters can seemingly excuse anything, including coordination with a foreign power (the stories are already out in the open) and violation of campaign-finance laws (it's 'only money, something that many Trump supporters understand only as a paycheck and what they can exchange at the store or gas station or pay as utilities, taxes, etc.)

I have the ability to close this thread at any time unless someone hits the witching post.

If I see new national polls that suggest that Trump approval ratings have dropped  into the low 30s I will first assume that such are outliers. But show me enough such seeming outliers and I will see a trend. I expect at least one statewide poll of approval of interest to modify my map (remember -- I got polled in Michigan this week).

Again, I still believe that approval ratings for the President are so low that they can hardly get less flattering -- nationally or statewide. Millions will be in denial about the content of the Mueller report, and those that have smelled a pervasive and permanent stench emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will simply have more confirmation. 

[pbrower2a]

March statewide data from Morning Consult, as this thread will almost certainly contain April and later incarnations of such data.  
Net approval map from Morning Consult for March 2019

I do not have approve/disapprove numbers, so these are hardly comparable to approval and disapproval. A +5 net approval or a -5% disapproval means far more at a 52-47 split than at 47-42 split. This does not supplant my earlier maps.  I assume that DC is extremely hostile to Trump due to its demographics.

https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump/

maroon 20% or higher net  disapproval  158
red 11% to 20% net disapproval  75
pink 6% to 10% net disapproval 43
white 1% to 5% net disapproval 60
light blue tie to 5% net approval 97
blue 6% to 10% net approval 26
navy 11%+ net approval

Although net disapproval is not as reliable a predictor of a Trump loss as is 100-disapproval, it is relevant.  I an astonished to see Pennsylvania in the third category, but a 7% negative edge is decisive unless the Democrats nominate someone with severe and obvious flaws. The white category, which I normally use for the zone of equal chance or a tie, gives a Democrat an edge even if it contains Virginia (4% is the usual margin of error). This category includes Florida and Ohio.

Indiana is a real shocker, as it looks on the fringe of contention. Then again, Obama did win Indiana in 2008. As a general  rule, a Republican needs to be winning Indiana by a double-digit margin to have a real chance of winning nationwide.  

OK -- 1.5 it is

[pbrower2a]

I DO NOT OWN THIS THREAD. All threads close at 2000. Starting a new one? I have put little polling data there, the only bit being the monthly 50-state Morning Consult poll from March. The April poll will probably be available only after "1.5" is active and 1.4 isn't. One tip-off that 1.4 is about to close (a day or two) is that I will move my statewide approval and "Trump or not" polls there.  

I have the power to close this thread by default because I opened it. That is how it goes. It is good for people closing their mistakes, shutting off a poll among users,  or recognizing that nothing new will happen with it. Few threads ever reach or even approach 2000 posts; most become irrelevant as news dies.

So if you start a thread that reads "Tom Hanks for President", your thread is likely to die after a few people get bored of it, it becomes irrelevant, or under some circumstances (let us say you slander him) it will be taken down. Or you can close it and even delete it. All jokes get stale. Take my wife -- please!

This thread, like 1.3 and earlier threads along this theme, will be archived. The problem is that you will be unable to bring your material here easily, especially if it contains pictures, charts, or maps. This presents some problems -- such that I cannot easily compare Obama to Trump at times analogous to this (or any other time) based upon maps from 2011.

If I cannot continue the thread, then I can at least continue the theme in another fresh thread.

By the way -- I am extremely cautious about predicting how events will change approval and disapproval. If you remember the killing of Osama bin Laden -- it had only a fleeting effect upon approval numbers of Obama. American politics are extremely polarized, and support for Trump looks close to an imaginable floor.  

I have no reason to believe at this point that the release of the Mueller report will cut significantly into Trump support. Some people consider the investigation of the President a sort of treachery and see our President as the irreplaceable vehicle for achieving their social ideals. So suppose that Republicans lose the Senate as well as the Presidency in 2020 -- many people dread a liberal, godless, socialist, multicultural nightmare. People who suspected much that was released are getting their suspicions confirmed. Most such people despised President Trump before the release of the Mueller report and simply have more cause to despise him.

[pbrower2a]

You tried to end 1.4 early; so far, you're the only one who thinks the next in the series should not be 1.5; and you apparently started your "1.6" several pages early just so you could set the number to be you think it should be.  I don't see any better term than "own" to indicate what you apparently think your relationship to it is.

I thought that the posts would be counting down even faster. My expectations are not always right. Welcome to the club.

Dave Leip owns this thread, and he can shut me down completely if he so chooses.  I 'own' only what I put in this thread. I am not posting polling results to "1.6" yet. "1.5" got merged into "1.4", which I would have never done. I have explained clearly at the start of "1.6" why I call it 1.6. I have seen threads shut down at 2000 posts and gotten caught with having to reintroduce the tools of maps.

Do I have my opinions? of course! Who doesn't?

The number of posts does not shrink. I want to make it possible for others to post polls on the approval for Trump and other relevant measures (including whether people want to vote for him or vote for someone else) after this thread is archived.

By the way -- the new thread is now renumbered "1.5", and I accept the decision. I have made the appropriate adjustments. 75 more posts here, at most, and this thread closes. I too would keep going.  

[pbrower2a]

Ipsos / Reuters, 1005 adults, Apr 18-19:
https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-TRUMP-RUSSIA-POLL/010091JB28J/Mueller%20Investigation%20Report%2004%2019%202019%20TRENDED%20PID.pdf

Approve: 37 (-6)
Disapprove: 56 (+2)

Oof.

Terrible poll for Trump.  Impeachment went from 39/49 in March to 40/42 now.  Whether he should resign went from 46/46 to 47/37.  Even 22% of Republicans said Trump should resign!

Although the disapproval rate doesn't go up much, the loss of approval is clearly out of the margin of error.  "Should not resign" has eroded by 9% One week, and one poll. Outlier? Maybe -- but there will be more polls. Ipsos seems like a very good pollster. 

Far fewer than 56% of Americans (the disapproval number) are liberals, so this is not cultural change. This is clearly about conduct, and not about ideology and political issues.

The 37% approval rating is nothing really new; I have seen this after other calamities for this President. I accept that few people have fully read the redacted Mueller Report; I am guessing that much of what is redacted can still hurt the President. Nothing exculpates the President. The most favorable thing that one can say of him is that he is a dupe, and that is a generous interpretation. The 6% drop in approval in one week suggests (unless this is an outlier, and I doubt that it is) a cratering in support for this President.

[pbrower2a]

Old (Gallup) polling data now on the average ten months old. Gallup does not do statewide polls as do some other pollsters, but it collects data from all fifty states. It shared this data early in 2019, and it says much about how things were in 2018. Polling about Trump has been remarkably stable, at least until... events that I am not discussing until I start putting current polls here.

OK, so it is not a complete map, but that's what I get when I assume that results mostly from 2018 are obsolete. Gallup, which does not do statewide polls, released the polling data on all 50 states as it used for its 2018 polls. Data will average in late June or early July, so it is obsolete -- if things have changed greatly.

Please pardon some of my hackish prose. Check the Gallup data in the link, and recognize that it may more closely reflect how things are now than when Trump was reeling from some political battles that he lost -- and after which many Americans were relieved.   

(Paging Mr. Brower.  Please report to your computer.)

Gallup Trump approvals in all 50 states

Cautionary note: this data was gathered throughout the whole of 2018, so take it with a grain of salt.  But it's a lot better than no data.  Summary:

Although much can change between now and Election Day 2020, a job approval rating of 50% or higher would presumably put Trump in good position to win a state in the presidential election. The 17 states with 50%+ approval ratings account for a combined total of 102 electoral votes. In contrast, the states in which Trump has an approval rating below 40% account for 201 electoral votes.

In order to get to the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency, Trump would have to win all but one or two of the states in which his 2018 approval rating was between 41% and 49%. Some of the more challenging states to win from among this group, based on that approval rating, would be Texas (41%); Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan (all at 42%); and Arizona and Florida (43%).

OK. Out with the crayons on the map. Every state that Trump lost in 2016 in which his approval rating is at 40%  or less is in maroon. There is no polling data on the District of Columbia, but we don't have to be stupid. Every state in which Trump approval is at 55% or higher is in navy blue.

Gallup 2018 data only.

Based on approval ratings, every one of these states should be double-digit wins for the Democrat or for Trump. The amazing facet of this map is that every state that Trump lost even by a small margin in 2016 is seemingly out of reach for him. His barest loss was New Hampshire, where the approval number for him is 35-58. The shakiest of these states against him is Nevada, at 40-55. 55% disapproval means that 55% of the voters will not vote for one. 55% approval seals a double-digit win.

Trump
approval 55% or higher
lost in 2016, approval 40% or lower, disapproval 55% or higher, and the majority of the statewide House vote going to Democrats
losses in 2016, approval 40% or lower

(OK, let's cut the verbiage for the likely electoral disaster for the President:

approval 55% or higher
Trump loss in 2016, approval numbers 40%A 55%D or worse, total US House races majority D

If you think that the vote of 2016 is irrelevant to 2020 -- then you are right.

Now in medium shades of red (states that Trump won in 2016, Trump approval is at 45A-51D or worse, and the Democrats won the majority of the House vote:

approval 55% or higher
approval 50%  to 54%
white -- Trump approval under 50% but tied or positive in net
Trump approval 45% or lower and net negative
Trump approval numbers 45%A 51%D or lower, Democrats won the majority of the House seats
Trump loss in 2016, approval numbers 40%A 55%D or worse, total US House races majority D

Note well that President Trump won everything not in maroon (deep red) in 2016, and he is not going to get any of what I show in maroon. If you are not going to pick up any loss from the prior election and you want to get re-elected, then you had better have started with at least 325 electoral votes to avoid losing, which means that you had better be at least as good as Obama. (Obama went from 365 to 332, and he came close to losing Florida, which would have made a close election in the Electoral College).   Of course, Obama lost the two states that he won with less than 50% of the popular vote in 2008, the two states in which he should have been most vulnerable -- and the wayward NE-02.

Trump is not winning people over, and when someone gets elected with the level of initial support that he got, he will have to win some people over. 

[pbrower2a]

Um...I'm not going to put too terribly high a degree of trust in a poll taken over two days released on the second day of the poll, of which the second day was Good Friday. (Or Passover, I guess, not that that matters for most people)

BTW, Happy Easter/Passover.

Possible outlier -- let's wait to see what other polls have to say. It is all bad news for the President.

There will be more polls. Watch the direction more than the absolute result. Note well: 6%/43% is nearly a 14% erosion of support.

I will leave it to others to speculate on the meaning and consequences of such a drop.

Happy Easter/Passover.