Donald Trump: polls of approval and favorability

[pbrower2a]

(05-19-2017, 10:30 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: A lot can change by 2020 but it is interesting to see the Upper Midwest becoming more and more hostile to Trump.

The telling one is Pennsylvania, which Trump barely won but looks as if it would go in a landslide to just about any Democratic nominee against him. Virginia was a modest Trump loss, but its polling results for the President are the political equivalent of a third-degree burn.

I'd like to see a poll of Ohio and more recent polls of Michigan and Iowa. I was polled in Michigan, and if this is for a statewide poll, I might have  results to show.

One of the most telling is heavily-Mormon Utah, a state that Republican nominees for President have typically won by huge margins except in 1964 since Eisenhower pulled  Mormons into the Republican camp. Donald Trump is about as far from practicing a Mormon way of life as is possible. His Party could pay a heavy price for that. Utah and Arizona have large Mormon populations. I can hardly imagine a more fitting exercise of democracy than Mormons choosing an Obama-like Democrat over Donald Trump to teach a lesson: offend Mormon values with behavior incompatible with Mormon values, and lose.

Recent national polls show President Trump with approval figures in the high thirties. I may lack the imagination to see how he could recover from that; after all I did not see the collapse of the Clinton campaign. He does have far more time in which to p[ull out of his current unpopularity than did Carter in the summer of 1980... but so far as I can tell, he doesn't understand what the Presidency is.

Imagine this situation: you are the manager of a fast-food restaurant, and someone immaculately dressed applies for a job. He* talks about art, history, classical music, philosophy, and literature. As you discuss the mundane reality of the job, he has something more to say that impresses you of his brilliance and erudition. Do you hire him? I say not. None of his brilliance has any relevance to the work that he will be doing. His co-workers are more likely to discuss pop music or professional wrestling, about which he will be clueless. His customers won't be interested.

If I were in that manager's position I would rather hire someone proud to push a broom, clean the grills, and take out the trash.

I see no evidence that President Trump is a learned or brilliant man irrespective of his bloated self-image. He does not understand what the Presidency is about. He acts like a dictator, contrary to the reality of most of the checks and balances having their focus on thwarting any executive despotism.
 
*Pronouns may be altered to fit the other possibility of gender.

[pbrower2a]

Gallup approval today (5-20):

37% approve, 56% disapprove.

Late in March he had approval ratings just below this, reaching 35% on March 28.

At this point, I question whether Trump support can get much lower. Figuring that 37% is a good estimate of how well he would fare in match-ups against Democratic challengers of average abilities as campaigners against him about three years from now at the start of the campaign season, and adding 6% on the assumption that he would be about as effective as the usual incumbent running for re-election in 'normal' times -- that is, no sudden economic downturn or international kerfluffle.

Appreciably beyond the 35% range of approval on the downside, people who support him might even be unable to see anything wrong with such wrongdoi9ng as leaking classified data or with obstruction of justice so long as their Leader does it, barring something personally catastrophic.

[pbrower2a]

(05-22-2017, 11:20 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-20-2017, 02:09 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Gallup approval today (5-20):

37% approve, 56% disapprove.

Late in March he had approval ratings just below this, reaching 35% on March 28.

At this point, I question whether Trump support can get much lower. Figuring that 37% is a good estimate of how well he would fare in match-ups against Democratic challengers of average abilities as campaigners against him about three years from now at the start of the campaign season, and adding 6% on the assumption that he would be about as effective as the usual incumbent running for re-election in 'normal' times -- that is, no sudden  economic downturn or international kerfluffle.  

Appreciably beyond the 35% range of approval on the downside, people who support him might even be unable to see anything wrong with such wrongdoing as leaking classified data or with obstruction of justice so long as their Leader does it, barring something personally catastrophic.

That 30something% core are completely illiberal people. Some of them are totalitarians. These are people who are way more radical then those who simply react against the 60s and 70s. These are people who opine that the entire "Progressive" (e.g. classical Progressive stemming from 1900AD GOPers / Bull Moose / etc) program was evil, or more radically, that Western cultural development since the end of the Middle Ages was evil.

Anyone who wants a return to the Middle Ages, with the cultural staleness, the grinding poverty, the horrific wars, the economic subjection, the plagues, the superstition, the powerless of the masses against feudal lords, is insane. Anyone who wants a return to medieval norms of economics, culture, and social organization except with better technology might deserve the label 'fascist'.

Donald Trump is the most illiberal President since at least McKinley on economics. I'm not saying that he would return to Jim Crow norms of the South.

Modernity begins with the Renaissance, with which there is no obvious break. It's in the Renaissance that the art begins to look realistic enough for my taste (although I appreciate Greco-Roman sculpture for its realism and Chinese painting for its two-dimensional delicacy). The medieval stuff is amateurish by contrast. It took the Protestant Reformation to shake up the complacency about morals and political reality. I'll take the pointillistic painting of Georges Seurat to the medieval arguments on how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

(Really -- do angels exist? Do they dance? Are they material enough that they would be able to treat the head of a pin as a surface? Who cares?)

As far as that goes, the concept "Make America Great Again" is reactionary in the sense of suggesting that something noble has been lost. All that I see worse about America since the 1920s  is that America is more crowded and that real estate is much more expensive in real terms. But go back to the era of 120 years ago -- I don't want elixirs of opiates and liquor sold as alternatives to seeing a physician. I don't want children then seen as trash (then Irish-Americans, largely) being run over by trolleys. I don't want black people being consigned to conditions reminiscent of serfdom. I don't want children drinking booze or toiling in mines and factories. The forty-year lifespan and seventy-hour workweek for workingmen as a norm is something to avoid -- not to recover.

[Eric the Green]

I am quite in agreement. I just hope brower's maps hold up over 3 1/2 years.

[Odin]

(05-22-2017, 11:20 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-20-2017, 02:09 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Gallup approval today (5-20):

37% approve, 56% disapprove.

Late in March he had approval ratings just below this, reaching 35% on March 28.

At this point, I question whether Trump support can get much lower. Figuring that 37% is a good estimate of how well he would fare in match-ups against Democratic challengers of average abilities as campaigners against him about three years from now at the start of the campaign season, and adding 6% on the assumption that he would be about as effective as the usual incumbent running for re-election in 'normal' times -- that is, no sudden  economic downturn or international kerfluffle.  

Appreciably beyond the 35% range of approval on the downside, people who support him might even be unable to see anything wrong with such wrongdoi9ng as leaking classified data or with obstruction of justice so long as their Leader does it, barring something personally catastrophic.

That 30something% core are completely illiberal people. Some of them are totalitarians. These are people who are way more radical then those who simply react against the 60s and 70s. These are people who opine that the entire "Progressive" (e.g. classical Progressive stemming from 1900AD GOPers / Bull Moose / etc) program was evil, or more radically, that Western cultural development since the end of the Middle Ages was evil.

They are the sort of people who want to turn the US into a theocracy based on "biblical law", basically no different than the Taliban.

[pbrower2a]

(05-23-2017, 06:53 AM)Odin Wrote:

(05-22-2017, 11:20 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: That 30something% core are completely illiberal people. Some of them are totalitarians. These are people who are way more radical then those who simply react against the 60s and 70s. These are people who opine that the entire "Progressive" (e.g. classical Progressive stemming from 1900AD GOPers / Bull Moose / etc) program was evil, or more radically, that Western cultural development since the end of the Middle Ages was evil.

They are the sort of people who want to turn the US into a theocracy based on "biblical law", basically no different than the Taliban.

Why don't they simply convert to Shi'a Islam and go to Iran? They would be incredibly happy!

[Odin]

(05-23-2017, 12:40 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(05-23-2017, 06:53 AM)Odin Wrote:

(05-22-2017, 11:20 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: That 30something% core are completely illiberal people. Some of them are totalitarians. These are people who are way more radical then those who simply react against the 60s and 70s. These are people who opine that the entire "Progressive" (e.g. classical Progressive stemming from 1900AD GOPers / Bull Moose / etc) program was evil, or more radically, that Western cultural development since the end of the Middle Ages was evil.

They are the sort of people who want to turn the US into a theocracy based on "biblical law", basically no different than the Taliban.

Why don't they simply convert to Shi'a Islam and go to Iran? They would be incredibly happy!

Because being the "correct" religion matters to these crazies.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-22-2017, 12:47 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: As far as that goes, the concept "Make America Great Again" is reactionary in the sense of suggesting that something noble has been lost. All that I see worse about America since the 1920s  is that America is more crowded and that real estate is much more expensive in real terms. But go back to the era of 120 years ago -- I don't want elixirs of opiates and liquor sold as alternatives to seeing a physician. I don't want children then seen as trash (then Irish-Americans, largely) being run over by trolleys. I don't want black people being consigned to conditions reminiscent of serfdom. I don't want children drinking booze or toiling in mines and factories. The forty-year lifespan and seventy-hour workweek for workingmen as a norm is something to avoid -- not to recover.

I miss the optimism and energy of the GI generation. They grew up in the last ugly remnants of the Gilded Age, the Great Depression being a final reprise of the economic ugliness of what came before. From the New Deal through the Great Society I think we did pretty good. Getting back that spirit and energy wouldn't be a bad thing.

The Great Depression and World War II were not fun. The Gilded Age was just bad. Thinking those times the peak of America doesn't feel right at all save in the context of a Churchill misquote. If the nation lasts a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their finest hour." But in terms of when was our time of broad sunlit uplands, that would be the heyday of tax and spend liberalism.

[pbrower2a]

(05-23-2017, 04:54 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-22-2017, 12:47 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: As far as that goes, the concept "Make America Great Again" is reactionary in the sense of suggesting that something noble has been lost. All that I see worse about America since the 1920s  is that America is more crowded and that real estate is much more expensive in real terms. But go back to the era of 120 years ago -- I don't want elixirs of opiates and liquor sold as alternatives to seeing a physician. I don't want children then seen as trash (then Irish-Americans, largely) being run over by trolleys. I don't want black people being consigned to conditions reminiscent of serfdom. I don't want children drinking booze or toiling in mines and factories. The forty-year lifespan and seventy-hour workweek for workingmen as a norm is something to avoid -- not to recover.

I miss the optimism and energy of the GI generation.  They grew up in the last ugly remnants of the Gilded Age, the Great Depression being a final reprise of the economic ugliness of what came before.  From the New Deal through the Great Society I think we did pretty good.  Getting back that spirit and energy wouldn't be a bad thing.

Regaining that spirit and energy would be the optimal solution. As a candidate, Donald Trump exploited mass resentments of people who use their education to allegedly exploit and oppress people with lousy jobs. The convenience store clerk who witnesses someone putting over $100 in motor fuels into the tanks of his pick-up and his motorboat isn't being exploited in that transaction. That clerk's problem may be in working in a job far too small for his talents and incapable of allowing anything more than bare survival in a social order that seems to value only material indulgence.

When America relied more heavily upon factories for employment, factory work was usually a reliable escape from grinding poverty. Work in fast food, retail, and farm labor was typically a stopgap or placeholder job -- something that one did while waiting for something that pays reasonably well before getting the first 'good' job, seeking a husband, or while laid off.  Now such jobs have often become permanent even if the worker intended it as a stopgap.  

People who feel that they have no stake in the economic order are vulnerable to demagogues, Left and Right. Be not fooled. Some Trump voters would have voted for a Commie who promised to expropriate great wealth and put it into new factories that would employ multitudes (but with Communism that implies denying the market and thus making huge amounts of stuff that nobody really wants -- obsolete stuff and objects with a saturated market).
 

Quote:The Great Depression and World War II were not fun.  The Gilded Age was just bad.  Thinking those times the peak of America doesn't feel right at all save in the context of a Churchill misquote.  If the nation lasts a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their finest hour."  But in terms of when was our time of broad sunlit uplands, that would be the heyday of tax and spend liberalism.

The Gilded Age was necessary -- the time in which America made basic investments in basic industry and sorted out what sorts of business work and what sorts don't.  It is easy to despise the brutal management, the dishonest business practices, the environmental degradation, the corruption in municipal and state government, and the gross neglect of children. We would not put up with that again. It was a time of economic growth, however uneven, unjust, and erratic with bubbles and busts. Nobody wants a return to the booms and busts. The Great Depression was the result of an attempt to return to the Gilded Age, and most of the Great Depression was the necessary measures to get out of a horrid meltdown. World War II was the consequence of fascists trying to achieve a new feudalism in which the industrial worker or small farmer became a serf worked to his physical limits and punished severely if he balked at that.

It is hard to imagine another war like the Second World War in which the war is an apocalyptic struggle between Good and Evil, with Good generally prevailing (but only after multitudes of people who did nothing wrong, like Jews, Gypsies, and the Polish intelligentsia. were largely exterminated). But this time, dystopia is practically at hand and many Americans know such to be so.

We will need to remake our cultural and economic norms. We are entering a new economic reality in which scarcity is no longer a necessary spur to toil. The bright side is that we can live with much more ease without lack. The dark side for many is that there may be no shortages to exploit (except perhaps for urban real estate, Donald Trump's source of wealth) for easy income above the norm.

[Odin]

(05-23-2017, 07:02 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-23-2017, 04:54 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-22-2017, 12:47 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: As far as that goes, the concept "Make America Great Again" is reactionary in the sense of suggesting that something noble has been lost. All that I see worse about America since the 1920s  is that America is more crowded and that real estate is much more expensive in real terms. But go back to the era of 120 years ago -- I don't want elixirs of opiates and liquor sold as alternatives to seeing a physician. I don't want children then seen as trash (then Irish-Americans, largely) being run over by trolleys. I don't want black people being consigned to conditions reminiscent of serfdom. I don't want children drinking booze or toiling in mines and factories. The forty-year lifespan and seventy-hour workweek for workingmen as a norm is something to avoid -- not to recover.

I miss the optimism and energy of the GI generation.  They grew up in the last ugly remnants of the Gilded Age, the Great Depression being a final reprise of the economic ugliness of what came before.  From the New Deal through the Great Society I think we did pretty good.  Getting back that spirit and energy wouldn't be a bad thing.  

The Great Depression and World War II were not fun.  The Gilded Age was just bad.  Thinking those times the peak of America doesn't feel right at all save in the context of a Churchill misquote.  If the nation lasts a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their finest hour."  But in terms of when was our time of broad sunlit uplands, that would be the heyday of tax and spend liberalism.

Ironically I don't interpret Make America Great Again as "go back to pre-WWII" or "pre 20th Century." I interpret it as "go back to the 1T (and maybe the 2T?)"

The Boomers who are the most firebrand about Trump are recalling their childhoods and for the older ones, early adulthoods, and wanting to recreate that magic. But being from a sector (or having been recruited by the sector) that viewed FDR as "that man" and JFK as "a horny drunk Catholic Mick" they only consider a sliver of those past days. They are irrational in that it was the New Deal and the relative unity that arose after the "America Firsters" and their evil opposites the Bosheviks were marginalized during the late 1930s and 1940s that made the 1T what it was and gave the 2T its "seed capital. "

I think the same can be said about many of us progressives of all ages who supported Sanders in the primaries, there is a lot of pervasive New Deal nostalgia, a want to go back to the 50s prosperity (what Colin Woodard calls "national liberalism") only without the racism, sexism, and homophobia.

[pbrower2a]

Here is my compilation of Nate Silver's estimates of approval for President Trump. It's his algorithm, but my interpretation. I show this because his algorithm is more complete than my compilation and better compares states. I may not (more precisely, the polls that I have) agree with him. He doesn't have a poll of likely voters in one state and registered voters in another as I must to compile data. I am keeping "my" map of extant polling.

Colors are garish (for this I apologize), but in essence, President Trump must win everything in any shade of blue or green (except perhaps Iowa) and win three of the four states in pink that have 15 or more electoral votes (Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania) to win re-election.



We can assume that approval ratings reflect the perception of competence and desirability of the President's efforts. Nate Silver does not use existing polls; he has an algorithm, and it is a suitable alternative to a compilation of polls as I have, at the least for completeness.

States in maroon are reasonably assumed hopeless for any Republican nominee short of the new Ronald Reagan against a very weak Democratic opponent, and the approval rating that Nate Silver estimates for Trump in those states largely so indicates. He estimates that the President's approval ratings in such states based upon his algorithm is at or below 30%.

So let's lump the states into categories

ap rate      Dem   Trp
>= 30%     115   423
31-36%     187   359
36-41%     323   215
42%         374   164
44%         412   126
46-47%     430   208
47%         433   105
48-49%     450   188
50% or more -- Do you really need to know?

Should he win the states in other than those in maroon and medium red, then he has an electoral result similar to that of Obama in 2012. But that implies that he wins states in pink in which he has approval ratings between than 36% and 41% (which cuts off New Mexico, which went to Clinton by 8%, which is a reasonable limit for saying what is close and what isn't), and contains North Carolina (a 4% win for Trump in 2016) which asks for a 'yuge' changes in political expectations and reality. The good news for President Trump  is that he has almost three and a half years in which to make that work.  The bad news is that he has little room for pushing an unpopular agenda or for any economic meltdown or foreign disaster. As a reminder, Jimmy Carter was doing far better at a comparable time into his single term as President.  

All states in pink were close in 2016. Donald Trump will need to win at least three of those with fifteen or more electoral votes, as they include Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania and Florida. But having approvals of 41% or less at this stage just does not look good for the prospect of a re-election of President Trump in states that were close in 2016.

Next come states in which President Trump has an estimated approval rating of 42% -- Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, and Ohio. Arizona and Georgia were fairly close in 2016, but they haven't gone to a Democratic nominee for President since the 1990s. Ohio and Iowa went for Obama twice but swung strongly for Trump.  These states comprise 51 electoral votes, and every one of them will be a must-win state for President Trump except for Iowa (only six electoral votes). President Trump is severely underwater in these states. I color them aqua.

Texas is a category in itself, a state straddling regions and having great diversity en economic life and ethnicity. A right-wing Republican should normally be very popular in Texas, at least since 2000 -- but it looks to have reverted to being on the margin of competitiveness.  Trump won it by about the same margin by which he lost New Mexico. It is the second-largest prize in electoral votes. Should President Trump lose Texas,  he is losing a landslide in which the Democratic challenger is getting over 400 electoral votes. Trump is underwater with only 44% approval and 49% approval. Texas is in lime green.  Texas might not be decided until December of 2020.

Bad as it might be for President Trump to be underwater in Alaska (not a Democratic win since 1964), or either Mississippi or South Carolina (last won by a Democratic nominee in 1976) -- he is barely underwater in those three states with approval ratings of 46% or 47%. Medium green.

Where the President is tied at 47%  (Indiana and Missouri in pale blue) he will likely win by mid-single digits, demonstrating the weakness of his defense of his record.  States in which he has just less than 50% approval (in medium blue) he will probably win with high single digits. Those in which he has an approval rating of 50%  (in navy) or more will go for President Trump by double digits.  

Note that Nate Silver does not distinguish the districts of Maine and Nebraska.

[pbrower2a]

Much demographic detail is here.

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-det...aseID=2460

American voters believe 54 - 43 percent that President Donald Trump is abusing the powers of his office, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

President Trump gets a negative 37 - 55 percent job approval rating, compared to a negative 36 - 58 percent approval in a May 10 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN- uh-pe-ack) University. Today, voters over 65 years old, divided in earlier surveys, now disapprove 53 - 42 percent. Trump has a negative 36 - 54 percent approval among independent voters, an improvement from his negative 29 - 63 percent two weeks ago.

The president is under water among every party, gender, educational, age and racial group except Republicans, who approve 84 - 13 percent; white voters with no college degree, who approve 52 - 40 percent, and white men who are split 47 - 46 percent.

Trump fired FBI Director James Comey to disrupt the investigation into possible ties between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, 55 percent of voters believe. Another 36 percent say Trump lost confidence in Comey's ability to lead the FBI.

American voters disapprove 54 - 36 percent of the Comey firing. The firing was an abuse of power, 49 percent say, while 47 percent say it was not an abuse.

Voters do not believe 54 - 31 percent Trump's claim that Comey told him on three separate occasions that the president was not under investigation.

"President Donald Trump remains mired in dreadful mid 30s approval numbers and the red flags that are popping up tell an even darker story," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

"Retirement age voters are leaving in big numbers," Malloy added.

"But by far the most alarming determination is that President Trump is abusing his office."

Voters do believe 55 - 27 percent that Trump asked Comey to drop the FBI investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

The matter should be investigated by the U.S. House of Representatives, voters say 62 - 33 percent.

American voters support 66 - 30 percent the appointment of a special prosecutor to look into possible ties between Trump campaign advisors and the Russian government.

A total of 68 percent of voters say alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election is a "very important" or "somewhat important" issue.

President Trump is not honest, voters say 59 - 36 percent. Voter opinions of most of Trump's personal qualities remain negative:

57 - 40 percent that he does not have good leadership skills;
56 - 42 percent that he does not care about average Americans;
65 - 31 percent that he is not level-headed;
64 - 33 percent that he is a strong person;
57 - 40 percent that he is intelligent;
62 - 36 percent that he does not share their values.

The president's first overseas trip has little impact on voter opinion of his foreign policy ability, as he gets a negative 38 - 56 percent approval rating for handling foreign policy, compared to a negative 36 - 59 percent in a May 10 Quinnipiac University poll. His grades on handling other issues are:

Disapprove 50 - 44 percent of the way he is handling the economy;
47 percent approve of the way he is handling terrorism and 45 percent disapprove;
Disapprove 57 - 41 percent of the way he is handling immigration.

From May 17 - 23, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,404 voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points, including the design effect. Live interviewers call landlines and cell phones.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado and the nation as a public service and for research.

Visit poll.qu.edu or http://www.facebook.com/quinnipiacpoll Call (203) 582-5201, or follow us on Twitter @QuinnipiacPoll

[pbrower2a]

I expect New York State to hold the President in contempt, but this badly? Wow! How often is the lowest popularity of a President in his home state? Maybe the more that people know him, the less they like him. I don't have a category for 'under 30%' because I couldn't see its relevance.

I'm guessing that New Yorkers do not like the landlord class. Maybe that's a heritage that goes back to when the Dutch ruled and tried to establish the feudal patroon system.  

Quote:

Quote:New York (Siena):

Favorable 30%
Unfavorable 65%

NYC: 27/67
Suburbs: 32/66
Upstate: 33/63

Job Approval:

Excellent/Good 27%
Fair/Poor 71% (Poor is at 57%)

NYC: 24/73
Suburbs: 30/70
Upstate: 30/70

Wow, didn't he carry upstate in 2016?

It looks as if he has disappointed many of his 2016 voters.

New Hampshire:

Quote:UNH poll of New Hampshire (change from early May):

Approve 34% (-9)
Disapprove 56% (+9)

Trump barely lost this state in November.  Jimmy Carter without character. Sure, he can win in 2020 without New Hampshire -- but any Trump win of re-election will have new Hampshire at least close to being a win for him if he doesn't win it outright.

Michigan. I got polled for this one. Second poll of the year.

Quote:MRG poll of Michigan:

Approve 40%
Disapprove 51%

In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job President Trump is doing as president? [IF APPROVE / DISAPPROVE, ASK:] Would that be strongly (approve / disapprove) or just somewhat (approve / disapprove)?



Strongly approve……………….25%

Somewhat approve……………..15%

Neither approve or disapprove….7%

Somewhat disapprove…………..7%

Strongly disapprove ……………44%

Don’t know……………………..2%

Look at the "Strong disapprove" category. There's much anger about President Trump.

I am not using favorability polls unless the rating is uncontroversial and there is no approval poll.

The letter F shall signify a favorability poll, as the only polls that I have for Massachusetts and Oklahoma  



Even -- white



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

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

White - tie.

Colors chosen for partisan affiliation

[pbrower2a]

(05-25-2017, 04:59 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I think we are seeing the hard hats starting to turn against him.

Hard hats may hate what they term "n___rs, sp__s, ch__ks, f_gs" etc, but they really hate a bullshitter.

We are seeing multitudes turn against the President. He betrayed his promises. Hoover was OK until the economy melted down, and Carter was OK until events in Iran went out of hand very fast. But events betrayed the Hoover and Carter presidencies.

I'm not so sure that the 'hard-hats' are as bigoted as the stereotypes of the 1970s had them. Co-workers might be "n___rs, sp__s, ch__ks, f_gs" etc.  Then there might be a 'Puerto Rican' son-in-law or 'Mexican-American' daughter-in-law that they try to convince you is 'really Italian'. "Archie Bunker" is dead.

I have had my unfortunate encounters with 'bullshitters' -- and I know enough to listen only for dollops of entertaining fiction.

I'm beginning to wonder about rural America. Donald Trump is the definitive city slicker at the stereotypical worst. I have seen no polls so far about the Plains states except for Oklahoma.

...The most likely time for a Regeneracy will be the evening of November 3, 2020. When states that 'never, ever, ever! vote for a Democratic Presidential nominee' are shown voting against Trump or Pence, we will know that the Power of Mammon is broken. I can easily imagine the Republicans warning about how employers will shutter their doors, Satanism will supplant Christianity, the sun will stop shining, and dogs will turn on their owners if people don't vote right. Or is it 'Right'?

We are entering the post-scarcity era, and that transition may not be so bright and benign as many expected. Because there will be far fewer easy ways to make an above-average income other than being born rich or being part of a bureaucratic elite. people will find some of their expectations unmet. The insecurities that people had will not be solved with status symbols that buy a simulacrum of self-esteem for a moment. Creativity and imagination are far less commonplace at the level of commercial marketability than people think.

But a post-scarcity society means that need is no longer a conscionable means of controlling people. But plutocrats and bureaucratic elites control through fear.

[David Horn]

(05-30-2017, 11:07 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: ... I saw an excellent interview yesterday on Charlie Rose. The guest was Ben Sasse.

He truly is the Anti-Trump, at least among GOPers. What a talented, intelligent, well spoken, out-of-box thinking man.

Sasse still believes in the Horatio Alger America-for-all, where we are all hard working, productive and able to achieve our highest goals.  In other words, he's engaging but very naïve.

[Ragnarök_62]

(05-31-2017, 10:43 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(05-30-2017, 11:07 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: ... I saw an excellent interview yesterday on Charlie Rose. The guest was Ben Sasse.

He truly is the Anti-Trump, at least among GOPers. What a talented, intelligent, well spoken, out-of-box thinking man.

Sasse still believes in the Horatio Alger America-for-all, where we are all hard working, productive and able to achieve our highest goals.  In other words, he's engaging but very naïve.

Yes, those days are long gone. Welcome to the Gilded Age 2.0.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012...bor?page=1

[pbrower2a]

Just look at Michigan. I think that Michiganders are beginning to feel betrayed.

[quote author=pbrower2a link=topic=264554.msg5676028#msg5676028 date=1496252391]

Michigan: Epic/MRA for Detroit Free Press. http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/mi...355614001/

I don't find a link to the actual results, but the story seems to indicate the following Trump approval ratings (change since Feb):

Approve: 12% (-6) ("positive job rating")
Disapprove: 61% (+5) ("negative job rating")
[/quote]

It looks like a misprint. Probably 32% approval, which is still execrable. I'll accept 32%. 61% disapproval? That suggests a collapse of Trump support.

Civitas ® poll of North Carolina registered voters (change from mid-April):

Trump Approval:

Approve 42% (-6)
Disapprove 53% (+7)

Cooper Approval:

Approve 61% (+2)
Disapprove 24%[/quote]

It looks as if Democrats are gaining and Trump is doing badly in states that he just barely won in 2016.



Tennessee, Vanderbilt University

The poll of 1,005 registered voters also shows that support for Trump remains strong among Republicans at 86 percent and self-identified Tea Party members at 90 percent.

But Trump's positive standing among Democrats is just 10 percent and 49 percent among self-identified independents.

Trump handily won the state in November with 61.1 percent of the vote over Democrat Hillary Clinton's 34.9 percent.

The Vanderbilt Poll was conducted May 4-14 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percent.

In November polling, 54 percent of Tennesseans thought Trump would change things for the better in Washington. Now, just 41 percent think that.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/break...ns/430855/



Does anyone remember when Tennessee was the most politically-progressive state in the South? I do. That's when it had Senators Gore and Sasser. That seems like an eternity ago.
date=1496352600]

Quote:Donald Trump falls to 27 percent approval rating in new California poll



http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/31/do...oval-poll/

[/quote]

I am not using favorability polls unless the rating is uncontroversial and there is no approval poll.

The letter F shall signify a favorability poll, as the only polls that I have for Massachusetts and Oklahoma



Even -- white



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

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

White - tie.

Colors chosen for partisan affiliation

[pbrower2a]

Current polls suggest that President Trump will lose the four states that were his closest wins in 2016. But even if he gets only one of those back, he will lose. The comparisons are with incumbent Presidents who lost.

Trump barely loses (analogue Ford 1976) after snapping back a bit:



unnamed Democrat 51%, Trump 48%

Bush 1992 analogue. Basically the President is widely seen as a non-solution.



Hoover 1932/Carter 1976 analogue, which is not so preposterous as it seems to people who think that this President can do nothing wrong:

[Odin]

(05-30-2017, 11:07 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-26-2017, 12:33 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(05-25-2017, 04:59 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I think we are seeing the hard hats starting to turn against him.

Hard hats may hate what they term "n___rs, sp__s, ch__ks, f_gs" etc, but they really hate a bullshitter.

We are seeing multitudes turn against the President. He betrayed his promises. Hoover was OK until the economy melted down, and Carter was OK until events in Iran went out of hand very fast. But events betrayed the Hoover and Carter presidencies.

I'm not so sure that the 'hard-hats' are as bigoted as the stereotypes of the 1970s had them. Co-workers might be "n___rs, sp__s, ch__ks, f_gs" etc.  Then there might be a 'Puerto Rican' son-in-law or 'Mexican-American' daughter-in-law that they try to convince you is 'really Italian'. "Archie Bunker" is dead.

I have had my unfortunate encounters with 'bullshitters' -- and I know enough to listen only for dollops of entertaining fiction.

I'm beginning to wonder about rural America. Donald Trump is the definitive city slicker at the stereotypical worst. I have seen no polls so far about the Plains states except for Oklahoma.

...The most likely time for a Regeneracy will be the evening of November 3, 2020. When states that 'never, ever, ever! vote for a Democratic Presidential nominee' are shown voting against Trump or Pence, we will know that the Power of Mammon is broken. I can easily imagine the Republicans warning about how employers will shutter their doors, Satanism will supplant Christianity, the sun will stop shining, and dogs will turn on their owners if people don't vote right. Or is it 'Right'?

We are entering the post-scarcity era, and that transition may not be so bright and benign as many expected. Because there will be far fewer easy ways to make an above-average income other than being born rich or being part of a bureaucratic elite. people will find some of their expectations unmet. The insecurities that people had will not be solved with status symbols that buy a simulacrum of self-esteem for a moment. Creativity and imagination are far less commonplace at the level of commercial marketability than people think.

But a post-scarcity society means that need is no longer a conscionable means of controlling people. But plutocrats and bureaucratic elites control through fear.

There is even a GOP way out of this.

I saw an excellent interview yesterday on Charlie Rose. The guest was Ben Sasse.

He truly is the Anti-Trump, at least among GOPers. What a talented, intelligent, well spoken, out-of-box thinking man.

Sasse is a nice guy, but much of the policies he supports are pure right-wing BS.

[pbrower2a]

What Americans think of other leaders -- and Donald Trump:

PPP's newest national poll finds a variety of bad news for Donald Trump in the wake of James Comey's testimony to Congress last week. 49% of voters say that they think Trump committed obstruction of justice, to just 41% who don't think he did. Only 37% of voters say they think Trump is honest, to 56% who say he's not. A majority of voters- 53%- come right out and say they consider Trump to be a liar to 41% who disagree with that characterization. And for the second month in a row we find plurality support for impeachment- 47% are in support of it to 43% who are opposed.
Voters say they trust James Comey more than Trump by double digits, 51/39. Comey's image has improved rapidly in the wake of his testimony. Last month he had a -16 net favorability rating at 24/40, but now he's on positive ground at 40/37. That improvement is a product of Clinton voters seeming to have largely forgiven Comey at this point- his favorability with them is 60/13, in contrast to an 18/67 standing with Trump voters. One thing we find little disagreement about is that only 13% of voters think it's the job of the FBI Director to do whatever Donald Trump tells them to do, compared to 77% who say they disagree with that notion. There also continues to be a clear consensus that the reason for Comey's firing was his investigation into Russian involvement in the election- 54% say that drove the firing to 35% who disagree.
We polled Americans on how they feel about a quartet of foreign leaders, and found that all of them have better net favorabilities in the country than its own President does:

Leader
Favorability
Net Favorability

Angela Merkel+11
36/25

Justin Trudeau  +11
31/20

Emmanuel Macron +7
25/18

Theresa May+4
27/23


Donald Trump -14
40/54


The favorability numbers for the foreign leaders are a little bit of a reality check on how closely Americans pay attention to foreign affairs though. Merkel has just 61% name recognition and it goes down from there to 51% for Trudeau, 50% for May, and 43% for Macron. Clinton voters have favorable opinions of all the foreign leaders with Merkel (57/10 favorability) and Trudeau (53/11) coming out particularly well. Trump voters see all of them with the exception of May in a negative light.

Health care continues to be a political disaster for Republicans. Only 24% of voters support the American Health Care Act to 55% who oppose it. It doesn't even have majority support among GOP voters- 42% support it to 29% who are opposed. Voters prefer the current Affordable Care Act to the alternative of the AHCA by a 51/34 spread, and only 35% of voters think the best path forward on health care is to repeal the ACA while 59% think it should be left in place with fixes made to it as necessary.

The health care bill could have major political implications in 2018. By a 24 point margin voters say they're less likely to vote for a member of Congress who supported the American Health Care Act- 48% say they're less likely to vote for someone who favored it, to only 24% who say they're more likely to support such a person.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com (12 June 2017)

Comment: Theresa May lost her election.

---

Gallup

Approve 38% (-1)
Disapprove 58% (+2)