Donald Trump: polls of approval and favorability

[Eric the Green]

Breaking News from Newsmax.com


President Donald Trump's approval rating has fallen to a low of 34 percent in the latest Gallup daily tracking poll on Friday.

The president's disapproval rate is at 61 percent, according to Gallup. The difference represents a new low net approval rate of negative 27 points.

The approval rate is down 1 point from the previous week, while the disapproval figure had risen, also by a point.

[pbrower2a]

(updated due to a twelve new polls, some of which show huge swing since the last polling data)

Quote:If you put all states with a disapproval of less than 55% in his column, he's still relatively close to 270 electoral votes.

That's one way of looking at it. I look heavily at vote shares. One must draw a line somewhere to show that some tipping-point state defines victory and loss.  This could be percentage of the vote  or margin. As an example of what I mean by a tipping-point state, if one takes the margin of the Obama victory of 2008, he would have won the Presidency had he won Iowa (which he won by about 9%) and every state that he won by even more. He would have lost the Presidency had he not won Iowa and every state that he lost outright or won by less than the margin by which he won Iowa. Likewise Dubya won in 2004 because he won Ohio and every state that he won by a larger margin. Had Kerry won Ohio (and that year a marginal gain that would have won Ohio would have also won him New Mexico and Iowa) he would have won the Presidency. In 2000 -- we all know about Florida.

Of course it is possible for an incumbent to have disapproval in excess of 50% in a state and still win the state -- if the opponent is an unusually-weak campaigner, takes grossly-unpopular stances, or has such problems as looming scandals. So if it is a choice between Donald Trump and someone that he and his Party can characterize as even worse, then Trump could win. But if one has a disapproval rating over 50% in a state, then such indicates that one is not relating to voters or that one is doing things offensive to them. To win despite such one needs a very weak or flawed opponent.

So far I see Donald Trump as one of the worst Presidents in American history, one-and-out for having no idea of what the Presidency entails and making mistakes that nobody else would make as President. Any President will offend some sensibilities, and in a time of extreme polarization of the body public nobody will be able to satisfy much more than about 50% of the people. But a half-way effective President will get a sure 45% approval and be able to campaign to get re-elected.

Maybe it is excessively simple to take the disapproval rating of an incumbent from 100  and use that number as a ceiling for what he will get. But this tool seems as good as any. I expect a spirited contest among Democrats for the nomination for President in 2020, and that that will bring out the best. Democrats are much less likely to fall for a demagogue best described as a mirror image of Donald Trump. I can see, based upon the generational change that has aged the Boom Generation and matured Generation X that Democrats could end up with either the Gray Champion (a 60-something Boomer) or a mature Reactive who is a clone of Barack Obama in agenda, ideology, and attitudes toward institutions and process if not in ethnicity, gender, and region. Republicans will be stuck with either Donald Trump or some stereotypical reactionary who would give all power to the economic elites.

Defeating an incumbent is usually difficult. Bad policies that begin popular often take time to show ill effects, after which the incumbent has no price to pay because there will be no Third Term or because the incumbent has a safe seat due to the culture of his state or district. Democrats have a chance of nominating a "new FDR" (but I can't say who that is) or a "new Obama". Republicans have no chance of nominating a right-wing version of FDR or even another Ronald Reagan, as they will almost certainly be stuck with an incumbent with serious flaws. Successful politicians do not inflict pain without expecting good results from the policy that inflicts that pain (example, Ronald Reagan taking harsh measures against inflation, with eventual benefits in reductions of interest rates, but at the cost of lowering expectations of most Americans).

I have a chart of how the states trend toward a generic Democratic nominee based on the disapproval of Donald Trump. It is possible to win if one has a disapproval rating just under 50 but otherwise anything from difficult to impossible. You can argue against the position of any state. Most obviously, "But Texas hasn't gone for a Democratic nominee for President since 1976" makes much sense, much as "But Virginia has not voted for a Democratic nominee since the LBJ blowout of 1964" in 2008. Or, for that matter, the common knowledge that West Virginia will deliver its electoral votes to a Democrat in anything short of a Republican landslide -- that common knowledge being repudiated in 2000 and ever since.

DEM stands for how many electoral votes a Democrat would get before carrying a state or district, REP what the Republican nominee (I now assume Trump) would get, the disapproval rating for Trump in the most recent polling data (I estimate 80 for Dee Cee), ΔEV for the number of votes that the Democratic nominee would get if the states to the right of that column would get if winning the states to the right, and STATES for the state or district that would go for the Democratic nominee (maybe more precisely, against Trump).


DEM  REP  DIS ΔEV  STATES
000  538   80   03      DC
003  535   71   58      CA VT
061  477   66   11      MA
072  466   65   14      NJ
086  452   64   10      MD
096  442   62   29      NY  
125  413   61   13      VA
138  400   59   24      CT HI WA
161  377   58   20      IL
181  357   57   45      CO MI MN WI
222  312   56   15      DE NM OR
241  297   55   32     ME* NH PA RI TIPPING POINT/ZONE
273  265   54   11      AZ
284  254   53   06      NV
290  248   52   53      FL IA OH
343  195   51   36      TX
381  157   50   37      GA NC UT
418  120   48   16      IN WV
434  104   47   06      AR
440  098   46   19      MS MO MT
459  079   44   12      ND SC
471  067   43   16      LA NE* SD
487  051   42   29      ID KS KY TN
516  022   39   22      AL OK WY
538  000

*Maine and Nebraska divide their electoral votes.

ME-01 is more Democratic than Maine at large, which is more Democratic than ME-02 (which went to Donald Trump in 2016). Maine-01 is somewhat urban southern Maine, including Portland, and ME-02 is very rural, comprising central and northern Maine.

NE-02 (mostly Greater Omaha inside Nebraska) is less Democratic than ME-02, so in a normal election it is more likely that Maine gives an electoral vote for a Republican than that Nebraska gives an electoral vote to a Democrat. But NE-02 went for Barack Obama in 2008. It is much more Democratic than Nebraska as a whole. NE-01, eastern Nebraska (including Lincoln and some parts of Greater Omaha) is slightly more Democratic than Nebraska as a whole. NE-03, including very rural central and western Nebraska (including Scottsbluff and Grand Island) is one of the most Republican districts in the USA, and is so strongly Republican that

(1) it can easily swing the state at large Republican, and
(2) it could conceivably offer the single electoral vote for a Republican nominee for President.

Descriptions of the states and their districts are

ME-01 -- very strong D
ME at large  -- strong D
ME-02  -- very weak D
NE-02  --  weak R
NE-01  -- strong R
NE at large -- very strong R
NE-03 -- almost as reliably R as the District of Columbia is reliably D

With allowance for the age of some of the polling data (oldest of which is a Gallup composite of statewide data from January to July, which I average as April data) that likely underestimates disapproval ratings of the President in some states, I get some idea of how badly President Trump will do in many states. On the whole I have a reasonable average of disapproval of the states lower than those of recent Gallup polls of nationwide tracking. Sure, California (55 electoral votes) is huge, but it is only a little more than a tenth of the population of the USA, and even Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey New York State, and Virginia -- 97 electoral votes altogether) are shown close to the national average of disapproval of the President.

To win while winning all states in which he now has disapproval of 54% or less, he would have to pick off five or more electoral votes from states in which he has current levels of disapproval of 55% or more. Conveniently those would have to be the ME-02 (which President Trump won, and for which I have no polling data) and New Hampshire (one of his barest losses in a usual swing state). That is stretching things.

But that leaves President Trump with practically no room for error. He could conceivably lose only one more electoral vote, the unlikely loss with nothing else of NE-02, which means that there would be a 269-269 split of the Electoral College with the Presidency chosen in the House of Representatives. President Trump is doing so badly that he could hand the Democrats a majority of House seats in this unlikely scenario.

The problem that President Trump has in the polling isn't that he has 71% disapproval in California. It is that he has 54% disapproval in Arizona, 51% disapproval in Texas,  50% disapproval in North Carolina, and 52% or 53% disapproval in three states in four states (Florida, Iowa, Nevada, and Ohio) that Obama won twice. Yes, you can say "but it is Arizona, which hasn't gone Democratic in a close race in a century (1948 was not close even if the newspaper headline read "DEWEY WINS!", "but it is Texas, which hasn't voted for a Democratic nominee since 1976", or "but it is North Carolina, sort of a freak in 2008". You can say such things, but President Trump will need to win every one of those states.  

Take the Trump chance of winning every one of those states individually, and really New Hampshire because it is in the set-up condition to give Trump a probabilistic chance (it will be between 0.00 and 1.00  for each), multiply them all, and you get the chance of President Trump getting re-elected. If any of those states slides out of reach, then he is one-and-done. To reset the chance for being re-elected he must reset the public discourse on him in states in which he is faring badly.  

You can argue about any single state, but even with 268 electoral votes for the Democratic nominee in states in which disapproval of Donald Trump is 55% or higher, President Trump has many ways to lose -- as in, any state in which his disapproval is under 55%.

He actually lost Nevada in 2016, and he could easily do so again. But if Nevada doesn't get him, Arizona might. Or Florida, Iowa, or Ohio.   Texas (of all states!) could utterly reject him if he bungles the response to Hurricane Harvey. The Hispanic vote in Texas is growing rapidly, and Texas is no longer below-average in educational achievement for white people. Then there is North Carolina.  These seven states are dissimilar enough and scattered enough that the President could not offer a one-size fits all approach that could secure all seven states, and he would have to spend resources of advertising funds and personal appearances wildly in an effort to keep them all.

(So why did I not mention Georgia or Utah? Utah doesn't go to a Democrat unless the Democrat is a Mormon, and I see it more likely that a third-party conservative nominee wins Utah than does any Democrat. Utah isn't going for a Democratic nominee unless either Arizona or Nevada goes for the Democrat.  Georgia does not go for a Democratic nominee unless both Florida and North Carolina also do so).

[pbrower2a]

EPIC/MRI, Michigan:

Job performance -- negative, 62%.

Michiganders questioning the mental stability of the President. -- 43% unstable, 45% stable

More effective: Obama 56%, Trump 32%

Investigations against him a "witch-hunt" -- agree 34%, disagree 55% (disagreement is hostile to the President's credibility)

Worry about the President handling North Korea -- 38% very worried, 15% somewhat worried

Overall

36% favorable, 58% unfavorable


I do not use favorability polls anymore, so this will not appear on the map. But there is new data to show some flavor to the perception of the President.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/mi...634859001/

[pbrower2a]

Here is much data as a composite of polling results for nationwide polling between June 1 and August 31. Figure an average polling data of July 15:

Based on Survey Monkey's polls from June 1 through August 31. Figure an average of July 15 for any data from Survey Monkey after I show updates from this data with polls from late July, August, and (so far) early September.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BztOs71...RaaHM/view

Approval



Trump ahead Trump behind

55% or higher 45% to 49%
50% to 54% 40% to 44%
45% to 49% under 40%

Ties are in white.



Disapproval:



60% or higher (207 -- deep red)
57% to 59% (36)
55% (68) TIPPING POINT/ZONE
51% to 54% (141)
46% to 49% (44)
45% (22)
42% or less (23)

There are later polls, but at least here one can compare polling data in different states in the same time frame by the same pollster. Such data is precious.

[pbrower2a]

Now with later polling (July 24 or later)

NJ, Rutgers-Eagleton 30-65

Zogby Interactive
FL 45-52
IN 48-48
KY 52-44
MI 38-57
MO 46-40
MT 49-46
ND 51-44
OH 45-52
PA 40-55
WI 40-57
WV 48-48

Kentucky, PPP, 60-38

Marist:

Michigan 36-55
Pennsylvania 35-54
Wisconsin 34-56

(Zogby Interactive supplants these)

PPP, Tennessee 51-42
University of New Hampshire, 34-55

Quinnipiac, Virginia 36-61

PPP, North Carolina 44-50
PPP, Arizona 45-53
PPP, Nevada 42-53

PPIC, California 25-71

Using only those that have fewer than 10% undecided,

Approval



Trump ahead Trump behind

55% or higher 45% to 49%
50% to 54% 40% to 44%
45% to 49% under 40%
Ties are in white.



Disapproval:



60% or higher (deep red)
57% to 59%
55% to 56%
50% to 54%
46% to 49%
43% to 45%
42% or less


Ties are in white.

[Eric the Green]

If Trump/Pence win those states who disapprove of Trump by 55% or less now on brower's map above, and 55% is not that much, then he/they will win the 2020 election. If Trump can learn to switch sides to get things done, as he did this week, his disapproval rating could sink.

Nevada 53 6
Arizona 53 11
Utah 55 6
Idaho 45 4
Montana 46 3
North Dakota 44 3
Wyoming 39 3
South Dakota 46 3
Nebraska 51 5
Iowa 52 6
Kansas 51 6
Oklahoma 45 7
Texas 53 38
Ohio 53 18
Missouri 48 10
Indiana 48 11
West Virginia 48 5
Pennsylvania 55 20
Kentucky 38 8
Tennessee 47 11
Arkansas 42 6
Louisiana 45 8
Mississippi 46 6
Alabama 41 9
North Carolina 50 15
South Carolina 51 9
Georgia 54 16
Florida 52 29
Alaska 52 3

285 electoral votes. Pennsylvania would look to be the decider.

Will the August eclipse on Trump's Ascendant/Mars prove to be beneficial to him after all, signalling a switch in his strategy (thanks to the floods; Trump doesn't want to be the next Katrina-like victim) ? Or are more challenges awaiting him soon that could sink him?

Don't underestimate the Drump. And don't over-estimate the chances of a Democrat who has a lower horoscope score than Trump.

[pbrower2a]

But -- 55% disapproval is hard to undo.

Maybe not impossible, as we are 38 months away from the 2020 election. I still see a personality unable to act in an adult mode. Spite is a poor motivation for making decisions, and even his (one-time?) deal with Democrats could be an exercise in showing Congressional Republicans who is boss. One can do that only so often.

[Eric the Green]

(09-09-2017, 09:13 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: But -- 55% disapproval is hard to undo.

Maybe not impossible, as we are 38 months away from the 2020 election. I still see a personality unable to act in an adult mode. Spite is a poor motivation for making decisions, and even his (one-time?) deal with Democrats could be an exercise in showing Congressional Republicans who is boss. One can do that only so often.

Yes, especially Trump can only do that so often, apparently. Because he's an incompetent boss. But he's a good salesman among the people. So Democrats beware, you can't beat someone with no-one.

[pbrower2a]

Movement of Trump support and otherwise from April to August:



https://t.co/8rZGh0Pj2H[/quote]


This is "all adults" , which of course includes:

1. non-citizens
2. people who will die, emigrate, or lose the right to vote
3. people who just simply do not go out and vote

It does not include

1. people under 18 now who will be voting in 2020.
2. People who may get citizenship and start voting.

This map refers to approval, and at this point I consider disapproval far more sticky.

[pbrower2a]

Nate Silver notes some trends.





Graphs belong to Nate Silver: comments are mine.

Although approval is not a 100%-reliable predictor of elections, let alone 100% precise, it is clear that President Trump is not maintaining anywhere near the support close to the vote that he got in 2016. To be sure, incumbents can usually expect to lose about 7% from the vote share entering office to approval after a significant time in office, which makes sense when you recognize that some voters can find that what they hoped for isn't on the agenda. All politicians make promises that they can never achieve; even the most honest can never predict the success of the proposals that they offer. There are, after all, nearly half the electorate and half the elected officials wanting the opposite, and they can stall just about any new legislation.

But elected pols usually get re-elected -- because they campaign again and excite much the same people the next time. The usual incumbent can show in the next election why he* was elected the first time, according to a study that Nate Silver made some years ago that I consider relevant not only to elected Governors and Senators seeking re-election but also to the Presidency. It worked well for Bill Clinton in 1996, Dubya in 2004, and Obama in 2012... and it looks likely to be relevant in 2020. Reality will dig a hole for just about any elected official, but if the hole isn't too big, he* will be able to get out of that hole.

So President Trump got 46% of the popular vote in 2016 and tracking polls typically have his approval ratings in the high 30s. Figuring that 46% of the popular vote is generally not enough with which to win a Presidential election (that is what McCain got in 2008 and Dukakis got in 1988, and less than Romney got in 2016 or Kerry in 2004, and we generally recognize them as electoral losers)... President Trump will have a tough time winning re-election.

When the mean loss is 13%, then the incumbent has a big problem unless he won 56% or more of the popular vote. The biggest losses are generally in states that he won big (losses of 17% or more from vote to approval in states that he lost only in Colorado and Minnesota), but states that were close for him (North Carolina, Arizona, Florida, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan which he won by margins less than 5%) are all turning on him. States on the fringe of competition for him in 2016 that he won by 5% to 9% (Georgia, Ohio, Iowa, and Texas) all give poor approval numbers. 

For now I rely more upon disapproval figures, establishing a ceiling of 100 less disapproval. Disapproval is far stickier than approval, and it is a clear barrier. Effective, spirited campaigning can win over the undecided, and it can bring people to vote who otherwise would not vote. Of course some things will matter: whether the economy is or is not in the tank, whether international issues are in worse or better shape, whether there will be a discrediting scandal, whether there will be civic peace (as opposed to riots and mass demonstrations), and of course who the Democratic nominee will be and how well he* campaigns. Above all, we have no idea of whether the next Presidential election will be free and fair. The President acts much like a dictator, and there are plenty of people who would love to kill democracy so that they can have an economic order in which no human suffering is excessive so long as it enhances, indulges, and enforces class privilege. They would love to have legislation by lobbyist... forever... so long as they own the lobbyists.

[pbrower2a]

Gallup tracking poll:

Gallup (September 26)


Approve 37%

Disapprove 58%




Quinnipiac poll, nationwide (with detail on issues and qualities):

September 27, 2017 - Trump Is Not Fit To Be President, American Voters Say, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Voters Disapprove 2-1 Of His Handling Of Race Relations

President Donald Trump is not "fit to serve as president," American voters say 56 - 42 percent, and voters disapprove 57 - 36 percent of the job he is doing as president, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

There are deep party, gender and racial divisions on whether President Trump is fit to serve, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds:

   Trump is not fit, Democrats say 94 - 5 percent and independent voters say 57 - 40 percent. Republicans say 84 - 14 percent that he is fit.
   Men are divided 49 - 49 percent, as women say 63 - 35 percent he is not fit.
   White voters are divided as 50 percent say he is fit and 48 percent say he is not fit. Trump is not fit, black voters say 94 - 4 percent and Hispanic voters say 60 - 40 percent.

American voters disapprove 62 - 32 percent of the way President Trump is handling race relations. Disapproval is 55 - 39 percent among white voters, 95 - 3 percent among black voters and 66 - 28 percent among Hispanic voters. President Trump is doing more to divide the country than to unite the country, American voters say 60 - 35 percent.

The anti-Twitter sentiment remains high as voters say 69 - 26 percent that Trump should stop tweeting. No party, gender, education, age or racial group wants to follow the Tweeter-in- Chief. Voters say 51 - 27 percent they are embarrassed to have Trump as president.

"There is no upside. With an approval rating rating frozen in the mid-thirties, his character and judgement questioned, President Donald Trump must confront the harsh fact that the majority of American voters feel he is simply unfit to serve in the highest office in the land," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

"A divider, responsible for the deepening chasm of racial discord. That is the inescapable characterization of President Trump from voters who see race relations deteriorating on his watch.

"Weary and wary of the Twitter-happy president's blizzard of provocative tweets, voters say dump the device for good."

American voter opinions of most Trump qualities remain low:

   59 - 37 percent that he is not honest;
   60 - 38 percent that he does not have good leadership skills;
   56 - 42 percent that he does not care about average Americans;
   67 - 30 percent that he is not level headed;
   61 - 37 percent that he is a strong person;
   55 - 42 percent that he is intelligent;
   61 - 36 percent that he does not share their values.

Democrats and Republicans

American voters disapprove 78 - 15 percent of the job Republicans in Congress are doing, worse than their 70 - 25 percent disapproval in a June 29 Quinnipiac University poll. Even Republican voters disapprove 61 - 32 percent. Voters disapprove 63 - 29 percent of the job Democrats in Congress are doing, virtually unchanged from June.

Voters say 47 - 38 percent, including 44 - 32 percent among independent voters, that they would like to see Democrats win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2018 Congressional elections.

Voters also say 49 - 40 percent, including 47 - 34 percent among independent voters, they would like to see Democrats win control of the U.S. Senate next year.

By a narrow 48 - 44 percent voters approve of Trump's handling of the economy. He gets mostly negative approval ratings for handling other key issues:

   38 - 57 percent for handling foreign policy;
   38 - 59 percent for immigration;
   34 - 59 percent for the environment;
   34 - 60 percent for health care;
   47 percent approve of his handling of terrorism and 45 percent disapprove.

From September 21 - 26, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,412 voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 3.1 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 nationwide, and in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa and Colorado as a public service and for research.

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-det...aseID=2487

[pbrower2a]

Maryland. Trump disapproval is up from 64% to 71%.

Alabama. Trump disapproval has gone from 39% to 43%.

Oh -- for the Senate race in Alabama, Roy Moore is up by 4.7%.  


Approval



Trump ahead      Trump behind

55% or higher     45% to 49%
50% to 54%       40% to 44%  
45% to 49%       under 40%

Ties are in white.



Disapproval:



60% or higher  (deep red)
57% to 59%
55% to 56%
50% to 54%
46% to 49%
43% to 45%
42% or less


Ties are in white.

[pbrower2a]

This is before we find out the effects of the horror in Puerto Rico upon the President's approval ratings.

[pbrower2a]

Public Policy Polling has a laundry list of polling data on President Trump. The only thing that looks good for him is that he would not lose a primary challenge. The rest?

Quote:One reason for the strong position Democrats are in is fallout from the GOP's failed efforts on health care, and our new poll makes it clear.  Paul Ryan is at a 25/51 approval rating, Mitch McConnell is at 14/61, and Congress as a whole has a 9/76 approval.

Only 27% of voters support the most recent Republican health care bill to 53% who oppose it. By contrast the Affordable Care Act continues to have new found popularity with 48% of voters in favor of it and 34% against. Asked which of the bills they prefer the Affordable Care Act beats out the Graham-Cassidy repeal bill 53-34, and only 32% of voters think the best path forward on health care is to repeal the Affordable Care Act while 62% think it's best to keep it and makes fixes as necessary.

It is not going to help keep a Republican majority in Congress.

Quote:The health care debate is having a bad impact on Republicans electorally. By a 19 point margin voters say they're less likely to support a member of Congress who voted for the health care repeal bill- 48% say they're less likely to vote for such an incumbent next year to only 29% who say they're more likely to.

Approval and issues:

Quote:Donald Trump continues to be unpopular with 42% of voters approving of him to 53% who disapprove. Some new issues that have cropped up in the last few weeks are causing him problems in addition to the ongoing issues causing his unpopularity. Only 37% of voters think it's appropriate for him to refer to a foreign leader as 'Rocket Man' to 56% who think it's inappropriate. Only 24% of voters think it's appropriate for him to use campaign funds to pay for his legal expenses, to 64% who think it's inappropriate. And only 20% of voters think it's appropriate for his cabinet secretaries to fly on taxpayer funded private plans, to 71% who say it's inappropriate.

It lo0oks as if he is doing much wrong. And this is before we get the whole story on Puerto Rico.

Character?

Quote:Beyond those specific issues voters continue to have concerns with Trump's general temperament. Only 39% of voters think he's honest, to 54% who consider him to be dishonest. A plurality of voters- 47%- consider Trump to be mentally unbalanced to only 45% who consider him to be mentally stable. 58% of voters still want to see Trump's tax returns, to only 35% who think it isn't necessary for him to release them. Only 35% of voters think Trump has fulfilled his core campaign promise to 'Make America Great Again' to 53% who think he has not delivered. And for the fifth month in a row we find voters in support of impeachment- 48% favor it, to 43% who are opposed.

Trump vs. media:

Quote:Do you have a higher opinion of Donald Trump or…

CBS, 53/38

NBC, 52/39

ABC, 52/39

Washington Post, 52/39

CNN, 51/38

New York Times, 52/40

ESPN, 48/38

(ESPN is sports, and not news. Hey, PPP -- you might ask about Nickelodeon, Discovery Channel, and Turner Classic Movies the next time).

Tales of collusion between the President's campaign and entities in Russia have some credibility:

Q23
Would you support or oppose an independent investigation into Russia’s involvement in the2016 Presidential election and ties to key Presidential aides? (55% support, 32% oppose, 13% not sure)

Q24
Who do you think Russia wanted to win the  2016 election: Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?

23% Clinton -- 56% Trump -- 21% not sure

..........................................................
Q25
Do you think that members of Donald Trump’scampaign team worked in association with Russia to help Trump win the election for President, or not?

44% think that members of Donald Trump’scampaign team worked in association with Russia to help Trump win the election for President
.........................................................
42% do not think that members of Donald Trump’s campaign team worked in association with Russia to help Trump win the election for
President
.........................................................
14% are not sure
..........................................................

Q26
If evidence comes out that proves conclusively that members of Donald Trump’s campaign team worked in association with Russia to help Trump win the election for President, do you think Trump should continue to serve as President, or do you think he should resign?

39% stay in office, 52% would want him to resign, and 9% are unsure. .

.
 

Now for some imaginable and some unlikely match-ups:

Quote:Trump continues to fare very poorly in possible match ups against Democrats for 2020. We tested Hillary Clinton against Trump this month for the first time, mostly as a baseline for comparison against other possible Democratic candidates, and Clinton leads Trump by 5 points at 47/42. 3 Democrats we tested clearly perform more strongly against Trump than Clinton- Joe Biden who leads by 13 points at 53/40, Bernie Sanders who leads by 11 points at 51/40, and Michelle Obama who leads by 10 points at 51/41. Biden and Sanders both win over 10% of people who voted for Trump last fall while losing almost no Clinton voters.

Other Democrats we tested against Trump are Cory Booker who leads him 47/40, Elizabeth Warren who leads him 47/41, Kirsten Gillibrand who leads him 42/39, and Kamala Harris who leads him 41/40. The percentage support the Democrat gets in these match ups varies from 41% to 53% probably depending on their name recognition, but Trump's support is pretty constant in the 39-42% range against all of these possible challengers.

Voters also wish by a 52/41 margin that Barack Obama was still President instead of Trump.

Ouch!

But now for some good news for President Trump:

Quote:...(H)e's still in pretty firm control of the Republican Party. By a 34 point margin, 61/27, GOP voters say they'd rather have Trump be their candidate for President in 2020 than anyone else. His margins against specific potential Republican challengers are even more emphatic. He leads Mike Pence by 38 points at 59/21, John Kasich by 50 points at 68/18, and Ted Cruz by 53 points at 68/15. His leadership style might not be doing much to help him win over Americans in the middle but it's helping him keep a strong hold on his party base.

and:

People prefer Donald Trump to Mike Pence, 39% to 32%, so Mike Pence was a good choice as 'impeachment insurance'.

[pbrower2a]

One large segment of the American population (Hispanics):


President Donald Trump is in trouble with Florida Hispanics, a group that’s long been largely in sync with Republicans, with a poll released Wednesday finding two-thirds disapprove of his performance.

The Latino Victory Project/Latino Decisions poll found 64 percent of Hispanic adults in Florida disapprove of Trump’s performance. Just 36 percent approve.

While Trump is underwater among Florida Hispanics, with a net negative of 28 points, he’s faring slightly better in the Sunshine State than nationally. The same organization’s national polling found 76 percent of Hispanics nationwide disapprove of Trump’s performance and 24 percent approve — for a net negative of 52 points.

Many Hispanics think Trump is doing a worse job than they expected. Few think he’s doing better than expected.

There are some caveats: Leaders of the Latino Victory Project and Latino Decisions organizations who released the results on Wednesday have done work for Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, who lost the 2016 election to Trump. And they were joined on a telephone press conference by two Florida Democrats: U.S. Rep. Darren Soto from Orlando and Annette Taddeo, who won a special election in Miami-Dade County last week for the Florida Senate.

Soto, the state’s first Puerto Rican member of Congress, and Taddeo, the first female Hispanic Democrat elected to the state Senate, hope the findings buttress their view that their party is poised to make 2018 election inroads among Hispanics, thinking voters may be inclined to punish Republicans over dissatisfaction with Trump.

“This poll is significant because it’s proof that President Trump and the Republican Party are alienating Latinos of all backgrounds and all political stripes,” Soto said. “An attack on one of us is going to be an attack on all of us, and that’s starting to resonate with people.”

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politic...story.html

[pbrower2a]

Now for a small part of the electorate, but one critical to the Republican vote in many states: the rural vote.





Comment:

Republicans have consistently won the rural vote  since at least 1968, losing it to Goldwater in 1964 and nearly splitting it with Wallace in 1968. Although the rural vote cannot on its own decide the Presidency, a nearly-even split of the rural vote makes a Democratic landslide a certainty. To be sure the rural vote has its splits, such as between North and South and between the farm and ranch vote. If Trump is winning one side of the split he is losing the other. Democrats can of course win the Presidency while being creamed in rural areas

The rural vote is large enough in some states that if the Democrats have a weak performance among urban and suburban voters (as is usually the case in Omaha and such smaller urban areas in the Great Plains region as Fargo, Grand Forks, Bismarck, Minot, Rapid City, Sioux Falls, and Lincoln (NE), then Republicans can win a state like Iowa or Ohio as they usually win the Dakotas and Nebraska. But in a state like North Dakota, the few areas that pass as urban are enough to flip the state if the rural areas are evenly split. In 2016 weak Democratic leads in urban and suburban areas allowed rural areas to decide such states as Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. If this rural near tie should hold in 2020, then a Presidential election involving Donald Trump will be a landslide for the Democratic nominee for President in the Electoral College.

The mathematical model is simple. Start by figuring that ranch country is relatively conservative, and the line between ranch country and farm country is around the 100th meridian of longitude. Let's look at three states: Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.  Nebraska  has three districts that vote separately in the Electoral College.  NE-01 is eastern Nebraska (including Lincoln) except for Greater Omaha. Its rural areas are largely farm country. NE-02 is Greater Omaha, wherein the rural vote is negligible. NE-03 is central and western Nebraska, including Scottsbluff and Grand Island. Figuring that in an extremely bad year (like 1964) for a Republican, this area goes 55-45 Republican instead of 75-25, Trump will win it. But NE-02 will go Democratic in a bad year for Republicans, and if Donald Trump has an approval rating around 35%, he will go down to defeat there. Nebraska barely goes Democratic statewide, and the Democrat gets four of five electoral votes from Nebraska.

North Dakota? It's not an urban state, but it has urban areas -- Fargo, Grand Forks, and Bismarck -- that lean D in most years. Split the rural vote 50-50, and a Democrat wins the three electoral votes of North Dakota. South Dakota? Sioux Falls and Rapid City together went for Obama, so split the rural remainder of the state 50-50 and the Democrat wins. The Democrat wins ten of eleven votes that Republicans usually win. That's as many electoral votes as Indiana, Minnesota, or Wisconsin -- or Iowa and New Hampshire together.

But -- note that there are bigger prizes. Rural Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Ohio, and Wisconsin went strongly R in 2016, strongly enough to flip those states due to weak Democratic performances in urban and suburban areas. Trump came close to winning Minnesota, of all states, because of much the same. But even with weak performances by a Democrat in urban areas in those states, an incredibly-weak performance of the Republicans in rural areas seals those states (and possibly even Indiana) for the Democrat. 

Trump could be winning the rural South (barely) while losing the rural North (barely). But all states of the Mountain and Deep South have significant urban areas. Mississippi may be one of the most rural states, but even it has Jackson, Biloxi, Pascagoula, and some spillover suburbs of Memphis. That could be enough to flip Mississippi.

...

OK, so why isn't Donald Trump getting a high approval in rural America? We are dealing with a more diverse category than you might expect.  Big cities like Atlanta and Cleveland surely have more in common than rural Ohio and rural Georgia. Republicans have relied heavily upon such themes as religion, guns, homosexuality, race, and patriotism. But Donald Trump is the most godless President that we have ever had. Attach the sexual attitudes of the late Hugh Hefner to the godless greed of Ayn Rand, and you get a city-slicker of the worst kind. Democrats will be wise to avoid discussing guns altogether. Homosexuality? I'm guessing that there's not much to attract gays and lesbians to rural America or to keep them from deciding to leave, so homosexuality isn't in the (rural) face. Neither is race in the lily-white farm or ranch country, at least Up North.

Patriotism? Now here's the tricky one. Rural America offers more than its share of members of America's Armed Services. But while parents of our fine soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines show pride, they might get scared if the President starts to get reckless about foreign policy.Americans may not be anti-war, but they are not for treating soldiers as cannon fodder for the glory of the President. There are plenty of ways for the president to lose, and for him to win re-election, he will need to win rural America decisively -- enough to offset places like Greater Detroit, Greater Cleveland, Greater Milwaukee, and Greater Philadelphia.

Polls added for New York and Virginia:

Approval



Trump ahead      Trump behind

55% or higher     45% to 49%
50% to 54%       40% to 44%  


45% to 49%       under 40%

Ties are in white.



Disapproval:



60% or higher  (deep red)
57% to 59%
55% to 56%
50% to 54%
46% to 49%
43% to 45%
42% or less

At this point, President Trump's supporters may already be saying that the only only poll that matters is the last one -- the election itself. So say mostly electoral losers. I have yet to see President Trump doing anything that gets a President re-elected, and he is lucky that the economy and the world still look like Obama's world. He did nothing to create that reality, yet he disparages Obama about as much as Gorbachev disparaged Brezhnev. Except that Gorbachev may have been the most decent leader in Russian and Soviet history except perhaps for Kerensky, Brezhnev was a corrupt kleptocrat, and Obama will continue to be seen as an above-average President and someone similar to him in temperament and integrity could easily be a default for the First Turning.

Let's put it this way: Donald Trump's team is down 6-1 in the second inning in  a baseball game in which Justin Verlander is the opposing pitcher. To be sure, only the final score matters, and there  are seven innings left, so it isn't over. Nobody in his right mind would give even odds, or even anything near even odds, for Trump's team to win that game.

[pbrower2a]

I posted this in a forum outside this one, with little modification:


CNN, Oct 12-15 (change from Sep 26-28)

Approve 37 (nc) Strongly 25
Disapprove 57 (+1) Strongly 47

Generic Congressional Ballot: 51D, 37R (among RV: 54D, 38R)

The "strongly disapprove" category is near a majority. This is higher than approval of any form -- by a full ten percent. Statewide polls would be interesting. At this point, I figure that if the election were in November (obviously contrafactual), the President would lose in a landslide.

The Congressional ballot is not definitive, but the ballot is close to a loss of the House (if not the Senate) for the GOP. Gerrymandering as it is, Democrats need at least about a 54-46 split in the overall popular vote to break even in the House.

The Senate: Democrats in a normal election would have a potential loss of six seats this year if the President were at all successful in convincing people of the rectitude and desirability of his agenda. There are only two reasonable chances for Democratic gains in the Senate (Nevada, with a Republican in a Democratic state and Arizona, which seems to be going Democratic due to demographic change). But with the retirement of Bob Corker (TN) and the likely demise of John McCain (AZ -- I saw him speak on TV, and he sounded like death warmed over... and I liked the content of his speech), there might be more Democratic chances.

Rifts in the Republican party are severe. The President is inflicting pain without any coherent idea of how the harsh medicine can make things better for most people. He is riding a bull market not of his making that could implode any day. His diplomatic efforts are crass failures so far. His regional base is the areas of America least like his home of New York City.

[pbrower2a]

Re John McCain:

With John McCain, the definition of a statesman as a politician who needs never face another election (he is obviously approaching death, and we know it) fits well. Because an appointed Republican would be up for re-election in a state that has become a legitimate swing state, I can now imagine the Republicans losing two Senate seats in Arizona. Appointed Senators must be re-elected in the next midterm.

Hoping the best for him is now more theological than anything else now.

[Eric the Green]

(10-17-2017, 04:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Re John McCain:

With John McCain, the definition  of a statesman as a politician who needs never face another election (he is obviously approaching death, and we know it) fits well. Because an appointed Republican would be up for re-election in a state that has become a legitimate swing state, I can now imagine the Republicans losing two Senate seats in Arizona. Appointed Senators must be re-elected in the next midterm.

Hoping the best for him is now more theological than anything else now.

Yes, but meanwhile, I hope he hangs on for a while. His one vote sank two horrible Obamacare repeal and replace bills. I don't think he's too keen on the tax relief for the rich and raise the debt astronomically bill either, and I don't believe he's against DACA kids (dreamers). Am I wrong? I certainly don't trust an AZ governor to appoint anyone but a right-wing asshole to replace McCain.

[pbrower2a]

(10-17-2017, 07:08 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-17-2017, 04:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Re John McCain:

With John McCain, the definition  of a statesman as a politician who needs never face another election (he is obviously approaching death, and we know it) fits well. Because an appointed Republican would be up for re-election in a state that has become a legitimate swing state, I can now imagine the Republicans losing two Senate seats in Arizona. Appointed Senators must be re-elected in the next midterm.

Hoping the best for him is now more theological than anything else now.

Yes, but meanwhile, I hope he hangs on for a while. His one vote sank two horrible Obamacare repeal and replace bills. I don't think he's too keen on the tax relief for the rich and raise the debt astronomically bill either, and I don't believe he's against DACA kids (dreamers). Am I wrong? I certainly don't trust an AZ governor to appoint anyone but a right-wing asshole to replace McCain.

So do I. But I did hear him talk (through TV) when he was getting an award in Philadelphia. I would like to see more Republicans start choosing principle and decency of partisanship -- and getting away with it. He sounded and looked like death warned over. You can trust that I know the look. In the last ten years I have seen six people on the days of or the day just before their deaths -- people that I have known for considerable times. No, I am not in and have never been in a medical occupation.

John McCain is not and has never been a liberal. But one need not be a liberal to oppose bureaucratic cruelty, corruption, pointless military adventures, and fiscal waste.