Trump Approval / Disapproval - a fine point to watch

The opposition to trump from lefties is emotional rather then intellectual

They are in a state of shock that trump won ad hillary lost and just reacting with childish personal insults

 

the rantings of Trump Haters and Baiters are absolute proof of that.

 

Ironic!

 

Given that his base is basically the white undereducated, less financially viable segment of the population their ability to take care of themselves is subject to some doubt.

And as for Trump's plan you are correct. His ideas change with every tweet. And calling them ideas is generous to say the least.

 

It is a failing girdle, not a failed arguement

 

Trump has supporters from accross society

If more trump supporters happen to be white working class instead of welfare babies in the hood and elite academia so be it

Until you manage to disenfranchize white citizens their vote counts too

 

Exactly one week ago, Trump's approval was as -18.9. See: quoted material above.

As of today, the President's approval aggregate, according to RCP, is: -20.0, the first time ever that he has hit an aggregate of -20 and the first time ever for any president in his first year in office to see such an aggregate, since polling began:



So, lot's of information to glean from this data. One week ago, the IBD/TIPP poll (which I also analyzed, see quoted material above), was in the middle of the polling DNA chain. It is now at the bottom and will fall out of the statistic in the next week or two, I suspect. It is interesting that both Gallup and IBD/Tipp show Trump at -27 and both Reuters/CBS show him at -22. This means that we are seeing some statistical consistency from a number of pollsters. In all four cases, the polling group is "A", which means "Adults". By contrast, the other three polls (CNN, YouGov and Rasmussen) use a voter screen and in Ras's case, LV (likely voters) and those presidential approval values are in the minus teens instead of minus twenties, so there is a verifiable divide between the two (or three) screens at present.

Just to put this in context: in the past, a -12 (as we see from Rasmussen) would be cause for major alarm for a President in his FOURTH year, let alone in his 7th month, and this value is the kindest value to Trump in the entire pack. In the summer of 2004, the Bush 43 re-election team was all worried because the then-President was under 50 approval, which prompted Karl Rove to go on TV and say that "48 is the new 50". You can maybe get away with that with 48, but you sure as heck can't claim that with a bottom-line value like 32 (IBD) or 34 (Gallup).

This data also blows away the idea that CNN is left-oriented, it simply hates Trumps and it's polls are bad. Actually, ORC has a pretty decent reputation and the CNN value (Trump +16) is only 4 points worse than Rasmussen; it is the third lowest of 7 polling values. By contrast, and I repeat from last week: IBD/TIPP is an extremely conservative-leaning organisation and I have never ever seen such a bad approval poll for a GOP president in his first term like this one from IBD.

So, one can argue that an "Adults" screen is not right. And one can argue that a "likely voter" screen is just as wrong. But folks, that's the beauty of the aggregate value. It has proven time and time again to be far closer to reality than outliers or possible outliers, either positive or negative. Probably, -27 is too harsh on the President. But -12 is probably also too kind to him. -20 is likely the the more accurate value here. And to prove that point, I will now remove one outlier on both sides. I will remove both IBD/Tipp (-27) and Rasmussen (-12). The remaining five values are:

-14, -22, -22, -16, -27, the average of which is: -20.2, practically identical to the full polling DNA-gene pool if you keep what some could views as outliers in the mix.

And to be clear, vast majority of the polling does not include reactions to:

1.) the North Korea Crisis

And NONE of it includes public reaction to:

1.) the nazi-rally in Virginia and President Trump's much criticized response to it.

But it does reflect reactions to:

1.) Scarmucci's firing
2.) Priebus' firing
3.) The Twitter-humilation of AG Jeff Sessions at the hand of the President
4.) Kelly's reassignement at WH Chief of Staff
5.) The three-fold failure of Obamacare repeal, aka Trumpcare, on the floor of the Senate.

So, we can see that the events of the last two weeks, completely excluding the threat of thermonuclear war against NK and the terrible nazi-rally in Virgina, have not been good for the President's standing among the American people. Things are only likely to get worse in the next couple of weeks, polling-wise, and usually August is the month where people are on vacation and presidents try to stay out of view, a lesson that Pres. Trump has not yet learned, quite obviously.

Btw, on the day this thread was created, June 17, 2017, almost exactly one month ago, Trump's approval rating was: -13.7. So, his composite standing has steadily fallen over 30 days, by 6.3 points.

Those are the current stats.

-Stat

 

One more detail that I forgot: I suspect that a flurry of monthly national polling will come in (Qpiac, PPP, SUSA, ARG, etc) in addition to the standard tracker polling. Get ready for a lot of data in the next 14 days or so.

 

We are talking opinion polls not voting. And everyone can have opinions but we are not required to take the opinions of the uneducated and uninformed seriously unless of course those opinions happen to belong to the President

 

True.

Also, I am skeptical of the methodology of any poll that shows Trump with an approval rating of over 25%.

 

You clearly have more faith in the masses then I do. Keep the faith it will help you maintain hope in the time of Trump.

 

At this point, it is all about containing Trump and limiting the damage he is doing.

 

Actually it appears his own incompetance and laziness is containing him quite effectively. Personally I worry more about Ryan who appears to have as his main objective transferring all the wealth of America into the hands of the rich.

 

Hopefully Trump's Racist Agenda will make any attempt to alter the Tax Code more difficult.

 

I wonder what his changes to the tax code would entail. I'd be fine with a reduction in my taxes, but I'm sure he would not make that up by taking more from the wealthiest among us.

 

In the last 36 hours, two 'premium' polls from reputable pollsters were released and I think the internals are worth examining. I am publishing screenshots of some of the data from both polls plus equivalent Obama approval/disapproval polls from the same time-frame in 2009.

MARIST / McCLATCHY, released 16.08.2017:
Main write-up / Data-table, set to p. 3

Trump approve 35 / disapprove 55, -20 (among adults)
Trump approve 37 / disapprove 55, -18 (among registered voters)

In Marist's polling since February, this is the lowest point that the President has reached thus far. Here the data-table, in two screenshots:





Boxed in in dark orange are data points I think are important. First and foremost, how a president is doing among independent voters is really telling and usually tracks very close to the overall value and this is indeed the case. Among Independent RVs, it's 37/54, -17, right in line with the overall -18.

We expect that with time, a sitting president will not be doing nearly as well with voters of the opposition party as with his own, but Trump is only getting 5% of Democratic support. That is, for a President in his 7th month, exceedingly low. Even more telling is that the President is only getting 79% among "strong Republicans", where most Presidents are usually at 90% or more with the strongest members of his own party. Remember this when I also present the approval/disapproval for Obama from August, 2009.

Geographically, we expect a Republican to not do as well in the NE and the West as in the South, and since Trump most won of the Midwest, which put him over 270 EV, the -7 in the Midwest and the -6 in the South are important data-points.

There is a an extreme difference among genders: among men, -9, but among women, -30. If this number among women holds through 2020, then President Trump's re-election chances do not look good.

There are only two subgroups where Trump shows a postive value:

Whites without college education: +13 (among whites overall, -7)
White Evangelicals: +32

So, let's compare that to Obama from August 12th, 2009:

Write-up / Table

Obama approval 55 / disapproval 35, +20 (registered voters)



Important to notice is that back then, the big news was that Obama went under 50% with independent voters for the first time, which Marist considered a warning sign for the then-President. That being said, at 47/37, Obama was a +10 with Independents, in contrast to Trump's current -17.

Among the opposition party, at that time, Obama was getting 20% approval (Trump is currently only getting 5% Democratic approval)

Geographically, looking at the same two areas of the country, Obama was at +30 in the Midwest (where he romped), but only +4 in the South, an area that he did not win in much in 2008.

But perhaps the most important statistic here is that there was, in August 2008, no big gender gap for the then-President: +16 among men, +22 among women.

So, to recapitulate:

Marist, August 16th, 2017: Trump 37/55, -18
Marist, August 12th, 2009: Obama 55/35,+20

That's a HUGE difference.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quinnipiac National poll, August 17th, 2017:
Write-up and tables

Trump approve 39 / disapprove 57, -18 (among registered voters)
This is exactly the same negative value as with the Marist poll




Again, there is consistency with Independent voters: Trump -16

Quinnipiac gives stats for less subcategories than Marist, but the category white without college degree tracks pretty closely with Marist: Trump +8

As with Marist, again, a huge gender gap: among men, -5, but among women, -29. As I wrote above with Marist, if the President remains this far underwater with women, then his re-election chances are definitely not good. Even among white women he is underwater, by -16, but at +5 among white men. So, there is consistency among the two polls as to exactly who is "base" is.

Let's compare that with Obama approval/disapproval poll from Quinnipiac, August 6th, 2009:
Write-up plus tables



Obama approval 50 / disapproval 42, +8

In spite of the fact that this poll shows Obama above water, the spead is about 1/2 of that from Marist, which tracks with their mathematical bias record: Marist tends to be about 3-4 points to the Left of Qpiac most of the time.

In this poll, Obama is at parity among Independents, +/-0, but he is getting 16% from the opposition party (tracks well with Marist).

In this poll, there is a gender gap (there was not with Marist), with Obama at -1 among men and +16 among women. That being said, the difference between the two rubriks is 17 points and with the Marist poll from 2009, the difference among the same was 6 points.

Where Trump Trump's among Evangelicals, they were never in Obama's corner, as the polling with Qpiac shows: -39.

However, among those with no college degree, it's Obama +7. That being said, the category makes no distinction between whites with no college degree and non-whites with no college degree, so a real comparison is not possible here.

So, to recapitulate:

Quinnipiac, August 17th, 2017: Trump 39/59, -18
Quinnipiac, August 6th, 2009: Obama 50/42, +8

Those are the current stats.

-Stat

 

The CEO's resigning from those business councils just threw a wrench in the tax code agenda.

 

Nothing could be more wrong.

These are ADVISORY COUNCILS which have no legislative or regulatory power. They are composed of business executives who meet occasionally to discuss the economy and send the president their views. Their positions are more symbolic than anything else.

As such, they are busy people. Their first responsibilities are to their families and their companies. They have to worry about the smear campaign against PRESIDENT TRUMP rubbing off on them.

Some executives resigned from advisory councils after PRESIDENT TRUMP rightly trashed the Paris Accord.

The stock market took no notice.

Congress will not worry about a bunch of hotheads in a small town no one heard of when they meet in September.

 

As Trump's approval numbers go down, watch for him to foment another war.

 

Another lazy man's outrage.

 

I think that a small part of what you wrote is correct: the advisory councils are indeed largely symbolic, they are unpaid, they have no legislative power (quite obviously, they should not, according to the US Constitution) and indeed they have an advisory function.

But, they are high-powered execs who know how the business world functions and are examples of sucess. If Pres. Trump cannot hold the support of such people after claiming to be such an incredible businessman, then something is wrong here. Also, it is not a smear campaign to hold a President accountable for the truly stupid and extremely unneccessary stuff he has said. Nobody is shooting Trump in the proverbial foot except Pres. Trump himself. It's that simple.

Not real sure why you mentioned the stock market following the Paris Accords and Pres. Trump's decision to not keep our word, thus making us a pariah among civilized nations. The stock market does not rise and fall with everything that happens, nor is a President responsible for it's success or failure.

As for your hotheads comment, that remains to be seen. Often, Liberals are accused of disparaging small towns in the USA, but apparently, that illness is not restricted only to "Liberals"....

 

Survey Monkey released it's one-week rolling polling cycle (Presidential approval, etc) with a time frame of August 11th-17th. As of August 17th, it landed at: Trump approve 40 / disapprove 58, -18, pretty much in line with everyone else out there.



But, they have made some very interesting observations. Overall, when you average the entire cycle of 14,805 adults it is then:

Trump approve 40 / disapprove 57, -17 (adults)
Trump approve 41 / disapprove 57, -16 (registered voters)

Also critical: among those who STRONGLY disapprove: 45-46%. The reason why that is so critical is these are people who are very unlikely to be changing their minds any time soon. The same applies to the group that strongly approves and in Pres. Trump's case, 21% on the average strongly approve of his performance.

But there were some major fluctuations along the way, happening on the days following Pres. Trump's comments over the nazi-rally in Charlottesville, Virginia last Friday evening and Saturday and Survey Monkey published those results as a graphic:




So, though the average is Trump -17 to -18, the last two days of the cycle represent -24, very much in line with pollsters like IBD/Tipp, Gallup and Marist. Also, the Rasmussen curve is opening again as well.

This dip for Trump is not only because of more opposition from Dems (which is barely possible, considering the statistic) or Independents, but rather, because his support among rank-and-file Republicans also dipped some:



To their great credit, Survey Monkey was brutally honest about what may be going on and not simply saying it's all about Charlotte:

There is more at the article, but with more than 14,000 in the survey group, the MoE is only +/-1.5, which means that overall, his value for the entire 7 days would be between -15.5 and -18.5 but for the last two days between -22.5 and -25.5.

This is the first hard statistical evidence that what happened with Charlottesville hurt the President's standing even more and 7 months into his young presidency, -17 is a place where no President wants to be.

Here the entire survey results (toplines)

The final Survey Monkey poll from the GE 2016 was 4 points to the Left of the actual results, so there is also likely a mathematical bias of 2-3 points in this poll as well. That doesn't change the fact that the President is underwater, by double digits. When you are at -24, as he was on August 17th alone, -21 - if you shift and account for mathematical bias - is not much comfort. Not only that, with a verifiable mathematical bias of 4 points to the Right, Rasmussen has been publishing very similar results.

-Stat

 

Have you analyzed any polling data from 2016 to discover how much of an impact the Trump affect may have had on those close house and senate races? Did Hillary 'lose' those races secondary to poor turnout for her, or did Trump win them for the GOP, or was the national election not much of a factor?

 

Thanks for the question.

In my free-time (of which I have relatively little) I have been running an extensive comparison of the end polling data to the actual results and also looking at the limited exit-polling that was taken in 2016.

The conventional wisdom is that a President's approval numbers have a direct bearing on his party's performance in the mid-term election and until this time, that has held true. But the Trump presidency is so unconventional, who knows for sure. Plus, in the Senate, there is a major structural deficit for the Democrats: the GOP only has to defend 8 or 9 of 33 senate seats, so the Democratic Party has it's work cut out for itself, something I noted on THIS thread. The GOP will have that very same problem come 2020 because all those Senators who came in on the 2014 wave will be up for re-election. I think that both 2018 and 2020 will be very rough-and-tumble cycles for Senate.

 

Well I don't take excuses. I expect the analysis on my desk by Monday or

[actually I missed this thread. Its an excellent resource as it the green papers link inside. I can probably make do with that for another week, but by if that comparison is not sitting with a shiny cover next to my Jefferson Davis paperweight by Aug 28 you will be standing in the same line as Bannon, Spicer, Walsh, Flynne, Priebus....]