Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just 36% say they approve of the job President Trump is doing, a 5-point drop from last month, according to the latest IBD/TIPP poll. Fifty six percent disapprove of Trump's job performance, up from 53% the month before.
The drop in Trump's approval rating comes after a spate of bad news, including the conviction of his former campaign chairman on eight counts of fraud and a guilty plea on campaign finance charges by Trump's former lawyer, which sparked a torrent of impeachment talk. Trump also caught flak for his handling of Sen. John McCain's passing.
The sharp decline also comes with the midterm elections now just over two months away.
I'm wondering if the Russian's were able to achieve the unthinkable? Lets say that Trump was behind in polls in key states. Lets say the Russian's target those key states with negative adds against the opponent, and positive adds for their candidate of choice. Lets say they hack sensitive emails and release those emails at just the perfect time, after the polls come out and days before the election. How better to know where to target then in areas with negative polls?
Our intelligence reports that the Russian's were researching our electoral process in 2014. (Read What we know about Russia's election hacking from Politico.)
The senate report confirms that Russia interfered in our election to help Trump win. What is Trump doing to prevent interference in the midterms?
I have a friend that was going to vote for Clinton until at the last minute she changed her mind. "Every time I turned around there was something else negative coming out about her." Most people are sheeple and won't do even the most basic research. There are a lot of people out there that think like she did.
We all know that the electoral college elects our presidents. There have been 4 times in our electoral process that the president lost the popular vote but won the electoral college. In 1824 Adams was elected president having not won either the popular vote nor the electoral vote. He lost both categories to Jackson, but Jackson did not have the needed 131 electoral votes to win so Adams was voted in by the house. Jackson had 38,000 more in popular vote.
In 1876 Hayes won the election by one electoral vote but lost the popular vote by 250,000.
In 1888 Harrison won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote by over 90,000.
In 2000 George W won the electoral college by 5 votes having lost the popular vote by 540,000 more votes to Gore.Source: A short history lesson ....USA Today.
We have a president who lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes. That's quite a spread compared to other presidents. Does the electoral college have to vote the popular vote? The answer is no. "Candidates for elector are nominated by state political parties in the months prior to the election." Wikipedia.
Accurate polls? That may very well turn out to be the least of our problems.
Okay, you have a point. But it did indicate Trump would win and that did turn out to be correct when virtually all polls were forecasting a huge Clinton win. Fox News had Clinton up 4 for example.
Most nationwide polls for popular vote. Clinton did win that.
You had to look at individual state polls for the electoral vote and add all those up state by state, since electoral vote is state by state. But when you have several toss up states, it's hard to know which way they will go and it becomes a guessing game when several state polls are within the margin of error.
Boosted by growing support among suburban women and widespread antipathy toward President Trump, Democrats approach the midterm election poised to make major gains nationwide, a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Poll shows.
Democrats had a 14-point margin, 55% to 41%, when likely voters were asked which party’s candidate they would cast a ballot for if the election were held now. If that advantage holds up until election day, just less than six weeks away, it would almost surely be large enough to sweep a Democratic majority into the House.
And there's this little tidbit from the same poll:
Quote:
Likely voters disapprove of Trump’s overall performance in office by 57% to 39%, the poll found. Almost half of likely voters, 49%, said they “strongly” disapprove, while just under one-quarter, 24%, strongly approve.
I don't remember that poll. But I said numerous times the LA Times poll had it right about Trump. Hence my commentary in this topic.And I specifically remember you saying the LA Times poll didn't mean anything. LAWL.
To defend, once again, the LA Times poll you defended before, of course.
The poll that the LA Times used for the Presidential election and their recent polling are completely different mechanisms....the methodology they used for the Presidential election proved correct and the methodology for this latest polling is the type of polling that proved so wrong last election.....based on that, I predict this latest polling by the LA Times will prove just as inaccurate as all the other polls.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
