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.
Maybe it’s just the summer heat. Perhaps it can be attributed to spending a lot of time overseas lately. Or, as most observers seem to feel, maybe it’s still just the economy, stupid. Whatever the cause, the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll has some good news for President Trump. He’s seen a six-point rise in favorability in this survey over the past few months and he’s polling fairly competitively against all but one of the Democratic contenders hoping to replace him next fall. (WaPo)
Quote:
Worth noting right off the bat is the fact that the 47/50 number is among registered voters and it’s significantly better than his popularity with all Americans of voting age. Being so far out from the election, there’s no point in try to model likely voters, but he’s tended to do even better in that category, so it’s conceivable that Trump is somehow approaching something in the range of 50/50. That would be rather amazing given the endless barrage of negative coverage he receives in nearly all media outlets on a 24/7 basis.
Polls are worthless, but interesting. When the fake news is conceding Trump's popularity is going up, I wonder what the motive is. Perhaps CNN is trying to increase enthusiasm or scare the Democrat base?
Of course, that poll also showed that 65 percent say that Mr. Trump has not acted 'presidential'. A majority also disapproved of how he has handled issues like immigration, health care, issues of special concern to women, abortion, climate change, gun violence and foreign policy.
How does a poll grudgingly do anything. It's a poll. It just shows what it shows. A biased poll isn't biased because it grudgingly admits things. It's biased because of the way it was worded or because the people answering it were not representative of the population at large. E.g., if you conducted a poll on abortion outside of Catholic church on a Wednesday you'd get very different results from it than if you conducted the same poll outside a women's studies lecture. That's more directed at the poor "journalism" of HotAir, but then HotAir doesn't do journalism so really dumb click bait is to be expected.
News coverage and Rachel Maddow aren't the same thing. My personal opinion is that the major news outlets shouldn't be featuring pundits on primarily news channels but that ship sailed. Prior to the Limbaugh era the pundit shows on news channels tended to be things like Crossfire which while liberal biased made an effort at presenting both sides. Then Fox came along. It had great viewership because, well, the rest of cable channels were all pretty damn liberal so anyone who wasn't watched Fox. Fox also lead the charge with pundit shows from the outset. The rest of the liberal media looked on in envy as, well, they had to split viewership three-ways to Sunday. Since pundit shows were popular and people tuned in they just copied Fox and here we are.
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.
