ABCNews/Wapo Poll

[Rogue Valley]

Aided by a strong economy, Trump approval rises, but a majority also see him as ‘unpresidential’

7/7/19
Aided by a strong economy and perceptions that he has dealt with it effectively, President Trump’s approval rating has risen to the highest point - 44% - of his presidency, though a slight majority of Americans continue to say they disapprove of his performance in office, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll. His approval rating on most issues is net negative, and more than 6 in 10 Americans say he has acted in ways that are unpresidential since he was sworn into office.The survey highlights significant differences between women and men in their candidate preference, a continuation of a trend that has been evident throughout Trump’s presidency. Those gender differences shaped the outcome of the 2018 midterm elections, when Democrats captured the House with strong support among women. In the new survey, men clearly favor Trump against four of five potential Democratic challengers (they are evenly divided over a Biden-Trump contest) while women back all five by strong margins.

The survey matched Trump against five possible Democratic nominees: Biden, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Among registered voters, only Biden emerges with a clear advantage, leading Trump by 53 percent to 43 percent. Trump runs very close against Harris (46 percent Trump, 48 percent Harris) and Sanders (48 percent Trump, 49 percent Sanders), and he runs even against Warren (both at 48 percent) and Buttigieg (both at 47 percent). The economy is the lone issue in the survey where Trump enjoys positive numbers, with 51 percent saying they approve of the way he has dealt with issues. Asked how much credit Trump deserves for the state of the economy, 47 percent say a “great deal” or a “good amount,” while 48 percent say he deserves “only some” or “hardly any.”

It is early indeed, and this is just the latest poll from ABCNews/Washington Post. Trump does very well among uneducated white male voters, but lags behind with educated whites and independents, farther behind with women, strikingly behind with Hispanic-Americans, and hopelessly behind with African-Americans. The most important issues for Americans are the economy, health care, Foreign policy, gun violence, taxes, issues of special concern to women and abortion follow behind. Climate change trails the others — but still over 50% say it’s at least “very important.” On the main issues measured, Trump gets overall negative ratings, ranging from a net negative of 7 points on taxes to a net negative of 33 points on climate change. More than 50% of all Americans disapprove of his handling of immigration, health care, abortion, gun violence and “issues of special concern to women.”

 

[NeverTrump]

Dang. I wonder if people who aren't twitter resistances actually like Biden's message. I could see his appeal to them. I wonder how much of the cult would vote for Biden though...

 

[Lutherf]

Aided by a strong economy, Trump approval rises, but a majority also see him as ‘unpresidential’



It is early indeed, and this is just the latest poll from ABCNews/Washington Post. Trump does very well among uneducated white male voters, but lags behind with educated whites and independents, farther behind with women, strikingly behind with Hispanic-Americans, and hopelessly behind with African-Americans. The most important issues for Americans are the economy, health care, Foreign policy, gun violence, taxes, issues of special concern to women and abortion follow behind. Climate change trails the others — but still over 50% say it’s at least “very important.” On the main issues measured, Trump gets overall negative ratings, ranging from a net negative of 7 points on taxes to a net negative of 33 points on climate change. More than 50% of all Americans disapprove of his handling of immigration, health care, abortion, gun violence and “issues of special concern to women.”

So Bernie Sanders is up one on Trump but "A candidate you would regard as a socialist" is down 6. That pretty much sums up polling in America!

 

[TrueScotsman]

I'm worried that Democrats are trying an untested route to the oval office in a MUST win year. I think America is generally quite moderate politically, and Democrats should really slow down on certain policies.

This is what I have been saying since my first thread here.

Where is the Democratic Party Really At?

I don't think Biden is the one honestly, I don't think he can win the primary, but whoever does needs to not be running an extraordinarly progressive platform right before a recession and while we have $22 trillion in debt.

 

[Fruityfact]

I'm worried that Democrats are trying an untested route to the oval office in a MUST win year. I think America is generally quite moderate politically, and Democrats should really slow down on certain policies.

This is what I have been saying since my first thread here.

Where is the Democratic Party Really At?

I don't think Biden is the one honestly, I don't think he can win the primary, but whoever does needs to not be running an extraordinarly progressive platform right before a recession and while we have $22 trillion in debt.

Moderate democrats have ****ed things up since 2000. Time to take the reins from the losers.

 

[Amelia]

I'm worried that Democrats are trying an untested route to the oval office in a MUST win year. I think America is generally quite moderate politically, and Democrats should really slow down on certain policies.

This is what I have been saying since my first thread here.

Where is the Democratic Party Really At?

I don't think Biden is the one honestly, I don't think he can win the primary, but whoever does needs to not be running an extraordinarly progressive platform right before a recession and while we have $22 trillion in debt.

Yeah, I lean toward Democrats running someone that people such as my husband could comfortably vote for.

My husband started as "Never Hillary" _and_ "Never Trump". But turns out he was more "never Hillary" than he was "never Trump".

If Democrats can be down-to-earth and not pick someone who comes across as a flake, that would be the making of a landslide against Trump ..... if too many on the left don't then say, "No difference between Trump and this Republican-lite that the Democrats picked so I'm not voting for either."

 

[Outlook]

Aided by a strong economy, Trump approval rises, but a majority also see him as ‘unpresidential’



It is early indeed, and this is just the latest poll from ABCNews/Washington Post. Trump does very well among uneducated white male voters, but lags behind with educated whites and independents, farther behind with women, strikingly behind with Hispanic-Americans, and hopelessly behind with African-Americans. The most important issues for Americans are the economy, health care, Foreign policy, gun violence, taxes, issues of special concern to women and abortion follow behind. Climate change trails the others — but still over 50% say it’s at least “very important.” On the main issues measured, Trump gets overall negative ratings, ranging from a net negative of 7 points on taxes to a net negative of 33 points on climate change. More than 50% of all Americans disapprove of his handling of immigration, health care, abortion, gun violence and “issues of special concern to women.”

Polls are meaningless, we saw that in 2016.

 

[PLizzy]

Moderate democrats have ****ed things up since 2000. Time to take the reins from the losers.

This.

Republicans win without the so-called "middle" all the time. When the Democrats put all their eggs in the swing vote basket, they fall on their faces.

 

[TrueScotsman]

Moderate democrats have ****ed things up since 2000. Time to take the reins from the losers.

I'm interested in winning, no use to call them losers and then join them in losing. Dems need a coherent strategy for victory, one which fits the American national character to some degree.

 

[TrueScotsman]

This.

Republicans win without the so-called "middle" all the time. When the Democrats put all their eggs in the swing vote basket, they fall on their faces.

And what's the track record for Far Left candidates in the General Election?

Do you think there are enough people who will want a Leftist platform? I'm doubtful of that, and I live in a pretty Left Wing area.

 

[TrueScotsman]

Yeah, I lean toward Democrats running someone that people such as my husband could comfortably vote for.

My husband started as "Never Hillary" _and_ "Never Trump". But turns out he was more "never Hillary" than he was "never Trump".

If Democrats can be down-to-earth and not pick someone who comes across as a flake, that would be the making of a landslide against Trump ..... if too many on the left don't then say, "No difference between Trump and this Republican-lite that the Democrats picked so I'm not voting for either."

If the Leftists cannot discern a more moderate Democrat from a wannabe autocrat, then we do not deserve this democracy.

People need to think more seriously about the consequences of losing to Trump. I would vote for Biden a thousand times before I vote for Trump.

 

[PLizzy]

I'm interested in winning, no use to call them losers and then join them in losing. Dems need a coherent strategy for victory, one which fits the American national character to some degree.

The old guard of the DNC that supposedly is all knowing and wise, clearly doesn't have one.

 

[Fruityfact]

And what's the track record for Far Left candidates in the General Election?

Do you think there are enough people who will want a Leftist platform? I'm doubtful of that, and I live in a pretty Left Wing area.

Bruh, don't make me tell you that hillary lost.

 

[Cardinal]

I'm interested in winning, no use to call them losers and then join them in losing. Dems need a coherent strategy for victory, one which fits the American national character to some degree.

The coherent strategy is to be sincere and engaging. Both of those components were lacking in Clinton and she "only" won the popular election by three million votes. When the candidates appear engaged and sincere, they win elections. Simple as that.

 

[Rogue Valley]

This.

Republicans win without the so-called "middle" all the time. When the Democrats put all their eggs in the swing vote basket, they fall on their faces.

I still think to win Democrats need to nominate a center-progressive. A candidate that can win the blue states, recapture the 2012 Obama states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania, and flip North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona which are competitive and in play. The battleground states will be in the Rust Belt and the Sun Belt.

I don't believe Trump can win on the economy alone. I don't think the Democrats can win with a far left-of-center candidate.

 

[TrueScotsman]

The old guard of the DNC that supposedly is all knowing and wise, clearly doesn't have one.

You think without any track record in the General Election, we should have worries about running a far-Left candidate? Are you thinking about what YOU want? Or are you thinking about a realistic appraisal of the American voting base?

 

[TrueScotsman]

The coherent strategy is to be sincere and engaging. Both of those components were lacking in Clinton and she "only" won the popular election by three million votes. When the candidates appear engaged and sincere, they win elections. Simple as that.

Clinton lacked sincerity, I agree. I hated her and ran against her in the Primary, but I swallowed my pride and voted for her.

Clinton not being successful is not evidence that a further Left platform should be endorsed. At what point are Dems reaching too far?

I think I have proven myself by now not to be a Right Wing troll as you accused me of in that first thread of mine. I want to win, simple as that, and am being as realistic as I can be.

 

[PLizzy]

You think without any track record in the General Election, we should have worries about running a far-Left candidate? Are you thinking about what YOU want? Or are you thinking about a realistic appraisal of the American voting base?

We've done this 'run the republican-lite' candidate over and over again, and it keeps biting us in the ass. The track record of Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, and company is that they lost 1000 seats in their fall from leadership, and then Clinton out did them all by losing to a complete idiot two years ago.

Learn from Gingrich: go for your base and get as many non voting people that already agree with you off the couch.

 

[Amelia]

The coherent strategy is to be sincere and engaging. Both of those components were lacking in Clinton and she "only" won the popular election by three million votes. When the candidates appear engaged and sincere, they win elections. Simple as that.

I was thinking about that yesterday while watching South Park. ... an Al Gore episode

Trying to think of a world with Gore as president. Intellectually I know he would have been fine ... but W had "sincere and engaging" and it appealed to me. [long-winded rehash of my circa-2000 political leanings deleted ... suffice to say W had that appeal.]

 

[TrueScotsman]

Bruh, don't make me tell you that hillary lost.

Hillary had other problems, but she won the majority of the votes still and there was all kinds of funny business. I was a Congressional Delegate for Bernie Sanders even and staunchly opposed her in the Primary. I'm now convinced that America isn't ready for a further Left candidate like Bernie and agree with RV that we need a Center-Progressive who won't scare off all the moderate Democrats. Which there are a lot of.

I want to beat Trump, don't you?

 

[Cardinal]

Clinton lacked sincerity, I agree. I hated her and ran against her in the Primary, but I swallowed my pride and voted for her.

Clinton not being successful is not evidence that a further Left platform should be endorsed. At what point are Dems reaching too far?

I think I have proven myself by now not to be a Right Wing troll as you accused me of in that first thread of mine. I want to win, simple as that, and am being as realistic as I can be.

I forget that thread, but anyway...

The "further left" move is an expression of the values we took for granted before Trump systematically dismantled them. I believe we need a candidate who makes it clear in no uncertain terms that those values are non-negotiable. Anything else, in my view, is an admission of defeat of principle.

Democratic candidates ran on principle (and, yes, health care) in 2018 and won handily.

 

[Cardinal]

I was thinking about that yesterday while watching South Park. ... an Al Gore episode

Trying to think of a world with Gore as president. Intellectually I know he would have been fine ... but W had "sincere and engaging" and it appealed to me. [long-winded rehash of my circa-2000 political leanings deleted ... suffice to say W had that appeal.]

A world with Al Gore as President means no Citizens United and no dismantling of Federal election protection laws, a decision that led to the kind of ass-hattery you regularly see in Southern States today.

Republicans have understood since the start of the Culture War in 1980 that It's The Supreme Court, Stupid. Democrats never got that through their thick skulls, and here we are.

 

[TrueScotsman]

We've done this 'run the republican-lite' candidate over and over again, and it keeps biting us in the ass. The track record of Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, and company is that they lost 1000 seats in their fall from leadership, and then Clinton out did them all by losing to a complete idiot two years ago.

Learn from Gingrich: go for your base and get as many non voting people that already agree with you off the couch.

Actually, it is the ONLY way Democrats have done well in the General Election in recent history. Bill Clinton and Obama were both more moderate Democrats, and won handily.

The thing about the Right, is that they have a larger demographic of angry nativists to tap into by virtue of this countries history. The Left's base is not a majority of this country, and in 2018 Dems won by having an array of people running, including some moderates. And the progressives lost some key races too, such as in Florida for governor, which is a critical state in the General.

I don't think the Left's base is big enough, and if only that base is appealed to then the moderates might jump ship. Have people forgotten that our system forces compromise?

 

[TrueScotsman]

I forget that thread, but anyway...

The "further left" move is an expression of the values we took for granted before Trump systematically dismantled them. I believe we need a candidate who makes it clear in no uncertain terms that those values are non-negotiable. Anything else, in my view, is an admission of defeat of principle.

Democratic candidates ran on principle (and, yes, health care) in 2018 and won handily.

And if you uncomrpisingly stand by those values and lose? This is a totally experimental exploration of far-Left policies in the General Election.

Do we really want to bet that 180 million people want to give up their healthcare plan?

 

[Stealers Wheel]

The coherent strategy is to be sincere and engaging. Both of those components were lacking in Clinton and she "only" won the popular election by three million votes. When the candidates appear engaged and sincere, they win elections. Simple as that.

It doesn't help when the Bernie crowd stays home, either.