FYI:
FiveThirtyEight " Bias and Credibility
mediabiasfactcheck.com
LEFT-CENTER BIAS
"These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.
Overall, we rate FiveThirtyEight (538) Left-Center Biased based on story selection that slightly favors the left but does not favor the progressive left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information, a solid record with poll analysis, and a clean fact check record"
Makes one questin the accuracy/validity of the poll numbers.
@#8 ... Then there is this poll:
"Rasmussen Reports surveyed 1,245 likely voters between January 21-23, and asked a very simple, straightforward question "Who do you trust more?" ...
OK, since you did not provide a link to that poll, I went searching.
Here's what popped up in the browser ...
Republicans Trust Trump a Lot; Other Voters, Not So Much
www.rasmussenreports.com
... Who is more trustworthy, President Donald Trump, the news media, or the Federal Bureau of Investigation? For Republican voters, questions like this are easy.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 44% of Likely U.S. Voters trust Trump more than the news media, while 41% trust the media more and 15% are not sure. Similarly, 40% trust Trump more than the FBI, while 46% trust the FBI more and 13% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.) ...
For starters, the questions of that poll seem to lead towards a specific answer. Apparently typical of Rasmussen polls.
But when I try to find the margin of error in the poll, I am greeted with ... "You need a Platinum account to access this page"
So, the partial results of the poll seem to be published just to make money?
__________
#26 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine
And look how much he's managed to do with such little support?
Presidents, especially "lame ducks" who just escaped prison time and are looking for revenge, "don't need no stinking support" to do the damage they are allowed (or even not allowed, but to be adjudicated later) to do by law. "Stroke of the pen - law of the land!" - Paul Begala on Bill Clinton's EOs.
Makes everyone that came before him seem ineffectual by comparison.
You are confusing "hyperactivity" with effectiveness and positive (in normal sense of the word) results - welcome to ADHD / Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder!
"Effectiveness" or "effectively" don't inform about the direction (positive or negative) or give a comparison to a standard of the given effect.
Quantity of activity doesn't imply quality of results. It's true that, in some cases, "quantity has a quality of its own" - presidency is clearly not that case.
Spitballing out loud, worse yet rashly acting on, dumb ideas that his "best people" provide to him, are signs of HD, not sound judgment. That's how Trump run into the ground and bankrupted nearly every business (including real estate and gaming), while stuffing his own pockets - yet still was broke until Mark Burnett (current US envoy to UK) stumbled onto him for "unreality TV" show Apprentice:
www.newyorker.com - How Mark Burnett Resurrected Donald Trump as an Icon of American Success | With "The Apprentice," the TV producer mythologized Trump " then a floundering D-lister " as the ultimate titan, paving his way to the Presidency. (must read if you want to know more about Trump / "branding" / marketing / "power of media" / "unreality TV")
Enjoy the Celebrity Apprentice 4.0 s**tshow, if you want. You can also buy "matching" $TRUMP and $MELANIA memecoins and whatever else he's selling.
Unfortunately, unlike the weekly TV show we didn't have to watch, we must live in the "unreality TV" he is putting on. Hopefully the results won't be disastrous and irreparable for the US, like it was for his businesses.
__________
www.newsweek.com
Trump approval rate is better than his first term.
You liberals are idiots.
President Donald Trump is seeing higher approval ratings now than at the beginning of his first term, according to recent polling.
Why It Matters
Republicans are currently enjoying a wave of popularity nationwide"Trump improved his margins in all but two states in the 2024 presidential election, and the GOP now controls both the Senate and the House.
Polls have also shown that Trump has higher approval ratings among groups that don't traditionally vote Republican, indicating a realignment in voter demographics that could have lasting implications for future elections.
What To Know
According to the latest polling from Emerson College, conducted between January 27 and 28 among 1,000 registered voters, Trump's approval rating currently stands at 49 percent, while 41 percent disapprove. The poll had a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.
__________
#38 | Posted by boaz at 2025-01-30 03:02 PM
I don't know where you ... are getting your "polling" LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
From your own link - www.newsweek.com :
|------- ... [Trump] remains one of the least popular U.S. presidents in history. According to the Gallup poll, Trump still has the lowest approval rating of all elected presidents, dating back to 1953, and he remains the only elected president with sub-50 percent initial approval ratings.
An Ipsos poll conducted between January 24 and 26 showed 46 percent of voters disapprove of Trump, while 45 percent approve.
-------|
Don't you think it's pathetic and weird to celebrate Trump's "honeymoon" poll that is much lower than all previous presidents' at this stage except only his poll from 8 years ago?
|------- Trump began his presidency in 2017 with a 44.6 percent approval rating and a 41.4 percent disapproval rating, based on applying our current averaging methodology retroactively. Before that, the record low for initial net approval rating was set by former President George W. Bush in 2001, at +28 points. However, former President Joe Biden started his first term at +22 in 2021.
-------|
"Joe Biden started his first term at +22 in 2021" - despite being lower than all (except Trump-45) was still far and away better than Trump's "new and improved" second term... and how did that end?
What all these polls really show is that, while people rejected Dems and try to give GOP a benefit of the doubt, they really don't like... Trump.
This poll, like many others, just confirms that most people didn't vote for Trump, they voted against and "fired" Biden / Harris incompetent administration and campaign - just like voters in most European countries are attempting to 'flip' their unpopular governments, most of which happen to be left-of-center. But in UK, where they 'flipped' Tories, the Labour is already less popular than Tories were.
People want "change," no matter how pathetic and weird that "change" may be.
Just to show how bad Harris / Dems campaign was:
House was lost by about 7K votes - one of the closest in decades.
Harris lost 3 "Blue Wall" states by less than 230K votes - underperformed the margins of win for Trump in 2016 (lt 75K) and Biden in 2020 (lt 45K).
She underperformed in 4 states where 4 Dem Senators (3 of them women!) won - AZ, NV, MI, WI - wins there would put her within 5-6 EC votes, but still not enough to win! She absolutely needed PA but didn't choose the popular centrist Dem Governor of PA as her VP - which could have changed the tone and professionalism of campaign. Critical decision / mistake that right off the bat made electoral math and path to winnig incredibly difficult, and punctuated how unserious she / her campaign was to begin with. Tim Walz kept talking about guns and hunting - that shows they had no clue what the voters were concerned about, and how little they thought of the voters they needed to reach.
She underperformed J-Biden by a mile - when Trump reached 74M votes (same as his total in 2020) she had 11M less votes than Biden had in 2020 - again, EC voters that count (ex-CA/OR/WA) stayed home in droves / voted against Harris.
She needed and tried (once) to distance herself from Biden/Bidenomics but couldn't, because:
a) Loyalty
b) Her campaign was essentially run by [inherited] Biden's election team, even though she had time to put together her own - another critical mistake
c) She never had a "Sister Soulja moment" and kept trying to please "all sides" on many issues
Campaigns should add from a pool of available "undecided" voters, she managed to divide and subtract.
__________