bostonangler Posted July 6, 2017 Report Share Posted July 6, 2017 Donald Trump's Approval Rating Nearing Record-Low in His Favorite Poll T.marcin,Newsweek 2 hours 34 minutes ago The poll President Donald Trump has publicly touted isn't bringing him much good news lately. The latest survey released by Rasmussen Reports Thursday found Trump's approval rating his nearing his all-time low. Just 44 percent of respondents approved of Trump's job performance in the survey, while 56 percent disapproved. That's just one percentage point better than the president's lowest approval ever in the Rasmussen Reports tracking poll: He hit 43 percent approval on multiple occassions. But Trump had risen to 46 percent at the end of June, and he also tweeted out the results of the poll earlier in the month—when he rose to 50 percent approval. "Great news!" he tweeted at the time. Now: Not so much. The Rasmussen Reports survey interviewed 1,500 likely voters and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. Trending: Rick Perry Hilariously Misunderstands Supply and Demand Theory in Attempted Defense of Coal Industry To be sure, the 44 percent approval rating cited by Rasmussen—which has typically found better results for the president and is generally considered to be right-leaning—remains markedly better than the results of other polling firms. In the latest Gallup survey Thursday, for instance, Trump's approval rating was 37 percent, with 57 percent disapproving. The weighted average from data-focused website FiveThirtyEight, meanwhile, pegged Trump's approval at 39 percent and his disapproval at 55 percent. The FiveThirtyEight average adjusts for a given poll's quality, recency, sample size and partisan lean. Trump, who was visiting Poland Thursday, has seen his approval rating trend steadily downward since taking office in January, his popularity waning under the weight of the investigations into his campaign's possible ties with Russia and a widely unpopular Republican health care bill. For context's sake, at about this point in Barack Obama's first term, the former president had an approval rating of about 58 percent. While the Russia investigations and the health care debate have been the most serious strains on the president's popularity, he recently did himself no favors by getting into an internet spat with two TV hosts. Referencing Morning Joe's Mike Brzezinksi and Joe Scarborough, Trump said in a series of tweets last week: "I heard poorly rated @Morning_Joe speaks badly of me (don't watch anymore). Then how come low I.Q. Crazy Mika, along with Psycho Joe, came to Mar-a-Lago 3 nights in a row around New Year's Eve, and insisted on joining me. She was bleeding badly from a face-lift. I said no!" A poll this week found that 65 percent of voters felt such online behavior was unacceptable, and 55 percent said they would describe Trump as sexist. Run Forest Run! B/A 3 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jg1 Posted July 6, 2017 Report Share Posted July 6, 2017 Hahahahahahahahahahhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha. Who cares, I know the real truth. 8 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2017 3 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel7 Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 It's plain to see you still haven't learned anything. More proof that you can't fix STUPID. No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLadiesDaddy Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 I think it's funny watching these libertards come unglued the more that Donald Trump becomes solidified as a greatest president this nation will ever know. 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rw.sutton Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 Rasmussen Reports ,,Funny! 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DinarDavo Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 And Hillarious has a 99% chance of winning the presidential election.... 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shabibilicious Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 Donald should just start his own poll, 99.99% approval rating......He should ask Putin how to go about it. GO RV, the BV 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 1 hour ago, rw.sutton said: Rasmussen Reports ,,Funny! It's Donald's favorite poll I'm surprised you don't agree with him... B/A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 3 hours ago, Sentinel7 said: It's plain to see you still haven't learned anything. More proof that you can't fix STUPID. No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise Thanks for proving my point. Now would you like wild cherry, or fruity punch flavored Kool-aid? B/A 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel7 Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 I will stay with Trump Thanks No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rw.sutton Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 43 minutes ago, bostonangler said: It's Donald's favorite poll I'm surprised you don't agree with him... B/A Funny! D/A 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shabibilicious Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 29 minutes ago, Sentinel7 said: I will stay with Trump Thanks No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise Hangin' with the 44 percentile.......Sweet! GO RV, then BV 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, rw.sutton said: Funny! D/A Looks like you are coming around.. B/A 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLadiesDaddy Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said: Hangin' with the 44 percentile.......Sweet! GO RV, then BV Stupid is as stupid does. Oh , and hanging out with the 44th percentile is exactly why you lost. Edited July 7, 2017 by ladyGrace'sDaddy 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shabibilicious Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 Just now, ladyGrace'sDaddy said: Stupid is as stupid does Right you are Forrest. GO RV, then BV 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shabibilicious Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 10 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said: Stupid is as stupid does. Oh , and hanging out with the 44th percentile is exactly why you lost. We all lost......the 44 percentile is just too enamored with The Apprentice to admit it. Wrestlemania 23......check. I can just see Vlad P. and his buddies sitting around sucking back vodka shots while watching Donald's wrestling video on a continuous.....laughing at what they did to America. GO RV, then BV 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 Here are the official election results as per the government. Not the media, not some blogger, not slanted bs. Actual validated ballot numbers. And I don't think most here are going to like it... https://transition.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2016/2016presgeresults.pdf The majority of American did not vote for our president. Now explain why the system shouldn't be repaired. B/A 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
md11fr8dawg Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 People much smarter than you (our Founding Fathers ) set up this system in order to keep one city or state from nullifying the votes of the rest of the country by allocating Electoral College votes based on the population of a state. Worked for 241 years and now because your HillDawg lost, NOW we need to change the process. Funny, I don't recall anyone on our side saying that when "The Great One" was in office and trust me, we despised him as much as you guys hate Trump. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 17 minutes ago, md11fr8dawg said: People much smarter than you (our Founding Fathers ) set up this system in order to keep one city or state from nullifying the votes of the rest of the country by allocating Electoral College votes based on the population of a state. Worked for 241 years and now because your HillDawg lost, NOW we need to change the process. Funny, I don't recall anyone on our side saying that when "The Great One" was in office and trust me, we despised him as much as you guys hate Trump. You guys crack me up! Welcome to The United States of Amnesia... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Hayduke Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 2 hours ago, bostonangler said: The majority of American did not vote for our president. Now explain why the system shouldn't be repaired. The majority of Americans did not vote for Hillarious either, now explain why an alternate system would be better. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 Just now, George Hayduke said: The majority of Americans did not vote for Hillarious either, now explain why an alternate system would be better. A simple majority... That's how democracy is supposed to work. If no one receives 51% we have a run off... B/A 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Hayduke Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 If a simple majority is the best way to govern, then it stands to reason that all laws should be enacted with a simple majority. Toss the Constitution and allow mob rule and everything will be hunky dory unless your one of the 49 percenters. Great system. As long as you're one of the majority. I'll pass. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonangler Posted July 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, George Hayduke said: If a simple majority is the best way to govern, then it stands to reason that all laws should be enacted with a simple majority. Toss the Constitution and allow mob rule and everything will be hunky dory unless your one of the 49 percenters. Great system. As long as you're one of the majority. I'll pass. Sadly, laws are written and paid for by the minority "corporations" Great system... It's been working so well for the last 30 years. Do you think health insurance is so high because our elected officials wanted it that way? Do you believe health officials wanted aspartame legalized knowing it's direct link to Alzheimer's? Below is a little light reading on how allowing corporations into our election process has affected our government and lives as voters. How Corporate Lobbyists Conquered American Democracy Business didn't always have so much power in Washington. Jonathan Ernst/Reuters Something is out of balance in Washington. Corporations now spend about $2.6 billion a year on reported lobbying expenditures—more than the $2 billion we spend to fund the House ($1.18 billion) and Senate ($860 million). It’s a gap that has been widening since corporate lobbying began to regularly exceed the combined House-Senate budget in the early 2000s. Today, the biggest companies have upwards of 100 lobbyists representing them, allowing them to be everywhere, all the time. For every dollar spent on lobbying by labor unions and public-interest groups together, large corporations and their associations now spend $34. Of the 100 organizations that spend the most on lobbying, 95 consistently represent business. The self-reinforcing quality of corporate lobbying has increasingly come to overwhelm every other potentially countervailing force. One has to go back to the Gilded Age to find business in such a dominant political position in American politics. While it is true that even in the more pluralist 1950s and 1960s, political representation tilted towards the well-off, lobbying was almost balanced by today's standards. Labor unions were much more important, and the public-interest groups of the 1960s were much more significant actors. And very few companies had their own Washington lobbyists prior to the 1970s. To the extent that businesses did lobby in the 1950s and 1960s (typically through associations), they were clumsy and ineffective. “When we look at the typical lobby,” concluded three leading political scientists in their 1963 study, American Business and Public Policy, “we find its opportunities to maneuver are sharply limited, its staff mediocre, and its typical problem not the influencing of Congressional votes but finding the clients and contributors to enable it to survive at all.” Things are quite different today. The evolution of business lobbying from a sparse reactive force into a ubiquitous and increasingly proactive one is among the most important transformations in American politics over the last 40 years. Probing the history of this transformation reveals that there is no “normal” level of business lobbying in American democracy. Rather, business lobbying has built itself up over time, and the self-reinforcing quality of corporate lobbying has increasingly come to overwhelm every other potentially countervailing force. It has also fundamentally changed how corporations interact with government—rather than trying to keep government out of its business (as they did for a long time), companies are now increasingly bringing government in as a partner, looking to see what the country can do for them. If we set our time machine back to 1971, we’d find a leading corporate lawyer earnestly writing that, “As every business executive knows, few elements of American society today have as little influence in government as the American businessman, the corporation, or even the millions of corporate stockholders. If one doubts this, let him undertake the role of 'lobbyist' for the business point of view before Congressional committees.” That lawyer was soon-to-be Supreme Court Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., whose now-famous “Powell Memorandum” is a telling insight into the frustration that many business leaders felt by the early 1970s. Congress had gone on a regulatory binge in the 1960s—spurred on by a new wave of public-interest groups. Large corporations had largely sat by idly, unsure of what to do. In 1972, against the backdrop of growing compliance costs, slowing economic growth and rising wages, a community of leading CEOs formed the Business Roundtable, an organization devoted explicitly to cultivating political influence. Alcoa CEO John Harper, one of the Roundtable’s founders, said at the time, “I think we all recognize that the time has come when we must stop talking about it, and get busy and do something about it.” This sense of an existential threat motivated the leading corporations to engage in serious political activity. Many began by hiring their first lobbyists. And they started winning. They killed a major labor law reform, rolled back regulation, lowered their taxes, and helped to move public opinion in favor of less government intervention in the economy. By the early 1980s, corporate leaders were “purring” (as a 1982 Harris Poll described it). Corporations could have declared victory and gone home, thus saving on the costs of political engagement. Instead, they stuck around and kept at it. Many deepened their commitments to politics. After all, they now had lobbyists to help them see all that was at stake in Washington, and all the ways in which staying politically active could help their businesses. Those lobbyists would go on to spend the 1980s teaching companies about the importance of political engagement. But it would take time for them to become fully convinced. As one company lobbyist I interviewed for my new book, The Business of America Is Lobbying, told me, “When I started [in 1983], people didn’t really understand government affairs. They questioned why you would need a Washington office, what does a Washington office do? I think they saw it as a necessary evil. All of our competitors had Washington offices, so it was more, well we need to have a presence there and it’s just something we had to do.” To make the sell, lobbyists had to go against the long-entrenched notion in corporate boardrooms that politics was a necessary evil to be avoided if possible. To get corporations to invest fully in politics, lobbyists had to convince companies that Washington could be a profit center. They had to convince them that lobbying was not just about keeping the government far away—it could also be about drawing government close. I hope everyone actually read this, but I know many have the attention span of a nat. Truth be told, we the people, have been hoodwinked. B/A 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattyangel Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) So a poll says one thing and the people who stand by our POTUS say another. Unfortunately we are being bombarded with bias media regarding President Trump that even the polls can be lacking trustworthiness. Edited July 7, 2017 by pattyangel 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.