It’s hard to delineate all of the things that have changed since [the April] poll: The firing of James Comey, the appointment of the special prosecutor, reports about Trump hoping to intervene for Michael Flynn, the revelation of classified information in a meeting with the Russians — not to mention the Trump Jr. emails. But only a small change in the percentage of people who believe Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians....Maybe you shouldn't have cried wolf all those other times. Or was this one another crying of wolf? You squandered your credibility, trying so hard to get Trump. You built up our skepticism and our capacity to flesh out the other side of any argument against Trump.
Would any new evidence convince Trump supporters of collusion? We’re in the weird position, one week after the release of the Trump Jr. email, of already seeing that shockingly unexpected document as part of the background fabric of our political discussion....
July 17, 2017
WaPo scratches its head at poll showing the Don Jr. "smoking gun" hasn't budged opinion about Trump and collusion with Russia.
People haven't moved from where they were back in April.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
158 comments:
Poor puppies.
But, but RUSSIA!
There's a copybook heading for this somewhere.
"World Ends Tomorrow." Inga and sunsong most affected.
And if you've lost Dershowitz you're toast...
"Under the campaign finance laws, I mean, there is a claim that if you get something of value, and they're alleging that information... from a foreign national could be, you know, stretched out to mean, you know, words," Fox News host Jeanine Pirro said Saturday night. "Is that's something that's ever been prosecuted?"
"Of course not, and if it were to be prosecuted, the First Amendment would trump," Dershowitz replied. "A candidate has a right to get information from whatever source the information comes."
Nobody I know - and I have liberals in my family - gives a shit about this.
The Russian "Collusion" story remains total bullshit. Hillary still lost. Nobody's been indicted.
The goofs, mistakes and dissembling by the Trump campaign may be politically damaging, but not even close to a crime.
The Chicken Littles at the WaPo are NOT coming home to roost.
It feels like we've reached peak Trump Crisis and are entering the terminal decline phase.
Trump needs use RICO and declare the Democrat/media complex a criminal subversive enterprise.
From the article:
There are fewer people who now approve of Trump’s job performance — six percentage points fewer — which could be in part a function of belief that his campaign worked with the Russians. Other than that, though, how you felt about Trump and Russia in April is pretty much how you feel about it now.
That's a pretty big jump since April!
I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue...
"Our lies and hysteria no longer have the intended effect!"
They've not only cried wolf, they've cried wolf pack, and only had a flea-bitten, emaciated chihuahua show up.
f any information about Hillary was handed out at that meeting, where is it? It certainly wasn't used before election day. And why didn't we hear about the meeting until now? We're they expecting blowback against the Obama Administration that set up the sting to get FISA warrants?
WaPo has no credibility left--just like CNN and soon the NYT if they continue down the same path.
"Our lies and hysteria no longer have the intended effect!"
More cowbell!
WaaaaaaPo
I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue...
It's really up to Congress now. That;s why that Fernandez column is so significant. That plus Pat Toomey's comment.
Toomey said, "I didn't expect Donald Trump to win. I think most of my colleagues didn't. So we didn't expect to be in this situation."
The GOPe might even have preferred Hillary. The devil you know and all that.
Plus, just like with Obama, you can promise all year and blame the veto. You don't have to really do anything.
Just substitute Congress for "college"
I love how they name stories/events that have happened like Comey being fired (Democrats were asking for that before it happened), Special investigator being named, Trump Jr. e-mails, and some press stories as if those things were scandals themselves.
There is no actual content listed or direct A to B link - anywhere. So why would peoples opinions have changed dramatically?
The WAPO just doesn't get how much the country truly hates them - along with the MSM in general and the Washington political establishment.
Trump was right. He could murder someone at Broadway and Park Avenue and get away with it. He's already crushed the press - nobody listens to them anymore - and now is on his way to defeating Washington through appointments like Gorsuch and policy reversals like today's Title IX announcement.
He's struck a deep vein of resentment of the establishment by the general populace and even his own perceived missteps can stop him now.
It's called political inoculation, and campaign managers have been known to leak weak tea bad news about their own candidate to rile up their base in their defense. Or so I read once in an article fifteen years ago, I think.
Middle America continues to not agree with MSM's perspective! News at eleven!
Perhaps a good old fashioned fisking:
"It’s hard to delineate all of the things that have changed since [the April] poll"
Things have happened. Things! Unimportant things that the MSM has tried to make into important things. Things!
" The firing of James Comey"
A thing!
"the appointment of the special prosecutor"
A thing!
"reports about Trump hoping to intervene for Michael Flynn"
A report!
"the revelation of classified information in a meeting with the Russians"
A revelation! Wait, didn't that turn out to be nonsense?
Nobody cares because any disinterested observer can see they are throwing any and everything they can against the wall to see if any of it will stick.
Firing Comey was what the Democrats wanted, until Trump did it. Appointing a special prosecutor does not mean anything wrong has been done. It just means that the establishment wants to rid itself of Trump, so they have appointed Comey's bud to accomplish that. Trump trying to intervene on Flynn's behalf isn't even a report. Its a "he said, he said" situation.
The reason the Washington Post and the rest of the MSM is going apoplectic is because impeachment is a political act. They can't do it unless the majority of the populace think it is the right thing to do. During the Watergate era they controlled the public square, so they were able to force Nixon to resign rather than face impeachment because most people thought he should be. Bill Clinton didn't care about being impeached because he knew that it would be unpopular. If Trump is impeached right now, it would make him more popular and enhance his power.
So, that's the reason for the anguish from the MSM.
I think the Comey testimony and the Trump Jr. email are basically a wash. The Comey testimony basically killed the strong-form collusion conspiracy theory -- it undercut the whole spittle-flecked narrative the opposition had been putting out about the President being under investigation by giving clear confirmation that on multiple occasions Comey had informed the President he was not under investigation. And then the Trump Jr. email resuscitated the conspiracy theory, albeit in weaker form.
"I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue..."
Depends on the target.
Would any new evidence convince Trump supporters of collusion?
Evidence this:
President Trump Asserts Commitment to NATO Defense Policy
There is no actual content listed or direct A to B link - anywhere.
The whole thing is about inchoate anxiety personified in Trump. Trumpophobes is actually far more appropriate than "Islamophobe" for example, since it is an actual irrational fear. Do not expect reasons from them, and don't try to stifle their emotion with your tone policing!
The whole thing is about inchoate anxiety personified in Trump.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/01/05/gentry-liberals-trump-college-campuses-elite-glenn-reynolds-column/96155458/
"I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue..."
sunsong, I voted for Trump reluctantly in November. I was not a "die hard supporter" then. Lesser of two evils....
Now I am a die hard supporter and it is the hysterical reaction of the left and the media that has made me one.
The marches, innuendos, insults, mockery, threats, and violence committed by the Left is having exactly the opposite effect you wish it to have.
Your side is making me like Trump all the more.
Would any new evidence convince Trump supporters of collusion?
Well, sure, the first piece of actual evidence would go a long ways.
That's a pretty big jump since April!
That's all they care about. They don't need no stinking evidence.
Exactly. They cried "wolf!!" so many times when it turned out to be nothing. Imaginative vapors and pearl clutching over nothing.
Now, the public is just yawning in their faces. Ho hum...yet another Trump is evil, the devil, an idiot, a mastermind genius, a womanizer etc etc etc. Take your pick.
Talk about Russia fatigue. We've got it and YOU guys (media) gave it to us. Good work!
"Why am I not 50 points ahead?" - HRC
I've never liked Trump as a person, not for decades, I never watched his show, etc. and so on. So, I'm not inclined at all to think favorably about him, with my tendencies more to see how worse Hillary and the current Dem leaders are in just about every way.
That said, after all is said and done over the last year, I'm more inclined to think the Clinton's colluded with Russia than Trump colluded with Russia. I'm more troubled by how the Democrats were able to get access to Trump campaign phones, etc. That seems significantly worse than what Nixon did. All justified by reports of unsubstantiated collusion. Plus, Obama seemed to have catered to the Russians in more key ways than Trump as done (energy, European defense).
The media has embedded opposition in search of a scandal and is willing to work with the DNC in order to maximize whatever nuggets they can find. Meanwhile, they can't actually bother to work to change hearts and minds through serious discussion of important issues. Is the media intellectually bankrupt or just morally bankrupt like the rest of the Entertainment industry?
I'm very happy to see the worst in Trump, but the media isn't helping me with that goal.
No evidence and fake polls.
Transparently obvious to the voters that put Trump in the White House.
Leftists and their "lifelong republican" allies continue to be hardest hit.
With respect to the meeting, 63% of respondents believe Trump Jr.'s actions were inappropriate. Sixty percent believe Russia meddled in the 2016 election, and 67% believe the Trump campaign colluded with Russia."
"Thirty-six percent of Americans approve of President Donald Trump's job performance at the six-month mark of his presidency, while 58% disapprove, according to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll.
Trump's six-month rating is the lowest of any American president at this point in the past 70 years."
I haven't seen anything in Junior's Emails that suggest "collusion." Not unless one expands the definition of collusion to include things that do not involve, you know, colluding.
But let's go back a little farther. WHY on earth would Russia collude with Trump in the first place? What about Hillary Clinton's stated political positions, as contrasted with Donald Trump's political positions, made him preferable to the Kremlin. Once you ask that single, obvious, question the whole "collusion" narrative falls apart.
News flash to Dumbocrats: people ain't totally stupid.
With respect to the meeting, 63% of respondents believe Trump Jr.'s actions were inappropriate. Sixty percent believe Russia meddled in the 2016 election, and 67% believe the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.
YAWN
Washington Post ABC News Poll
"You built up our skepticism and our capacity to flesh out the other side of any argument against Trump."
Flesh them out and flush them down.
exiledonmainstreet,
Your side is making me like Trump all the more.
That's ok, as I said, the die hards aren't really reachable, imo. I'll take a six point drop in three months any day ;-)
Paddy O: "That said, after all is said and done over the last year, I'm more inclined to think the Clinton's colluded with Russia than Trump colluded with Russia. I'm more troubled by how the Democrats were able to get access to Trump campaign phones, etc. "
Indeed.
Wait until Congressional hearings begin in earnest related to reauthorization if those programs.
All the "hide the ball" activities by the NSA/FBI/CIA leftist and "lifelong republican" holdovers will cease to be effective as leverage shifts to the republicans whose votes will determine that reauthorization.
We are going to see the real extent of the galactically worse-than-Nixon spying in domestic political opponents come out which is an existential threat to the leftists and their "lifelong republican" allies.
Washington Post ABC News Poll
Well there you have it. Two organizations that spent a decade destroying their credibility and now only the most demented among us believe their polls.
They just need to change their fake polling sample to D+20. The current D+7 to 12 only provides the comforting disinformation used during the election.
WAPO needs to step up their fake news game. Geez.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/six-months-in-trump-is-historically-unpopular/
"Trump is the most unpopular president at the 6-month mark
Approval, disapproval and net approval ratings of presidents since 1945 after 175 days in office, according to the FiveThirtyEight aggregate
PRESIDENT YEAR APPROVE DISAPPROVE NET APPROVAL"
1 Harry Truman 1945 87 3 +84
2 Lyndon Johnson 1964 75 10 +65
3 John Kennedy 1961 72 14 +58
4 Dwight Eisenhower 1953 69 15 +54
5 George H.W. Bush 1989 67 18 +49
6 Richard Nixon 1969 63 16 +47
7 Jimmy Carter 1977 62 22 +40
8 Ronald Reagan 1981 58 30 +28
9 George W. Bush 2001 52 33 +19
Barack Obama 2009 56 37 +19
11 Bill Clinton 1993 46 46 +0
12 Gerald Ford 1975 35 41 -6
13 Donald Trump 2017 39 55 -16
Average without Trump 62 24 +38
All those polls the lefties are posting. Are those the same ones that gave Hillary a 93% chance of winning the election ?
Just asking.
Most people I know don't answer polls. I hang up on them.
"Unknown said...
Washington Post ABC News Poll
7/17/17, 2:19 PM "
Yes, that's the poll that is discussed at the linked article (and that was also blogged yesterday), so... you have a point you think you are making?
Halfway through the article Mr. Bump writes this:
Which brings us back to the question of collusion — that is, whether Trump’s campaign actively and successfully worked with the Russians to submarine Clinton. The email is clear evidence of a willingness to work with the Russians by at least one member of the campaign. But did the effort go beyond that? (my emphasis)
Unanswered questions aside, you've just submarined your own thesis. The Don Jr. fiasco makes clear the shockingly unexpected paucity of evidence.
Trump is the most unpopular president at the 6-month mark
Poor Gerald Ford.
Ah yes, those warm, cuddly sweet and comforting polls. All guaranteed to give the left/"lifelong republican" MSM base what they so desperately crave.
Oversampling Dems? Why not if it makes them happy.
Let me be the first to say it: based on MSM polling, Trump has no path to 270 electoral votes in 2020!
Lol
"Your side is making me like Trump all the more."
Not surprising. No one cares about the sychophants, they're not reachable.
The WaPo/ABC poll uses 23% Republicans! Lulz
Of course the polls haven't budged.
They crashed to a 40% approval rating months ago and stayed there.
For the last few months, Trump has been down to the bedrock faithful, the "Baghdad Bob" ones who will never abandon him no matter what.
Everybody else already abandoned him long ago.
Trump couldn't go any lower unless he announced he was abandoning his Muslim ban and Mexican wall.
The most insane thing I saw, and this is insane, was Paul Begala suggesting that Trump should be "blowing up" and bombing Russia in retaliation for their "act of war" against our election system. And everyone on the CNN panel acted like that was reasonable for Begala to suggest. These sore loser Dems are whacked.
Oh yeah. Let's bomb a nuclear power because Russia hacked Podesta's emails and confirmed for all of us that Hillary was surrounded by a spirit cooking freak show. I can picture Begala with a ball gag and gimp mask.
Putin is less dangerous than Paul Begala.
The standard leftist/"lifelong republican" tactic is to create a firestorm of negative coverage with skewed polls intended to make conservative voters feel isolated and demoralized while simultaneously making the lefts/"lifelong republicans" views seem monolithically accepted.
That tactic stopped being effective 30 years ago when the media Monopoly was broken.
But our lefties/"lifelong republicans" have but one play in the play book and by gosh THIS time its just gotta work. It's just gotta!
They crashed to a 40% approval rating months ago and stayed there.
For the last few months, Trump has been down to the bedrock faithful...
40% seems like a very broad base.
Maybe you shouldn't have cried wolf all those other times. Or was this one another crying of wolf? You squandered your credibility, trying so hard to get Trump.
I'm a news junkie, but when every news broadcast....top of the hour radio, evening local and national news....have been hammering this story, and other anti-Trump stories, since January, all I hear is "blah blah blah Trump blah blah blah Russia blah blah blah". I have no clue what they are talking about each day. It all sounds alike to me. Something about a meeting.
36% a new low.
Still not quite 6 months.
So, Unknown, if you're against Trump, who are you for ? Please be specific. Or is this a rhetorical question ?
Unknown: "Not surprising. No one cares about the sychophants, they're not reachable."
Says the voice-actuated lefty)"lifelong republican" automaton to a voter who was originally a Trump skeptic who has been driven by the automatons into the "firm" Trump camp!
All that's missing is a couple more threats of mass arrests and deportations if Trump voting citizens to nail 2020 down for Trump!
Trump is the most unpopular president at the 6-month mark
And Hillary still isn't President.
When your "smoking gun" is more a limp water pistol, you should not be surprised when your mendacious story fails to get traction.
I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue...
I could rape a woman in a Little Rock hotel room and still get elected.
I could drive drunk off a bridge and kill a woman and still get elected.
I love when people defend Nate Silver because he "correctly predicted" the outcome of a game nobody was playing and now he's some kind of god. I like the people who take into account the complexities and still get it right. That' would exclude old Nate.
Remember when Wikileaks had the email explaining how to make polls that appeared to be "unbiased" skew more Democrat. Good times... Good times. We aren't supposed to know that because it's unpatriotic to know the truth about our leaders.
So, let me get this straight: If the Russians HAD provided evidence that Hillary Clinton was a crook and broke the law and should be in the Big House rather than the White House ... revealing that information would be undermining America and the Democratic process?
How with a straight face, or I guess with an Unknown handle, can anyone give validity to and ABC / WAPO D+12 Presidential approval poll?
You have to be a paid clown, or having threesomes with Joe and Mika.
The comforting part is establishment Trump haters will still push these flawed polls with padded sampling, and fool themselves into guaranteeing sweeping Democrat victories and Trump's demise. And then they will act shell shocked when the GOP gains Senate seats in 2018, holds the House, and the large majority of State Governorships.
Unknown said...
"Your side is making me like Trump all the more."
Not surprising. No one cares about the sychophants, they're not reachable."
You're rather slow.
Above, I wrote:
sunsong, I voted for Trump reluctantly in November. I was not a "die hard supporter" then.
The assholishness of the Left has made me a die hard supporter. But leftists will continue to be assholes because that is what they are. They are incapable of learning or changing course.
And so they will end up being very, very disappointed in '18 and again in '20....
And I will laugh and laugh and laugh...
"Unknown: "Not surprising. No one cares about the sychophants, they're not reachable.""
----------
"Says the voice-actuated lefty)"lifelong republican"...."
-----------
Hell no, I've never been a republican, much less a lifelong republican.
36% -- a new low in fake polling.
Blogger Dave from Minnesota said...
I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue...
Oh you mean that Trump supporters would be like the Democrat voters in Massachusetts who continually re-elected Swimmer Ted after he was responsible for drowning a young woman and then tried to avoid telling police and rescue personal all about the accident where they could have still saved her?
No President who's been savaged by the media on a daily basis in their ham-handed attempt to destroy his presidency ever had approval ratings as high as Trump's!
"And Hillary still isn't President"
We don't care.
"...Would any new evidence convince Trump supporters of collusion? " Not if this "evidence" is of the same quality as the historical "evidence." And the fact that AA an attorney actually defines the data dug up against President Trump as evidence is truly astounding?
"We don't care."
Shirley you can't be serious.
We don't care.
7/17/17, 2:40 PM
LOLOL! Yeah, you're so indifferent that you've rioted, smashed Trump supporters over the head with bike locks, tried to commit mass murder, paraded around in pussy hats and had a months long hissy fit like the adult babies you are.
But "we don't care!"
That is why only morons believe anything you write.
Exile, that is where I was and am with Trump. I hated it that he got the nomination and up until about October 25th I wasn't going to vote for him.
But the unhinged left is causing me to support our President.
An example? Edina Minnesota public school teachers asking their conservative students if they are racist because they support our nation's President.
Gee, Trump's polls are so low, it makes you wonder what will happen when his honeymoon is over.
sinz52 said...
For the last few months, Trump has been down to the bedrock faithful, the "Baghdad Bob" ones who will never abandon him no matter what.
7/17/17, 2:28 PM
Let us be honest for a minute. What choice does/did anyone really have? I mean I would have voted for Sanders too if the choice was between him and Hillary. I would have voted for roadkill over Hillary. Donald at least showed he wanted to win and was willing to stand up to the DNC/MSM machine. It was Hillary or ANYONE else and still is so why should those of us who voted for him hang tough? Again, what choice do we really have?
All that aside, he IS pissing off all the right people and he IS making some progress draining the DC swamp. Dept Ed is now moving in the better direction, SCOTUS is moving in the better direction, we are seeing this move (or crawl) in a better direction in many unexpected places. So again, what is the alternative?
If the Russians HAD provided evidence that Hillary Clinton was a crook and broke the law and should be in the Big House rather than the White House ... revealing that information would be undermining America and the Democratic process?
Yes, and Hillary Clinton would then be the rightful POTUS.
Unknown: "We don't care."
Lefty takes time out from rioting, destruction if property, burning down buildings, supporting would be mad murderers of opposing party members, total mental breakdowns, safe space creation, attempting to outlaw opposing viewpoints and attacking Trump voters 24/7 while wearing p**** hats at non-stop rallies and claiming fascism has descended on the US to then claim: meh. No big deal that Hillary list. "We don't care".
Lol
You could never make this stuff up.
Coordinated anti-Trumpism has become a contest where talking heads try to out do each other's hyperbole to get features in the realclearpolitics video section.
Today Newsweek's very own Kurt Eichenwald is featured stating the USA is in a "state of war" with Russia, and Fox News is aiding and abetting the enemy.
That just fucking crazy. Begala, Scarborough, Eichenwald...they make Trump look like the only sane character in the saga.
Donald Sr and Donald Jr each have a tag. Question for Althouse: What other Jr/Sr tag combos do you have?
Women don't do the Sr/Jr thing, do they? Names get recycled, but not so directly. Why is that? The patriarch? Ego?
"Would any new evidence convince Trump supporters of collusion?
Well, sure, the first piece of actual evidence would go a long ways. "
Exactly.
"Baghdad Bob" ones who will never abandon him no matter what.
What do you really have on him? What? Lay it out here.
One sided "collusion" in the form of a meeting with a powerless PR flack who didn't even speak English? Top level KGB operative there!
Mysteriously now there is an actual packet of information that changed hands, the contents of which must never be known because reasons!
Let's hear something with full context, that answers the best objections, or is that now "tone policing" and out of bounds to ask you to list your evidence?
Are we. going to drag Hillary off for her campaign's collusion with the Ukrainians? What about the Germans and Obama? Where does this stop, or is "collusion" a word that means "exactly what you want it to mean exactly when you want it to mean it." And it can never apply to Democrats?
They didn't just cry "wolf" over nothing, they told us "all is well" when actual wolves were were in the flock killing lambs.
When the WaPo is stolidly incurious about the the millions of dollars of bribes that Hillary accepted from the Russians, maybe they shouldn't be surprised that no one but the Golden Shower Left gives a shit.
maybe they shouldn't be surprised that no one but the Golden Shower Left gives a shit.
The Golden Shower Left/"lifelong republicans".
FIFY
I though Trump was going to be impeached because of foreigners staying in his hotel. What ever happened to that?
The lefties here never heard the story of the boy who cried wolf.
If the GOP Congress ever gets its thumb out and when all this hysteria produces no evidence of anything, the 2018 election could be a bloodbath.
Shorter Wapo:
The Proles always thought what we told them to think Before Trump.
We must redouble our efforts!
If something comes out that Trump did something really bad, I'll be first in line to call for his removal. I don't want a scandal plagued Trump (real scandals) dragging down Republican office holders.
"No big deal that Hillary lost. "We don't care"."
Jeez, I'd hate to see what would have happened if leftists actually cared that Hillary lost and Trump won.
Look how they carry on when they think it's no big deal.
People who are pushing the Russia hysteria don't even believe it. They know it's all BS.
What baffles them is their inability to make the public believe what they themselves know isn't true.
Let's say Russia did hack Podesta's emails and gave them to Wikileaks. That's not "hacking our election" or an "act of war". It's hacking a douchebag's email.
Nobody cares except those embarrassed by the exposure.
Michael k
Wrong answer.
Don't hang up on pollsters. Engage them, waste their time and, most importantly, lie to them.
John Henry
Dave from Minnesota said...
I don't want a scandal plagued Trump (real scandals) dragging down Republican office holders.
Oh, don't worry, Dave, Republican office holders can drag themselves down without Trump's help. They've done it in the past without Trump.
It's a lot like the media's global-warming alarmism: when you promise killer hurricanes and tornadoes that never arrive, ordinary people eventually conclude you're crying wolf, and thus you do more harm to your cause then if you had said nothing at all.
There is no collusion and no evidence of collusion.
By the Trump campaign.
Now, Hillary's campaign, there is actual proof of collusion (Ukraine, Fusion GPS), corruption, quid pro quo, play to play,($500,000.00 speech equals Russia buying uranium ), destruction of evidence 30,000 emails), lies (it was all about a video) and monumental incompetence (giving your password over to a fishing email).
By the Hillary campaign.
Why does the WaPo include 23% Republicans in its poll. Why not just 1% and really prove how unpopular Trump is?
Republican senators didn't think Trump would win. But Putin stopped Hillary from campaigning in the upper midwest because he was smarter than everybody. EVERYBODY!!
And that's the guy you want Trump to go after? The side you're telling me is smarter and more cagey than EVERYBODY? Combined?
Blogger Michael K said...
...
"Most people I know don't answer polls. I hang up on them."
Pew (MAY 15, 2012):
"It has become increasingly difficult to contact potential respondents and to persuade them to participate. The percentage of households in a sample that are successfully interviewed – the response rate – has fallen dramatically. At Pew Research, the response rate of a typical telephone survey was 36% in 1997 and is just 9% today."
US population: 321 million. TV audience: 300 million. Registered voters: 200 million. Actual voters: 120 million. Cable news audience: < 10 million.
The dogs bark and the caravan moves on.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/six-months-in-trump-is-historically-unpopular/
"Trump is the most unpopular president at the 6-month mark
Approval, disapproval and net approval ratings of presidents since 1945 after 175 days in office, according to the FiveThirtyEight aggregate
PRESIDENT YEAR APPROVE DISAPPROVE NET APPROVAL"
1 Harry Truman 1945 87 3 +84
2 Lyndon Johnson 1964 75 10 +65
3 John Kennedy 1961 72 14 +58
4 Dwight Eisenhower 1953 69 15 +54
5 George H.W. Bush 1989 67 18 +49
6 Richard Nixon 1969 63 16 +47
7 Jimmy Carter 1977 62 22 +40
8 Ronald Reagan 1981 58 30 +28
9 George W. Bush 2001 52 33 +19
Barack Obama 2009 56 37 +19
11 Bill Clinton 1993 46 46 +0
12 Gerald Ford 1975 35 41 -6
13 Donald Trump 2017 39 55 -16
Average without Trump 62 24 +38
Three MASSIVELY failed Presidencies leading the list.
Coincidence - I don't think so.
If Trunp Jr received a packet of information against Hilary as alleged, why haven't we seen it? Does anyone really think that Trump would have this information and not use it? If the MSM refused to print it, we woukd have seen it on Breitbart at the very least. The fact this information has not and was not released leads me to believe no information packet was provided at this meeting.
My problem is that if *this* is collusion, there's been *a lot* of collusion through the years, from Kennedy's promise to kill Star Wars to Clinton hiring a British guy to ask Russians if Trump peed the bed.
I wonder what Jeff Bezos wants.
His guys sure are trying their best to get him something.
If I were Trump I would just have him over and ask him.
I received information about Hillary that was not on the evening news.
1) Hillary has a drinking problem.
2) Hillary has an anger management problem.
3) Hillary often collapsed due to ongoing neurological deficits.
4) Hillary is in a loveless (between each other) marriage.
5) Bill Clinton dicks bimbos in the White House.
The Establishment and the MSM are a cancer in the body politic of America. Trump is the chemotherapy.
Ideally, the chemo eradicates the cancer, we stop the chemo, recuperate and rebuild our nation.
Then finally, get on with becoming a prosperous nation of achieving rugged individualists instead of a nation of entitled dependent pussies.
exiledonmainstreet has it exactly right. I voted EMPHATICALLY against Hillary, and very reluctantly for Mr Trump. Everything the Leftist media complex has done is to change me into en enthusiastic supporter. If they are this apopalectic (frigging auto fill is screwing up that word) then he's gotta be doing something right.
The polls don't move because at least 90% of the country isn't paying attention, and they're right not to.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/07/in-counties-he-carried-trumps-approval-rating-above-national-average/
Trump over 50% in counties he carried in 2016. These are the counties he needs to keep. Stop polling NY and CA and poll the swing states.
Also, I would assume that President Lincoln had a very low approval rating in August 1861. He turned out to have a great second half of his first term though, didn't he and was reelected in a landslide.
I was anti-Trump and peeved at traditional guy for his Trump boosterism.
Anybody remember that?
Now I want Trump to be John Houseman telling the driver's ed girl to give another driver the finger...
Except to the MSM and GOPe.
I tremble to think what kind of dirt they could have had on Hillary that we didn't already know (or suspect). At least what we had was just barely sufficient.
"I wonder what Jeff Bezos wants. "
He probably learned the lesson Microsoft learned. Gates did not have a lobby office in DC until the Congress went after him on anti-trust issues.
The WaPo is probably a lot cheaper than a first class lobby organization.
Maybe a sufficient number of conservatives have finally figured out that the Dems played them for suckers in the past with the "do the right thing mantra" that never applied to them. Taking a cue from the Willy years they should all just say "Move On!"
The McCarthyites were so much better at creating a Red Scare. It's difficult to open a paper and not be amused the same people who explained away the gulags think Trump has a son who talked to a gal who knows a guy is a smoking gun.
WAPO scratching its head that public opinion hasn't changed is like Michael Palin in the Spanish Inquisition sketch. His character can't understand why the old woman has not confessed her sins even after being subjected to both the comfy chair and being poked with the soft cushions. You can almost hear an incredulous Bezos asking his editors, "Do you have all the stuffing up on one end?" "Yes, milord."
If I had had any respect left for the MSM and if I thought they could have acted in good faith, I might have budged toward a more negative in view of their shenanigans. But since I could not despise the WAPO and the other witch hunters any more than I already did, I had no room to budge.
Michael K: "He probably learned the lesson Microsoft learned. Gates did not have a lobby office in DC until the Congress went after him on anti-trust issues."
Interesting that you mention that. Recall that Netscape was in a Life and Death struggle with Microsoft and the Netscape leadership bought off the Clintons first, which of course led to Clinton led executive branch types going after Microsoft. Remember it was the Netscape CEO sitting next to Hillary during a SOTU by Billy Boy right in the middle of the he court battle.
Gates looked around and understood the political danger, finally, and put together his own army of Clinton payoff folks.
The rest is history.
Sebastian:
Perhaps they can convince you by calling you names?
Would hillbilly work? Deplorable?
Shirley there is some combination of insults and condescension the MSM could use to win the day.
Right?
/sarc
@Birkel, don't call me surely.
Wait until Trump wins re-election in a landslide. Their heads will explode.
Great day in the morning! The MSM polls are now reliable.
Birkel nailed it, why not avoid sampling republican's all together and marvel at the trump approval numbers then? Since they totally stepped on their dick last year with polling do they think anyone will believe or care now? No. One. Cares.
The main reason Trump won is not because people were clamoring to elect a man they admired so much, but primarily because he was judged to be the lesser of two evils, the lesser of two lunacies, a decent bet to do us less damage.
In the aftermath of that election, we've had various shows of incompetence and lack of decorum from the president, and riots, violent attacks, intolerance of disagreement and insane fantasies from his opponents.
The original judgment still holds. The polls won't change until the left does.
Can't anyone here handle basic arithmetic? If a poll sample that is only 23% Republican still gives him a 36% approval rating, then his approval is equal to all the Republicans + 56.5% more. Since Republicans are more like 30-33% than 23% of the voting population, adding 56.5% to that would give him roughly a 47-51.5% approval rating in an honest unskewed poll. Sounds about right to me.
Of course, some Republicans are never-Trumpers, but some Democrats and a lot of Independents support Trump, so an actual count of his support would need more than a back-of-the-envelope estimate like the one I just gave. For that we would need an actual unskewed poll by pollsters who are competent, able to reach press-and-pollster-hating voters, and most of all honest. We may have to wait a while for one of those.
By the way, Ace of Spades reports that the poll was 35% Democrats (way too high), 35% Independents (too high), 23% Republicans (way too low), and 7% Other. Is that last group just don't knows and won't says? Or did they actually have a poll in which fully 7% of the respondents were Libertarians, Greens, Socialists, Communists, McMuffinites, and Rent-Is-Too-Damned-Highs? If so, 7% is way too high, and including too many of those would have skewed the poll further against Trump.
Jersey Fled:
He's struck a deep vein of resentment of the establishment by the general populace.
He's exposed a deep vein of resentment of the general populace by the establishment.
Todd said...
And if you've lost Dershowitz you're toast...
"Of course not, and if it were to be prosecuted, the First Amendment would trump," Dershowitz replied. "A candidate has a right to get information from whatever source the information comes."
So the campaign finance laws passed to prevent foreign intervention into American elections doesn't count, says the law-breaking, liberal HLS professor. Laws are made to be broken just as the Constitution is subject to reinterpretation.
" Laws are made to be broken just as the Constitution is subject to reinterpretation."
What laws ? You are using too much imagination, like most of the insane left these days.,
just as the Constitution is subject to reinterpretation."
You say that like it is a good thing. If the Constitution does not have a fixed meaning, than it can mean anything...which is exactly what the Left wants.
the poll was [...] 23% Republicans
And they've probably found a way to make sure they contact mostly GOPe/neverTrump types.
Heck, that probably happens by default... do GOPe types skew older, as in "retired and at home when the polling computer calls at 2PM"?
"the Netscape leadership bought off the Clintons first,"
I'd forgotten that. There is much of the explanation of the hatred of Trump in DC.
The bureaucrats fear for their jobs. You know, the ones they hold while send 8 hours on porno sites and video games.
The rich and influential, the ones who got nights in the Lincoln bedroom, have lost their entre.
The McCarthyites were so much better at creating a Red Scare.
Well, they did have the advantage of actually being right.
gadfly
When you commit per se defamation, try not to do so against a Harvard law prof, emeritus.
Can you tell me which laws you believe Dershowitz has broken?
And, yes, the First Amendment is superior to a statute. (See, e.g., Citizens United)
Don't think Althouse is convincing anyone either. The trenches have been dug and the two sides will spend many lives fighting over small patches of dirt for the next 3 years, while independent American maintains her cruel neutrality.
Of course nobody is offended. It's a different era than the one Philip Bump grew up in.
Time was (even as late as the 1960s), Americans across the political spectrum held roughly the same expectations of decency and fair play in government. Sure, in practice the expectations were rooted in myth; but when everybody believes the same myth, it provides a norm to compare bad behavior against -- and that's useful.
Fast forward 40 years. The major sources of national news are universally regarded as being biased toward the interests of the progressive movement and the Democrats; and anyone who pushes back at that notion is regarded as a shill or a crank. There is no single standard of acceptable conduct, with different standards applied to people of different political viewpoints. The only thing that seems to matter is who ends up with their grubby mitts on the levers of political power, regardless of how they got there. The victor gets the spoils.
That's why nobody cares about who talked with which Russian whenever about what. President The Donald continues to piss off all the right people. To his supporters, nothing else matters.
7/17/17, 6:13 PM Delete
The WaPo, the NYT, and the alphabets are the enemedia; I trust them not, no way, no how.
After the email release by Don Jr., we learn that the Russian Lawyer was let into the country by Obama's DOJ, we SEE her sitting next to the Russian Ambassador front and center at a congressional hearing, and the find out that she's big-time anti-Trump.
Those are some interesting twists to the story that you think would be worth investigating by the MSM. But not if your colluding with the Democrat Party and the Deep State. That's why the collusion needle doesn't budge with each new 'revelation'.
Something is really dirty and it's not the Trump campaign. The guaranteed Hillary victory that did not materialize must have messed up a lot of plans. I don't think Trump was kidding with the "wire-tap" tweet. It would be interesting to know what he knows. Not about the Russians, but about the set up. He's timing something...
Scott,
Truer words etc.
Particularly the reference to myth.
I didn't vote for Trump last November, but at this point, I think I owe him one just for the entertainment of the media choking on their own slavering need to destroy him. Shoot someone on Fifth? If it was a journalist, I'd vote for him twice.
People aren't batting an eye about this being proof or Russian collusion because they recognize it as the Bs that it is.
Wolf....wolf....WOLF!!!!
Wolf hound....wolf hound....WOLF HOUND!!!
Russian wolf hound... Russian wold hound... RUSSIAN WOLF HOUND!!!
Russian...Russian...RUSSIAN!!!
Were we not supposed to get fired up because the French President tried a manly handshake on Trump?
Were we not supposed to be fired up because there was "proof" Trump pissed on a bed?
Sorry, find me some proof of a CRIME!
Then we can talk.
Rich Vail said...
exiledonmainstreet has it exactly right
And I'm on board with both of them. Voted Cruz in the primary.
Blogger Bob Loblaw said...
The McCarthyites were so much better at creating a Red Scare.
No, it was Woodrow Wilson who started it. See Palmer Raids, 1919. American Legion continued it in the 20s and 30s, House UnAmerican Activities committee continued it in the 40s (to 1975 or so)
It wasn't McCarthy who imposed a loyalty oath. That would be Truman. It wasn't McCarthy that sent the Hollywood 10 to jail in 1947(that would be HUAC)and inspired the Hollywood blacklist (That would be the Hollywood Reporter magazine and the studios in 1947). It wasn't McCarthy that wrote and got passed into law the McCarren Act that makes the Patriot Act look like an innocent stroll in the park. That would have been the odious toad Pat McCarren D-NV.
You should get educated who really promoted the Red Scare. Started long before McCarthy reached the Senate in 47 and continued long after he was gone.
John Henry
Bob, That note may sound like I am picking on you with the You should get educated.. remark.
I did not mean it to sound snarky but it may and I apologize.
Everyone, or most everyone, needs to learn a bit about what McCarthy did and didn't do.
And, in case there is a pedant among the commenters, we can probably trace the red scare further back than Wilson. At least 1880s. Maybe earlier. But the Palmer Raids make a good starting point.
John Henry
I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue [sic]
Probably not. I mean, Bernie Sanders hasn't lost any support, and his campaign worker actually shot several people, and Sanders continues to use the same inflammatory "Republicans want people to die" rhetoric that just recently led to his campaign worker actually shooting several people.
So who could be bothered if Trump shoots just one person?
It’s hard to delineate all of the things that have changed since [the April] poll:
Maybe it would be easier to list just the things you think weigh against Trump. Oh, you did that? No mention that Comey's sworn testimony backed up Trump's claim that he had been assured he wasn't under investigation; nothing about missile defense for Poland or the administration's commitment to not just energy independence but "energy dominance", to cite two recent positions Trump has taken that a Putin stooge wouldn't. Let's not clutter the list of things that have happened since April by noting that every month April, May, and June has seen unemployment rates lower than any of the eighty four miserable months of the Obama administration. Don't let's wonder whether people choosing between the media and the President may have been swayed by the sight of a CNN anchor's best galpal aping ISIS with a bloody severed head, or listening to our millionaire morality police explaining why "cockholster" is acceptable to polite society if directed at Trump, or hearing lectures about how we don't understand the historical context that makes it ok to show the President assassinated in a bloodbath in front of a happy crowd who paid $500+ for the experience (why, protesting Republican administrations with productions of Julius Caesar is an American tradition going back to when John Wilkes Booth and his brothers played the Winter Garden Theater in 1864!)
Maybe, since you're a journalist, you're intentionally lying by omission by not mentioning those facts, or others that might tend to generate sympathy for Trump, like one of his opponents' supporters trying to murder several Republican congressmen a few weeks ago. Maybe, since you're a journalist, you're too goddamn stupid to realize all those things count for more with a lot of people than a twenty minute meeting between a Russian who Obama's AG allowed to overstay her visa and one of Trump's kids.
"Trumpophobes is actually far more appropriate than "Islamophobe""
That's a good point. Trumpophobia is probably the most widespread mental illness in the country right now.
Trump's six-month rating is the lowest of any American president at this point in the past 70 years
Wow, lowest since 1947, huh? Who was president then?
Who won in 1948?
Apparently the Deep State guys are still so afraid of losing their Lifetime Sinecures containing the expansionist International Communism of the USSR that they imagine Putin is a Communist Party Secret Police Boss, disguised as a Russian Orthodox Czar.
The trouble one more time is a complete ignorance of European History.
Let me help you out there boobie. You and your partners are fill of crap. Screw you.
"I'm not sure that the die hard supporters would change if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Aveneue..."
If the democrat media reported it, I sure would say bullshit first.
The Gateway Pundit has a good little article on the polling company scams. There really is nothing much to say about the polls except that the polls are shit.
Collusion is not a crime. Collusion was the means to separate Trump from his base. Once separated they could claim him too damaged to govern and pressure the GOPe to remove him from office.
The media forgot Trump's base watched Slick Willie stay in office after committing an actual crime. So they were never going to fall for this "collusion" non-crime nonsense.
Did they point out that he still beats Hillary?
"Would any new evidence convince Trump supporters of collusion?"
Would a full year of accusations that have not produced anything even approaching real evidence of any criminal act (and "collusion" per se is not a crime) convince WaPo to lay off and just go back to reporting news?
See, I can play that game, too.
The Dems are baffled because they cannot grasp that the Trumpies will stick to Trump the way they would stick with Hillary, Obama, Kerry, Bill, a Kennedy, Carter... any such creature. Why? You know why. But even if that were not the case they have a three tiered chore ahead of them. First, they must articulate a crime. They have not approached this hurdle. Next they must acquire EVIDENCE of that crime. Nothing absolute but something that would trigger a grand jury. Then that crime must be EQUAL to those publicly admitted to by Hillary and the evidence must also be as dispositive as that on record against her. And then, I will tell you to go screw yourself bloody.
After hearing RUSSIA, SOURCES, so much, who listens?
I am a Never-Trumper, and I'm still not sure if I'll be able to bring myself to vote for him for re-election...but Trump has been somewhat almost decent on Republican/conservative/libertarian issues (much better than I had feared, and even better than some Republicans), which has moved the needle somewhat...but what the Media has done to try to delegitimize has done a lot to move the needle somewhat, too.
Indeed, the Media has done so much to make President Trump look incompetent, even before he took office (and in a period where (1) the President-elect/President is going to be naturally "incompetent" as he puts things together, (2) *despite* that fact, he was showing more competence than a lot of Presidents) that I couldn't stand them anymore, far more than I dislike Trump.
For the record, I voted for McMuffin, and regretted the vote almost a week afterward. I should have held my nose and voted for the non-libertarian Libertarian Gary Johnson instead...
Post a Comment