April 2, 2018

Polls.

146 comments:

Mike said...

Boy the media sure has a lot of influence on American politics doesn't it?

Molly said...

Eaglebeak

Roseanne, Trump--gee whiz. What in the Sam Hill is going on here? Must be that optimism I hear so much about.

Mike said...

Let the phrase "higher approval than Obama" sink in for a few minutes. You'll see.

Mountain Maven said...

Different reasons
Obamacare hurt his numbers. He wasn't a divisive figure under relentless attack by he opponents like Trump. His race made his critics pull their punches.
Trump hasn't done anything as controversial as Obamacare. He is the result of half the country rebelling against the establishment Uniparty ™. They and their fellow travelers and useful idiots are fighting back. This is not new. The left hated Reagan. But this time they are far more unhinged.
Note that the MSM polls are biased against Grump compared to the more rigorous Rasmussen.

Curious George said...

That's because racism.

Inga said...

Huge discrepancy.

“President Donald Trump’s approval rating has dropped to one of its lowest levels since he took over in the Oval Office, according to a new national poll.

Public Policy Polling finds Trump’s approval rating stands at just 39 percent, some 15 points underwater when compared to the number of voters who now disapprove of his job performance in the White House.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/380442-poll-trumps-job-performance-rating-drops

https://www.inquisitr.com/opinion/4849529/polldonald-trumps-approval-ratings-falls-prez-running-behind-several-potential-2020-candidates/

https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/PPP_Release_National_32718.pdf

Mountain Maven said...

*Trump* not grump

Saint Croix said...

Stock market is down again today.

China is hitting us with tariffs.

Huh! Who could have guessed that might happen!

Jason said...

LOL who?

tcrosse said...

False Consciousness ! If only they knew what Inga knows.

tim in vermont said...

Trolls have been summoned to the ramparts with their politically biased push poll results!

tim in vermont said...

In Inga's defense, it is extremely unlikely that fattened up 401Ks, whatever the DOW is at today, and very low unemployment is going to win over any voters.

Gahrie said...

Q: When do polls not count and are meaningless?

A: Whenever they are good for the Right and/or bad for the Left.

MikeR said...

Better to get an overall look:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
There's been a definite rise from about February onward.
I want to see the next month or so. That's when your average American files his taxes. Will Trump and Republicans get a bump from the fact that people's taxes went down? And from the fact that the Democrats wailed about how they would go up? I would think so, but we'll see.

Hagar said...

It may have meaning in that his ceiling was supposed to be about 45%?

Curious George said...

What some fun? Google the PPP polling before the 2016 election. And also the #IngaKnew election night prediction....disregard the nasty rape joke told by our resident dullard.

Bay Area Guy said...

I didn’t worry about Trump’s low poll numbers before the 2016 election, I don’t celebrate his (allegedly) high numbers today.

If he can avoid a Dem takeover of the House in November, I’ll be pleased.

Achilles said...

If you believe cops are racists shooting unarmed black people all the time while simultaneously believing cops should be the only people with guns well...

You might be stupid enough to believe a PPP poll.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Even more impressive when you consider Obama's overwhelmingly positive coverage with Trump's overwhelmingly negative coverage.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I prefer the 538 model of the polls. I'm not claiming it is perfect, but it does avoid cherry-picking. It also graphs Trump over time against other presidents back to Truman. Trump has had points where he was ahead of Clinton and Ford. He is only a small amount below Reagan, and will likely pass Carter and Truman in the near future.

Yes, on average, he has been the least popular president. Given the press he has been getting, it's amazing that he is hitting double digits.

MikeR said...

PPP is not an outlier, but it is on the margin on one end. Rasmussen is on the other. It's more helpful to see trends; don't know if PPP provides that, not in the link given.

Achilles said...

It probably helps Trump that compared to Obama that Trump is called a liar by his political opponents while Obama was a liar.

Obama told world class whoppers daily and his idiot supporters passed it off. Remember we can meet all of our energy needs if we just inflate our tires properly. Or keep our doctor. Or sell guns to Mexican straw purchasers. Or use the IRS to punish our political opponents. Or just spy on them with the NSA...

Danno said...

MikeR said..."I want to see the next month or so. That's when your average American files his taxes. Will Trump and Republicans get a bump from the fact that people's taxes went down?"

The tax changes were largely for calendar year 2018. You will see it in your paycheck (if you are working) as the withholding will be less and net pay will be up.

I was a recipient of one of the few 2017 changes. The medical deduction was returned to the 7.5% of income threshhold from 10% and I benefited from this since my Obamacare-compliant health insurance premiums are so high.

Chuck said...

Yes, on average, he has been the least popular president. Given the press he has been getting, it's amazing that he is hitting double digits.


Given his good fortune so far in office (no recessions, depressions, military attacks, national disasters, etc.) it's amazing how persistently moribund his numbers are.

Inga said...

Trump should continue his trade wars and tweeting, bashing Amazon. I’m sure his approval numbers will soar will be the bestest more biglyist ever in history!

Saint Croix said...

fattened up 401Ks

the market should be up

and it was up

up big

but his announcement of tariffs to protect the steel industry gave us some mini-crashes

I know why he's doing it

He wants to keep Pennsylvania

But it's bad economics and stupid policy

Drago said...

I think it would be appropriate, given that we are coming off Easter week, to cut Inga a little slack.

After all, it cannot be easy for someone so emotionally invested in the Russia collusion hoax to see it unraveling so completely.

And now we have under oath lie discrepancies between 2 key players on the record: Comey (the leaker) and McCabe (also the leaker!!).

On top of Clapper (also a leaker!!) and Brennan (also a leaker!!)

My goodness.

So, the question for Inga and her LLR pals is: Which liar are you going to put your money on? Comey the liar, or McCabe the liar?

You'll want to be very careful when making your selection, since it is becoming abundantly clear that DOJ prosecutor Huber, working hand in glove with IG Horowitz, have Strzok, Page, Ohr, Priestap and Baker in full "flip" mode.

Which, by the way, The Hill published an editorial over the weekend which flatly stated that Liar Comey is putting himself in an extremely dangerous position with his book tour whereby he will be claiming things in public that will likely come under immediate contrary analysis when the IG releases his first of multiple (yes, multiple) reports.

The first focuses solely on how the Hillary email Whitewash was handled by our intrepid FBI top-level under oath liars, followed up by the FISA court abuses related to the hoax putin-provided dossier lies, followed up by the report on DOJ/FBI bias.

Tsk tsk.

LLR Chuck is going to end up back in therapy.

And once that hits the airwaves, I wonder what Trump's approval numbers will do then? Given that now hardcore evidence will be presented demonstrating what we've been saying for so long.

On the other hand, perhaps there are a few Tibetan monks Muh Mueller! can indict and never have to try in a court of law.......

Drago said...

Inga: "Trump should continue his trade wars and tweeting, bashing Amazon."

Bernie Sanders Agrees With Trump, Says Amazon Has Too Much Power

Ouch!

Inga and her LLR allies hardest hit!

Inga said...

“After all, it cannot be easy for someone so emotionally invested in the Russia collusion hoax to see it unraveling so completely.”

Interesting how Drago seems to know what is going on inside the Mueller Probe. Maybe if he clicks his heels three times and wishes very hard, it’ll turn out the way he wishes.

Inga said...

“Inga and her LLR allies hardest hit!”

Um...no. 401Ks all over the nation hardest hit.

Achilles said...

Inga said...

Trump should continue his trade wars and tweeting, bashing Amazon. I’m sure his approval numbers will soar will be the bestest more biglyist ever in history!

Trump is just putting tariffs on the same things China has tariffs on. Dullards think Trump is starting a trade war.

Trump is looking out for Americans first rather than donors. Donors don't mind shipping US manufacturing overseas while China protects it's manufacturing sector. If China dropped all of it's tariffs on steel there would be no need for tariffs on Chinese steel.

I know it is scary for you having someone actually listen to Americans. You would rather be told what to think.

gilbar said...

Igna said; "Huge discrepancy."

she's absolutely Right! ALL THE POLLS that showed Hilary easily winning the election now show Trump at Historic Lows!

as we ALL KNOW: since Hilary is our President; those Polls MUST BE RIGHT!
She is, isn't she?

Balfegor said...

Re: MikeR:

Will Trump and Republicans get a bump from the fact that people's taxes went down?

Why would they notice that filing their 2017 taxes? They're probably reaping those benefits now since automatic withholding ought to have reflected the reduced tax rates since January or so, and people are noticing they have more money than before.

Paulio said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

Inga: "Maybe if he clicks his heels three times and wishes very hard, it’ll turn out the way he wishes."

Why not?

It worked wonders on November 8, 2016.

A date that will live in LLR Chuck infamy....

BTW Inga, sorry about your pal McCabe.

It just isn't fair that an obama appointed Inspector General, working with the obama Inspector General's office in the DOJ/FBI, collected information necessary for the obama era members of the Office of Professional Responsibility to recommend McCabe be sent packing!

And that was just for lying about the leak! We haven't even gotten to why McCabe didn't list the hundreds of thousands of Clinton ally bribes...er...."donations" to his wifes campaign on his official reporting forms.

LOL

Poor Inga.

So much make believe accusations from the Inga/LLR Chuck hoax dossier crew....and so much real world firings, demotions and double demotions (I'm looking at you Bruce Ohr!...) and "retirements" amongst the core "small group" of plotters.

Make sure you donate to the McCabe defense fund Inga!!

Gee, why would a guy who had done nothing wrong and hasn't even been indicted yet want to start a GoFundMe defense fund....and who kicked in $500,000 to it already?.......

Very interesting indeed.

Not to LLR Chuck, of course. He is fully consumed by Stormy!!

Paulio said...

Yet another in the long parade of posts that demonstrate that Althouse is really, embarrassingly bad at math. Whenever a quantitative topic comes up she provides tremendously dumb and facile analysis. If someone offered as rudimentary and superficial analysis on the legal side she would tear it to pieces. This phenotype is all too common among politicians of all stripes. They are just quantitatively impaired.
Picking one poll with a known partisan bias at a random point is totally uninteresting. It's the equivalent of posting the powerball number from Saturday night and asking people to discuss it. It was 21. OMG! Amazing! Trump is definitely going to be re-elected, because...blackjack.

Also, whoever the idiot is that thinks the tax cuts were enacted for the 2017 tax year shouldn't be allowed to vote.

cubanbob said...

Even Thomas of Newsweek said back in 2004 that the media gave the Democrats an average of 15 percentage points lead going into a race over the Republicans. To the extent that is still partially true it is amazing that Trump polls as well as he does.

Obama had very favorable polls with respects to him personally ( but not of his policies) which resulted in him getting elected twice yet his policies cost the Democrats the Congress twice. Now it may very well be that the Republicans lose the House and possibly the Senate this November but it is a pretty safe bet any Democrat pickup will be a Democrat running as a moderate to conservative. The special elections held so far in Congressional elections were won by Democrats running as moderates against particularly weak Republicans. So if this were to happen it would be a case of the voters choosing in essence between wings of the Republican Party and not for progressive Democrat policies. Then again, the Republicans in spite of themselves may retain the Congress in which case what excuse will they invent to not pass what their voters voted for?

Bruce Hayden said...

@Chuck - recessions and depressions are cyclic and respond to external stimuli. We never really recovered from the crash caused in part by the real estate bubble popping (caused, of course, in no small measure by progressive govt policies) throughout the Obama Administration. Obama and the Dems seemed to do pretty much whatever they could to perpetuate that recession into the longest recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Brain dead economic policies, layering on regulations, etc. so, no surprise, the economy started to really recover with Trump’s election, and his deregulation. But then they cut taxes. Bigly. So, we are probably a couple years from the next downturn. Yes, we had some natural disasters last summer, but Trump handled them well, which is why you aren’t being reminded of them. And no one is going to make the mistake of attacking the US, figuring that the country was too timid to respond. Obama is no longer in the White House, sending ambiguous messages to our enemies about how far we can be pushed before we retaliate. In short, you suggest luck. I think skill.

Achilles said...

Inga said...

“After all, it cannot be easy for someone so emotionally invested in the Russia collusion hoax to see it unraveling so completely.”

Interesting how Drago seems to know what is going on inside the Mueller Probe. Maybe if he clicks his heels three times and wishes very hard, it’ll turn out the way he wishes.


Actually anyone who has a room temperature IQ will notice two things:

1. Mueller has found nothing having to do with collusion. No charges in over a year.

2. A whole bunch of FBI/DOJ people getting fired, hiring lawyers, and starting GoFundMes. Even a federal Judge has been "recused."

McCabe sure got to $500k fast. Who do you suppose he threatened to rat out? Either way one of Comey or McCabe are going to jail for perjury. Both have admitted to conspiracy in discussions how to leak classified information to the press.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Saint Croix said...

Huh! Who could have guessed that might happen!

President Trump could have, and the most reasonable guess is that he did consider this happening. The question is what happens in the long term. Do we get an ongoing trade war that last until some future president comes in and fixes things? Do we get a new trade deal that is notably better for the U.S.? Or do we end up with some trivial changes to the old deal, just enough for Trump to save face by claiming to have improved the situation, without him getting any real concessions?

I have no idea.

Drago said...

Achilles: "Both have admitted to conspiracy in discussions how to leak classified information to the press."

Shhhhh.

That is all just "under oath" kind of "stuff". Don't fill Inga's head with uncomfortable truthful "wrong-thoughts".

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

If he kept a few more promises, fired all the Goldman Saks people and all the people who voted for Hillary... (why on earth did he think it was a good idea to hire pro-Warren Buffet Hillary voters?) he'd tick up a bit more.

Drago said...

Inga: "Um...no. 401Ks all over the nation hardest hit"

Stock market close on Nov 8, 2016: 18,259.60.

Stock market right now: 23,522.

Math is hard for Inga.

Achilles said...

Saint Croix said...

But it's bad economics and stupid policy.

I always hear this. But the US is the only country that believes in "Free trade." Every other country in the world has tariffs. Trump is just putting tariffs on things that China has tariffs on.

Why does a "free trade" agreement need 20,000 pages?

A simple "Neither country will impose tariffs or fees on goods from our partner." Should suffice.

Could it be that big donors get special dispensations?

A real Free Trade agreement would fit one page double spaced.

Michael said...

Inga

Ah, see you have your eye on the stock market again. Still cheering when it falls, radio silence when it rises. Sick.

Drago said...

Saint Croix: "But it's bad economics and stupid policy."

Shorter Saint Croix: just surrender already.

By no means should the US ever, evah!, attempt to leverage our strengths and advantages to gain superior positioning in trade deals.

I mean, we could, I guess. But it's probably racist.

And it's always, ALWAYS better to execute complex multilateral trade deals which effectively makes it impossible for the US to move quickly to take advantage of fortuitous circumstances, right?

I mean, who wants yucky bilateral deals that enable the US to more effectively craft deals that benefit US citizens.

Again, too racist.

Drago said...

Michael: "Ah, see you have your eye on the stock market again. Still cheering when it falls, radio silence when it rises"

Same with the polls.

Did you know that this is the 17,986th time that Trump has sunk to a new low?

At this point, Trump should be right about -847% in the polls.

At this rate, one would have to say that Trump, at negative 847 in the polls, has no path to 270.

Gee, upon reflection, it's almost like, ALMOST, the media cranks out one of these polls every week which claims Trump has hit new lows just to keep the True Believers like Inga and LLR Chuck in line.

Inga said...

“Ah, see you have your eye on the stock market again. Still cheering when it falls, radio silence when it rises.”

Am I cheering?

cubanbob said...

Paulio said...
Yet another in the long parade of posts that demonstrate that Althouse is really, embarrassingly bad at math. Whenever a quantitative topic comes up she provides tremendously dumb and facile analysis. If someone offered as rudimentary and superficial analysis on the legal side she would tear it to pieces. This phenotype is all too common among politicians of all stripes. They are just quantitatively impaired.
Picking one poll with a known partisan bias at a random point is totally uninteresting. It's the equivalent of posting the powerball number from Saturday night and asking people to discuss it. It was 21. OMG! Amazing! Trump is definitely going to be re-elected, because...blackjack.

Also, whoever the idiot is that thinks the tax cuts were enacted for the 2017 tax year shouldn't be allowed to vote."

Anyone who voted for the grifter, criminal and traitor shouldn't be allowed to vote either. Speaking of taxes, people noticed that their promised $2500 medical insurance premium reductions never happened but they do notice the amount withheld on their paychecks has lessened. Considering how bad the polls were in the 2016 election Althouse isn't any worse than those pollsters.

Gahrie said...

Given his good fortune so far in office (no recessions, depressions,

The recession ended because of trump's election, not luck.

military attacks,

Tell that top American soldiers in Nigeria, Afghanistan and Iraq.

national disasters, etc.)

Except of course two hurricanes and a hard winter.

it's amazing how persistently moribund his numbers are.

Given the actions of your pals in the media it's amazing they aren't negative numbers.

FIDO said...

The proof is in the populous.

See November to see how people REALLY think about Trump v. Liberalism.

tcrosse said...

Am I cheering?

Gloating.

Drago said...

FIDO: "See November to see how people REALLY think about Trump v. Liberalism."

I'm afraid there are a few other critical variables in play in November beyond Trump v. Liberalism of which one should be cognizant.

For one thing, LLR Chuck's beloved Rubio essentially campaigning for the democrat against Scott in Florida.

Now that's the kind of "republican" action that LLR Chuck can really get behind.

The only things keeping Rubio from hitting the LLR Chuck trifecta is attacking Trump's 12 year old and Rubio coming out deflecting for every democrat running for reelection!

Inga said...

“Gloating”

Yes, guilty as charged.

FIDO said...

If Inga were offered a button which would fiscally devastate the nation, kill millions, BUT assure that her ideological brethren were assured 50 years of political dominance, who thinks she would press that button

A). Never...but struggle mightily over the choice

B). After an hour of cool deliberation

C). In less than a minute

D). Almost before the person can finish framing the circumstance

Jim at said...

304-227 is the only poll that matters.

Deal with it.

tim in vermont said...

Um...no. 401Ks all over the nation hardest hit.

401Ks are up a lot since the election. You have to look past last week, but you won't because you don't want to know that the economy is doing very well. When you can really start to cheer will be when you see unemployment going back up. I bet you pray the rosary every night hoping for that one!

Ray said...

I am surprised with the natural disasters of Flooding in Texas and Puerto Rico, that the press has not managed to Katrina, Trump. It's not for lack of trying.

Why has this not affected Trump, but it knee capped Bush?

FIDO said...

Ray,

They had the ridiculous failures of the Democrats in those states which they could pin on Bush.

Jim at said...

Why has this not affected Trump, but it knee capped Bush?

Because Bush sat there and took it. Never fought back.
Like a chump.

Bush also had cronies in positions of authority and his loyalty to them was his downfall. Trump fires people. Bush claimed they're doing a heckuva job.

Drago said...

Ray: "Why has this not affected Trump, but it knee capped Bush?"

Bush/Rove adopted the LLR Chuck approved tactic of standing very, very, very still and being very, very, very quiet as the dems/media/LLR's (like McCain) combine to destroy you.

So, Bush was destroyed.

But, as LLR Chuck will tell you, everyone now says he is a swell guy, so lets forget about all that "nazi"/"racist"/"misogynist" accusations from the dems unpleasantness!

There's a new republican in town for the dems and their LLR allies to destroy! Onward and upward!

Matthew Sablan said...

I agree; I think Bush lost a lot by not fighting back against the narratives arrayed against him.

Rick said...

Inga said...
“Gloating”

Yes, guilty as charged.


It ought to be embarrassing to admit rooting against your country. It's notable on the left this improves your status. But it does show the left doesn't care about people, that's all branding.

buwaya said...

Rubio is owned by someone.
He came from nothing, so has no sort of independence.
Its hard to exist in politics without patrons.

It was always so, and indeed this was an old argument against democracy, that the people could never be truly represented because it was unrealistic to expect a politician to exhibit honesty as the temptations from concentrated interests would always trump the wishes of his electors.

cubanbob said...

Tim in VT: today is not a good day to discuss market gains and 401Ks. However Trump has sent a rather blunt message to the proprietor of the Washington Post. The loss in Amazon valuation is probable the combined sum of a number of small countries GDP. Is Bezos getting the message and will he heed it?

Trump's tariffs and trade position are causing a lot of gyrations in the markets and the Chinese are shrewdly targeting Trump country. However the next move by the US could seriously affect the South of China and that would a huge problem for the Chinese Communist Party. I suspect both sides will come to an agreeable solution shortly. Also this trade "war" may result in North Korea retrenching on its nuclear program. At least on hopes that is part of the trade dance, making NK continuing its nuclear ambitions to expensive to China with keeping the NK regime in place as a buffer being one of the compromises.

Drago said...

Matthew Sablan: "I agree; I think Bush lost a lot by not fighting back against the narratives arrayed against him."

Rove has stated publicly that the tactic of just sitting back and not responding to or "feeding" the attack machine of the left/dems/LLR's was the biggest strategic mistake they made.

Dana Perino on Fox News perfectly demonstrates that tactic on an on-going basis by reflexively getting uncomfortable any time any republican anywhere begins to push back against the dems for any reason and heaven forbid a republican turn dem tactics back onto the dems.

Very similar to what LLR Chuck exhibits on a daily basis.

Kevin said...

If we find out he nailed a SI Swimsuit model, he'll hit 60.

Inga said...

“It ought to be embarrassing to admit rooting against your country.”

That is exactly what you did with your vote for Trump, I’m rooting FOR my country. Gloating is not the same thing as “rooting against”, nor is the same thing as “cheering for”. I’m laughing at the sheer stupidity (despite a possible high IQ) of some Trump voters. What fools you were and still are if you are supporting this fraud.

Drago said...

Kevin: "If we find out he nailed a SI Swimsuit model, he'll hit 60"

Just think, all Trump has to do is switch parties to Democrat and CNN will host glorious shows praising his marital infidelities just as they did with JFK over the weekend.

Michael said...

Inga
You are rooting for your country by gloating when the market goes down. You are a sick fuck. As sick as you are stupid.

Mike said...

So you’d destroy democracy to save the country?

Inga said...

Michael, you are “sicker” than I, as I knew not to vote for this fraud, you didn’t. Or worse, you knew what he was and voted for him anyway. You ought to hold up the mirror and ask yourself why you’re still such an idiot.

Drago said...

Inga is really not taking the 30% stock market gains, increased energy exports from the US to Europe undermining Putin's hold on Western Europe, increased defense spending, improved consumer/small business/market confidence indexes, increased bonuses/wages/hiring very well, is she?

Not to worry Inga. Lots of islamists are still whacking and raping and assaulting western women in Europe, so you have that to cheer.

Perhaps you could start a GoFundMe for those muslim couples in Sweden where, gee whiz, it just so happens some old geezer got himself a very young underage bride.

Something that happened with such prevalence the Swedish government actually created brochures to deal with it!! And not in a negative way, oh no. Not at all. In a very nice, understanding way. Naturally.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/939408/Sweden-leaflet-child-marriage-immigrants-National-Board-of-Health-and-Welfare

Of course, there has also been a massive increase in FGM, so its all good from a "diversity" and lefty perspective.

Rick said...

I’m rooting FOR my country.

No, you're not. You want your country to fail because the alternative is admitting that closely held fantasy you base so much of your worth and superiority on is laughably false. And the largest impact of that failure falls on those in the worst circumstances you claim to support. But you're cheering for their suffering because you think it will help get Team Blue a victory. What a disgusting person.

What fools you were and still are if you are supporting this fraud.

It's revealing that as obvious as his flaws are the results are far superior than those of his predecessor and undoubtedly better than his alternative.

Drago said...

Inga, like Michael Moore, is simply doing more of the chaos work that Putin so strongly desires.

The last thing Putin wants is a resurgent US, and yet that is precisely what Trump is delivering.

Inga and LLR Chuck hardest hit.

Jim at said...

What fools you were and still are if you are supporting this fraud. - Inga

The person who voted for Jill Stein - in a state Trump narrowly won - calling other people fools.

YOU helped put Trump into office just as much as someone who voted for him.

That would make you an even bigger fool.
And for that, I thank you.

grackle said...

See November to see how people REALLY think about Trump v. Liberalism.

Respectfully, I think not. Trump is not running. What we might find out is what the voters think of Ryan, McConnell and the rest of the anti-Trump cadre in both houses. Will Trump supporters hold their noses and vote for the eGOP traitors? I will, because I do not believe in political suicide and other unnecessary, destructive behaviors. I’m not sure about other Trump supporters. They just might stay at home.

Ryan and McConnell have played a very risky game. They had to accomplish something so they allowed the tax bill to be passed. As for the rest of the Trump agenda: Nada. They better hope one bill will be enough.

For sure – if they lose seats they will reflexively blame Trump, along with the MSM and the Democrats.

Drago said...

Inga should also be encouraged by all those future dem voters Mexico is assisting to reach our borders. Lots and lots of folks who have no intention of assimilating but will bring the dems a much needed boost in 3rd world socialistic voting habits.

Michael said...

Inga

Look, you moron, the stock market is a proxy for the economic health of the country and thus the welfare of its citizens. Your gloating over a set back is sick and reflective of the blinding hate you have for Trump. If Hillary were president, or Bernie, I would not "gloat" over a setback in the market because I give a shit about how people live and their economic well being. You stupid stupid pig

Ray said...

>Ryan and McConnell have played a very risky game.

I feel a lot of stuff is bottled up in the Senate, and with McCain out for cancer treatment most of the session, and the GA Senator, and a LLR, GOP types into civility and not rocking the boat, McConnell just can't get things through the senate and has to put up with the 30 hours of BS, etc.

Or is this McConnell just not using his power to ram things through?

Drago said...

Ray: "Or is this McConnell just not using his power to ram things through?"

On appointments, that is what the hold up is.

Balfegor said...

Just so we're all prepared -- if Trump succeeds in building a wall to block illegal immigration, you can expect the stock market to fall a bit. The whole point of suppressing illegal immigration is precisely to force a reallocation from capital (which benefits from illegal immigration) to labour. Same as you'd expect from intervention on trade. The question, ultimately, is the balance between benefits and harms and how that works out for Republicans.

The slice of the population that benefits most directly from these moves on trade and immigration is comparatively narrow. Indeed, the slice that benefits most directly from suppressing illegal immigration -- poor, urban African Americans -- is not only extremely narrow, but also hostile to Trump and Republicans in general. There's roughly 0 chance any of those districts they are clustered in will vote Republican in the foreseeable future. On trade, that's a little larger, but still a minority of the vote, since the proportion of the labour force involved in manufacturing is tiny now, in comparison to the past. The distribution of benefits and burdens is about as lopsided as Democratic pro-union policies (or, for that matter, the Corn Laws -- the dear loaf!). Most people are going end up paying more for goods, whether made in the US or abroad, either because companies are going to have to hire natives and legal immigrants, or because there's tariffs on low-cost foreign imports. So it's going to come down to whether netting the increased costs for everyone else against the broad economic benefits of lower taxes and looser regulation leaves the median voter feeling like he's ahead or behind.

I think it's just hard to say at this point.

Inga said...

“You stupid stupid pig.”

You retarded hog.

Unknown said...

At least some part of the improvement in Trump's numbers is that the constant bashing of him, much of which is shown to be unfounded and judged unfair, is making him a sympathetic character to people that weren't previously disposed to liking him. And they don't have to like him to view his POTUS performance favorably. Oh, and as others have said: fatter paychecks, bigger 401ks, and a better economic outlook, don't hurt.

-sw

Inga said...

“Most people are going end up paying more for goods, whether made in the US or abroad, either because companies are going to have to hire natives and legal immigrants, or because there's tariffs on low-cost foreign imports. So it's going to come down to whether netting the increased costs for everyone else against the broad economic benefits of lower taxes and looser regulation leaves the median voter feeling like he's ahead or behind.”

Good luck with small increases of paychecks off setting the increased price of goods.

Birkel said...

Balfegor:

Oh, sure. Doing right by people who hate you is wrong because the political calculus might not work in your favor? That sort of thinking is every bit Inga-Level-Bad. I want low skilled American workers to see increasing wages that beckon them to working, developing skills and contributing to society regardless of how the politics works.*

As to whether people feel they are doing better or worse, the question is 'compared to what?'

*Whether that will happen is anybody's guess.

Unknown said...

If this whole trade thing had started from an established free trade position between China and the US, then people would be right disagree with Trump. But most people acknowledge the bad trade behavior of China (dumping, stealing our IP, etc.) and so agree with Trump's actions.

-sw

Nonapod said...

The whole point of suppressing illegal immigration is precisely to force a reallocation from capital (which benefits from illegal immigration) to labour.

I wouldn't say it's the whole point, at least ostensibly anyway. There's the whole security/law and order thing too. We have immigration laws that have been ignored or unenforced to one degree or another for decades for various reasons (be they cheap, untaxed labor, new potential voting banks or whatever). Many voters know these things and dislike the hypocrisy of it all and do have respect for notions such as rule of law. Many others may question the long term economic wisdom of importing tens of millions of low to no skill workers during a time when we're gradually transitioning to a more automated/robotized economy with a shrinking low skill job market, so you're effectively importing millions of permanent government dependents. Or so the thinking goes.

Personally, I would prefer a bit more honesty around the whole immigration debate. What do we all really want? But I assume that'll never happen.

Balfegor said...

Re: Birkel:


Oh, sure. Doing right by people who hate you is wrong because the political calculus might not work in your favor? That sort of thinking is every bit Inga-Level-Bad. I want low skilled American workers to see increasing wages that beckon them to working, developing skills and contributing to society regardless of how the politics works.*


My comment isn't about right or wrong at all. I project the market is going to decline if Trump's remaining policy priorities get enacted. My projection doesn't turn on whether that's "good" or "bad" -- that's just the way I think it's going to shake out. As to the electoral consequences, similarly, I'm not saying it's "good" or "bad" -- it's just that the economic beneficiaries of Trump's policies on immigration will be distributed in a way that will not produce any meaningful electoral advantage for him.

You could read into that, that Trump is actually an unusually generous politician (in keeping with his aggregate wealth dropping significantly as a result of his decision to serve as President). Or you could read into it that he's stupid. I wasn't intending to present a normative position at all.

chuck said...

The whole point of suppressing illegal immigration is precisely to force a reallocation from capital

I don't know how it is taught these days, but I recall learning in school that immigration was encouraged by gilded age capitalists in order to undercut unions and keep wages down, particularly in steel and textiles.

Pookie Number 2 said...

I don't know how it is taught these days, but I recall learning in school that immigration was encouraged by gilded age capitalists in order to undercut unions and keep wages down, particularly in steel and textiles.

However it’s taught, increasing the supply of unskilled labor decreases the cost of unskilled labor.

Original Mike said...

Blogger Inga said...“That is exactly what you did with your vote for Trump, I’m rooting FOR my country. Gloating is not the same thing as “rooting against”, nor is the same thing as “cheering for”. I’m laughing at the sheer stupidity (despite a possible high IQ) of some Trump voters. What fools you were and still are if you are supporting this fraud.”

Yeah, cuz what this country really needed was an extension of Obama level growth.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Yeah, cuz what this country really needed was an extension of Obama level growth."

-- Now, now, I had it on good authority 3% growth is a FANTASY.

Balfegor said...

Re: chuck:

I don't know how it is taught these days, but I recall learning in school that immigration was encouraged by gilded age capitalists in order to undercut unions and keep wages down, particularly in steel and textiles.

I mean . . . it was, no? And that continued right up through the 20th century. That's why there's all these anti-immigration quotes from left-wingers (like Cesar Chavez and Barbara Jordan). As late as 2015, Bernie Sanders was still articulating the traditional Democratic/Left-wing talking point that immigration was a tool of global capitalism to suppress wage growth, until someone took him aside and informed him that Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Good luck with small increases of paychecks off setting the increased price of goods."

-- Well, the price of goods were going up anyway, as they have every year where paychecks didn't go up, so, yeah. I'll take it.

Balfegor said...

Re: Pookie Number 2:

However it’s taught, increasing the supply of unskilled labor decreases the cost of unskilled labor.

There's a whole field of economics research devoted to proving that the laws of supply and demand don't apply to low-skill labor. E.g. raising the minimum wage won't reduce employment. Increasing the supply of low-skill labour won't reduce wages. I think the Mariel Boatlift is the favoured "natural experiment" used for the latter studies.

Balfegor said...

Re: Inga:

Good luck with small increases of paychecks off setting the increased price of goods.

Nothing but CRUMBS! Crumbs, I say!

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Mueller is loaded up with Hillary hack layers and he still cannot find the collusion the hack press is certain exists. Hold on - the Hillary hacks will find something. Even if they have to dig to China.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

It is funny to see how the left tow the talking point lines. Gravitas.

theribbonguy said...

"The slice of the population that benefits most directly from these moves on trade and immigration is comparatively narrow. Indeed, the slice that benefits most directly from suppressing illegal immigration -- poor, urban African Americans -- is not only extremely narrow, but also hostile to Trump and Republicans in general."

"There's a whole field of economics research devoted to proving that the laws of supply and demand don't apply to low-skill labor. E.g. raising the minimum wage won't reduce employment. Increasing the supply of low-skill labour won't reduce wages."

Oh FFS..Every time I read,or hear, this bilge I wan't to kick the screen.

Maybe it's just my hick, white trash upbringin', but I remember the day when you saw a house being built, you didn't see a crew of illegals building it. What you saw was generational American carpenters doing it (my dad was one of them). I could list about EVERY blue collar trade having the same issue.

No lower wages from immigration , no siree, thats unpossible. The fact that my Journeyman cabinet maker brother had to move 2 states over to get a job in crappy production shop had nothing to do with the "imported" talent that would do quality custom work for half the price..thats just me remembering it wrong.

Yes it is true that in the BEGGINING of the industrial revolution we needed any unskilled body that we could get. NEWS FLASH!!! We are currently at the END of said revolution, and no longer need the extra bodies.

Jeebus...you need to get out more. This nation has a lot more than urban professionals checking their 401K's.

I seem to remember someone calling them "The Forgotten Man".

Birkel said...

Balfegor:

I will put you down for "stillNeverTrump" and you can tell me when you are ready to return to reasonableness.

rehajm said...

The optimal number of immigrants

Balfegor said...

Re: Birkel:

I will put you down for "stillNeverTrump" and you can tell me when you are ready to return to reasonableness.

I have never been NeverTrump at all . . . I've generally been at the level of unenthusiastic support since before the election.

Balfegor said...

I feel like some commenters in this thread are completely deaf to irony . . . when I point out that there's a bunch of economics researchers devoted to proving that the laws of supply and demand don't apply to low-skill labour, you, ah, you read that and think I agree????

I'm not going to pretend that people ought to "know" me as a long-time rightist commenter here, but the very fact that I am framing the question in that way -- as "economists try to prove the laws of supply and demand don't apply" -- should be a huge hint to even the casual reader that I think they're wrong. I mean, duh! Of course the laws of supply and demand apply to labour, just like anything else.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Geez, just when you think that obese twat Inga hits rock bottom, a new low.

Be sure to have one of your dozens of mythical children post when that obesity induced heart attack turns you into a very large corpse. Perhaps Trump can declare a new holiday, but even if not, the rest of us will want to know when to pop the champagne.

Balfegor said...

I, also, come on -- I know I made fun of Inga in this thread too, but let's not wish for each others' deaths. That's just awful.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Would that be "gloating?"

As I am not the genie from Aladdin, what I wish is irrelevant. Merely giving a statement of what my response will be when the inevitable medical outcome plays out. What you think is awful makes absolutely no difference to me.

Also, learn to spell properly, and take your extra "u" spelling of labor back to limey land.

Inga said...

Just another deplorable...yawn. PMJ has been the ugly underbelly of the Althouse blog comments sections for years.

theribbonguy said...

Balfegor-

Missed the irony of your second quote...guilty as charged. I stand by my bile regarding the first...the swath of people that will be helped by equalizing our trade imbalance will be considerably wider than you state. It does not matter how cheap that loaf of bread is if you don't have a jobby job.

Pookie Number 2 said...

Balfegor - I’m pleased to say I got your irony. I do spend a fair amount of my time “doing” economics l.

Drago said...

Inga: "Just another deplorable...yawn."

The only surefire way to become an ex-"deplorable" is to convert to islam.

Then you can do and say whatever you want, up to and including FGM, sexual enslavement and burning gays alive in cages and the left will never, ever criticize you or call you deplorable.

wildswan said...

I don't think it's quite right to say that blacks are a narrow slice of the vote and hence improving their economy will not help Trump electorally. In Wisconsin in 2016 70,000 fewer blacks voted for Hillary than for Obama. Trump's margin of victory in that state was 20,000 votes. There is still a lot of unemployment among blacks in Milwaukee but the Trump economy has drastically lowered the rate. If then. the Dems run on ending the Trump economy, they are running on raising the black unemployment rate. The same if they run on increasing illegal immigration. Perhaps the Dems will will get away with continuing to destroy jobs blacks need or with handing jobs to illegal immigrants. Or perhaps 20, 000 blacks here, 40,000 blacks there, will either not vote at all or will vote for the Republican who got them a job. I submit that no one knows any more what people in this country are thinking and we won't know until we see the results of several election cycles. But I will predict that at the end of that time it will be seen that Trump has dragged a majority in this country and a majority world-wide over to supporting his agenda - over to supporting his real agenda that is, not the fake-news, clickbait, mainslime media version of his agenda. So, get used to it - MAGA rules.

Inga said...

Good grief, you Trumpists are in high dudgeon today. Fighting with each other, inbetween lashing out at the libs, lol.

tcrosse said...

Also, learn to spell properly, and take your extra "u" spelling of labor back to limey land.

Humour him.

Jim at said...

I, also, come on -- I know I made fun of Inga in this thread too, but let's not wish for each others' deaths.

I didn't read that as wishing.
Just a request for notification of said event.

Inga said...

“... but let's not wish for each others' deaths.”

“I didn't read that as wishing.
Just a request for notification of said event.”


Hahaha! I’ll dance on your graves!💃 You people take yourselves far too seriously.

Drago said...

Older lefty Khrushchev: "If you don't like us, don't accept our invitations, and don't invite us to come to. See you. Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!"

Old lefty Inga: "Hahaha! I’ll dance on your graves!"

Some things never change.

Bay Area Guy said...

" Of course the laws of supply and demand apply to labour, just like anything else."

Ditto!

Let me give you an example. If you want your big ass lawn mowed, you can either:

1. Do it yourself
2. Hire 6 illegal Mexicans pretty cheap
3. Hire some dumbass teenagers.

If you're too fat, tired and outta shape, you will opt for 2 or 3.

If the snot-nosed lazy teenagers, wanna charge you $100 dollars, so they can new Nikes or the newest version of Mine Craft for their IPhones, you can say, "Hell No!" and hire the illegal Mexicans for $50. Thus, the point at which the supply curve meets the demand curve will be at $50. Hence, the supply of labor (cheaper illegal Mexicans) has brought the price point down.

Economics 101!

Balfegor said...

Re: theribbonguy:

Missed the irony of your second quote...guilty as charged. I stand by my bile regarding the first...the swath of people that will be helped by equalizing our trade imbalance will be considerably wider than you state.

Trade imbalance is going to have direct effects on manufacturing and agriculture or about 7.9% and 1.5% of the workforce respectively. And that's assuming Trump goes all-in on trade issues: right now, he's only doing particular industries, so the impact is even more focused. That seems like a narrow slice to me, but we can agree to disagree one what "narrow" means here. Perhaps you're projecting that after he scares them with one or two tariffs, other countries will work to raise the prices of exports to the US to a level where American industry is competitive again so as to avoid tariffs.

Immigration potentially has a broader impact, but it's limited to industries where there is a heavy illegal immigration component. Workers in construction (4.3% of workforce) will benefit on the immigration control side, but not the tariffs side (if anything, they're going to get squeezed on the tariffs side if tariffs raise market prices for construction inputs). People in services (about 80% of the workforce) will by and large not benefit from either of these policies, although people in some types of the hospitality subset of services (about 10% of the workforce) will benefit from immigration control; people in certain high-skill industries will benefit if the administration really is policing H1B visas aggressively, although that's a separate matter from cracking down on illegal immigration.

All that said, I still think the direct benefits of controlling illegal immigration are going to be concentrated in communities hostile to Trump, so the electoral impact will be muted. Trade is a different matter -- that's laser-focused on the Rust Belt, which was critical to his victory in 2016. But my comment was mostly about controlling illegal immigration.

Inga said...

LOL

“Older lefty Khrushchev: "If you don't like us, don't accept our invitations, and don't invite us to come to see you.”

“President Trump invited his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, to the White House when he called last month to congratulate the Kremlin leader on his re-election, the White House said Monday.

Press secretary Sarah Sanders confirmed that Trump and Putin had “discussed a bilateral meeting in the ‘not-too-distant future’ at a number of potential venues, including the White House,” during the March 20 call.”

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-invited-putin-to-the-white-house-2018-04-02

Balfegor said...

Re: wildswan --

You may be right, and the real impact will just be Black voters staying home, even if they aren't converted over to Trump. At the state level, Black voters are part of the whole electoral pool, rather than concentrated into gerrymandered districts, so it could be decisive in some states. We'll see!

Inga said...

Black voters won’t be staying home if they have a candidate that resonates with them. There won’t be any more Hillary Clinton’s.

Michael K said...

Inga and chuck are running a duet comedy show.

I agree with Bay Area Guy about Congress but that is because of Them, not Trump.

Gahrie said...

Black voters won’t be staying home if they have a candidate that resonates with them.

If Black voters were smart, 50% of them would vote Republican and 50% of them would vote Democrat in November. that would force both parties to actually pay attention to Black issues. Right now both parties basically ignore the Black population. Democrats do, because they know that even if they ignore Black issues, 90% of Black people are still going to vote Democrat. Republicans ignore Black issues because they know that no matter what they do, 90% of Black people are going to vote Democrat.

Bay Area Guy said...

"Black voters won’t be staying home if they have a candidate that resonates with them. There won’t be any more Hillary Clinton’s."

Bernie Sanders might resonate with black voters. Nothing says hipness like those pasty white Vermonters.

tcrosse said...

There won’t be any more Hillary Clinton’s.

But will there be any less ? Somebody tell her.

Inga said...

“But will there be any less ?”

There is only one Hillary. Don’t think for a minute that whoever runs won’t be distancing themselves from her at every chance they get and cuddling up to Obama. There are several strong contenders.

Scott said...

Trump is on his way to his second term. By the time he leaves office in 2024, he will be more popular than Ronald Regan. Out of fear for their own political viability, elected Democrats will give Trump the same deference that they now give Ronnie.

I love it!

Bad Lieutenant said...


Inga said...
“But will there be any less ?”

There is only one Hillary. Don’t think for a minute that whoever runs won’t be distancing themselves from her at every chance they get and cuddling up to Obama.


Interesting... How will the Ds keep HRC from kingmaking and/or sabotage and backstabbing?

Inga said...

“Interesting... How will the Ds keep HRC from kingmaking and/or sabotage and backstabbing?”

She doesn’t have that sort of power anymore. She’s been dismissed.

Scott said...

Hillary tested the boundaries of personality cult politics. In spite of having every possible institutional advantage, she was a lousy Secretary of State, and she was a terrible presidential candidate. Now, when there's no more skin in her game, she's looking like an ugly and small human being.

Who will the next beneficiary of the Democultists' largesse be?

chickelit said...

“Largesse” is kinda sexist, don’t you think?

langford peel said...

President Trump has the perfect opportunity to illustrate how Illegal immigration threatens black employment. He has to prepare a response to the invasion of 3,000 taco eaters who are being allowed to pass through Mexico untouched in order to invade the United States.

He should station the famous 10th Caverly who are the heirs of the famed "Buffalo Soldiers"at the border to turn back this tidal wave of beaners. It is a teachable moment where he can illustrate how Hispanic immigrants are in fact the real enemy of Black Americans. They directly compete with them for jobs, neighborhoods and supremcy in criminal enterprises.

These Hispanics have already driven the blacks out of baseball. Now they are trying to drive them out of drug dealing.

Attention must be paid!

langford peel said...

I will tell you one thing that is for sure.

If those Maricons ever learn how to play basketball all bets are off!

buwaya said...

"There is only one Hillary."

There are lots of them, as they all feed from the same system, which serves the same interests. HRC was just a figurehead. She didn't even begin, organize and run her own foundation. Nor was she the "rainmaker" who truly schmoozed for donations. That was her husband.

Pookie Number 2 said...

Who will the next beneficiary of the Democultists' largesse be?

Kamala Harris. The same racist mindset that believes that African Americans aren’t capable of anything better than Obama’s empty suit will fall all over her.

traditionalguy said...

The Progressives need to quit nominating old style Dems and go straight to nominating the woman who gives them the power: Marina Abramovic her coven.

Danno said...

Paulio said..."Also, whoever the idiot is that thinks the tax cuts were enacted for the 2017 tax year shouldn't be allowed to vote."

As I mentioned at least one of the cuts was applied to 2017.

See Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, (Sec. 11027) - For 2017 and 2018, this section reduces from 10% to 7.5% the AGI threshold that must be exceeded before a taxpayer is allowed to claim an itemized deduction for medical expenses.

So you (dear fucking retard) should refrain from voting also.

Drago said...

Inga the Helpless: "LOL

“President Trump invited his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, to the White House when he called last month to congratulate the Kremlin leader on his re-election, the White House said Monday."

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-and-khrushchev-meet-for-talks

snip: "On September 25, however, the real business part of Khrushchev’s trip began as he and President Eisenhower met at Camp David in Maryland to begin two days of talks about the Cold War."

What was your point again Inga?

Drago said...

Inga thinks Presidents aren't supposed to meet with foreign leaders.

Apparently, no one told obama that when you meet a foreign leader, especially the Russian figurehead that Putin sent over, it's best not to touch the russian on the knee in a loving manner and promise all kinds of post-election "flexibility" for Vlad.

LOL

Drago said...

Just for Inga

An archive of the the Obama White House website shows Obama did in fact talk with Putin on March 9, 2012, following his election win.

"President Obama called Russian President-elect and Prime Minister Putin to congratulate him on his recent victory in the Russian Presidential election," according to the official summary, or "readout" of the call."

That is so very, very sweet. And flexible. And "Re-set-y".

chickelit said...

I am amazed at how swiftly — and without an apparent second thought — Dems like Inga just throw out the old middle class. Trump gladly scoops them up.

Scott said...

@chickelitk: that's largesse, not large ass.

Drago said...

chickelit: "I am amazed at how swiftly — and without an apparent second thought — Dems like Inga just throw out the old middle class."

All good lefties know that the bourgeois kulaks can never be trusted to go along with The Revolution.

That's why they invented starvation, gulags and mass graves.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger Inga said...
“But will there be any less ?”
There is only one Hillary. Don’t think for a minute that whoever runs won’t be distancing themselves from her at every chance they get and cuddling up to Obama. There are several strong contenders.
4/2/18, 5:59 PM

I can kind of see this, Inga, but I wonder why any Democrat would believe that Obama had the Midas touch when it came to helping them win? His track record is pretty lousy.

bolivar di griz said...

The kruschev summit, happened only a short time, after andropovs smersh unit had liquidates two Ukrainian exile figure bandera and konovalets in Munich.