ChrisWeigant.com

Trump's Base Support Begins To Erode

[ Posted Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 – 15:47 PDT ]

For the first six months of his presidency, Donald Trump has always been able to count on a "floor" of public support of around 40 percent. Through thick and thin, four-in-ten Americans approved of the job he was doing. That seems to now be changing. For the first time, his own base is starting to become disillusioned with Trump. So far the change is slight, but the trendline doesn't look good for the near future for the president.

Today Trump hit several milestones on the Real Clear Politics poll tracking page. His job approval average is now 38.2 percent, which is the lowest he's ever seen. His job disapproval rate now stands at 56.9 percent, the highest it's ever been. That's a spread of 18.7 points (below water), which is also the largest it has ever been. But when you take a dive into the poll numbers which make up that average, things look even worse for Trump.

For the past two and a half months, Trump charted a remarkably consistent line. His job approval hovered close to 40 percent for this entire period, only fluctuating roughly one point on either side. During this time, the outlier polls which lean left showed Trump as low as 35 percent, while the polls which lean right charted numbers up to 45 percent. This evened out in the average, which stayed steadily around 40 percent.

For the past two weeks, however, Trump hasn't charted a single number higher than 39 percent. One poll now has him down to 33 percent job approval. Today's slide is a reflection of this, but it may go lower still. Real Clear Politics aggregates recent polls, and included in today's average are five polls that are pretty outdated (taken from 7/12 through 7/18). They're all buoying Trump's overall average up, since all five of these polls put his approval between 39 percent and 41 percent. This used to be right in the middle of the spread, but it is now at the extreme high end of the spread. When these polls drop out of the rolling daily average, Trump's numbers will likely go even lower.

Of the five more-recent polls, taken from 7/25 until now, Trump's showing is pretty dismal:

  • Economist/YouGov -- 39 percent approval / 55 percent disapproval
  • Gallup -- 36 / 60
  • Rasmussen -- 38 / 62
  • Quinnipiac -- 33 / 61
  • Reuters/Ipsos -- 35 / 59

Average these numbers out to get a most-recent picture of where Trump stands, and you get 36.2 percent approval and 59.4 percent disapproval. That's a full two points worse than where his overall average stands today, which is why the trendline isn't going to be Trump's friend any time soon.

This is remarkable and notable because it is the first time Trump has sunk far below that 40 percent barrier. Trump's poll numbers eroding now are not the result of liberal Democrats or true independents turning away from him, in other words, because they've been against him for a while now. No, what these numbers mean is that Trump's core base is now beginning to turn away from him. The difference between 40 percent support and 36 percent support is an enormous one, in other words, because it came about because people who voted for Trump are now not happy with him.

Democrats have long wondered what it would take for Trump to lose his base support, of course. It's too early to say what caused the change, because the past two weeks were pretty eventful ones, even for the Trump administration. Multiple major staff shakeups happened, the profanity-laden tenure of Anthony "The Mooch" Scaramucci ran its entire 10-day course, and perhaps most significantly, Trump lost his "repeal and replace Obamacare" battle in the Senate. There was a lot of chaos, but his base has stuck with him through previous chaotic weeks. My gut feeling is that Trump is losing support right now because conservative voters are upset that the whole "repeal and replace" effort crashed and burned so spectacularly. They were promised this for eight years of Republican campaigns, but even holding both houses of Congress and the White House was not enough to get it done. That's a major letdown for them.

While it certainly will be interesting to see how low Trump goes on his current slide in the polls, what will be more significant is whether he ever regains this lost support. This could be a momentary blip in the polling which eventually bounces back. But it also could be a mark of exasperation as Trump voters throw up their hands and say "Enough!" So far, it doesn't seem like Trump is doing much to woo them back. Here's an astonishing excerpt from the transcript of a recent Wall Street Journal interview with Trump, where he shows a breathtaking ignorance of his own base supporters' lives. Trump began by saying how wonderful it was that Foxconn was going to build new factories in America, then tells his own base voters what they should do in response:

But I said... you go to certain sections and you're going to need people to work in these massive plants that we're getting, that are moving in. Where do we have the people? You know where we have the people? In New York state that can't get jobs, in many other places that can't get jobs. And people are going to have to start moving. They're going to move to Colorado and they're going to move to Iowa and Wisconsin and places where -- like if Foxconn goes to Wisconsin, which is one of the places they're very strongly considering -- but if Foxconn goes to Wisconsin and they have a very low rate and the governor's done an excellent job, you're going to have a situation where you got to get the people. But they're going to start moving. And I'm going to start explaining to people when you have an area that just isn't working -- like upper New York state, where people are getting very badly hurt -- and then you'll have another area 500 miles away where you can't -- you can't get people, I'm going to explain you can leave, it's OK, don't worry about your house. You know, a lot of them don't leave because of their house. Because they say, gee, my house, I thought it was worth 70,000 [dollars] and now it's worth nothing. It's OK. Go, cut your losses, right?

Trump is sending a clear message here: "That house you've spent your entire life paying for? Just abandon it. That life you built up for yourself in upstate New York? Scrap it, and move! Wisconsin's really nice, have you heard? Just cut your losses, because when you're down the big banks will bail you out with millions of dollars -- I mean, that's been my experience, anyway." Perhaps that message -- that Trump really has no concept what most of his voters' lives are actually like -- is finally beginning to sink in.

Or perhaps not. Again, this could be a temporary downswing in Trump's approval. His voters may eventually decide that Trump wasn't to blame for Obamacare not being conquered, and rally behind him once again. But if the downswing is more permanent, then Trump's "floor" of approval will settle in to a much lower point than 40 percent.

This is going to exacerbate a problem Trump is already beginning to feel. Republicans in Congress just aren't that afraid of Trump anymore. They used to be a lot more fearful that Trump voters would make them pay at the ballot box, but if Trump's floor of support is only 35 or 36 percent, that threat is going to fade even further. Senator Jeff Flake, a Republican that Trump has repeatedly targeted with threats of a primary challenger, just released a new book that decries Trump and Trumpism in pretty strong and unequivocal language. Flake is betting that being anti-Trump is going to win him more votes than being pro-Trump, which is a decision that is getting easier for a lot of other Republicans by the day.

It's still too early to know how significant this week's downturn in the polls will be for Donald Trump's presidency. For at least the next few days, it is quite likely that Trump's "lowest job approval ever" mark will continue to move lower. Where it bottoms out and what happens next may change the course of his entire presidency. If it bounces back up, it'll eventually be seen as no big deal. If it plateaus at a new floor, then Trump will continue, albeit in a much weaker political position. If it continues downward, then even Republicans may stop paying all that much attention to what Trump wants. So the next month or so of polling could be crucial for the remainder of Trump's term in office. Once a politician loses his base support, it can be awfully hard to get it back -- just ask George W. Bush.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

65 Comments on “Trump's Base Support Begins To Erode”

  1. [1] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Senator Jeff Flake, a Republican that Trump has repeatedly targeted with threats of a primary challenger, just released a new book that decries Trump and Trumpism in pretty strong and unequivocal language. Flake is betting that being anti-Trump is going to win him more votes than being pro-Trump, which is a decision that is getting easier for a lot of other Republicans by the day.

    OR....maybe Flake has come to recognize that the problems that have overtaken the GOP as a whole are not the fault of one man, but a condition that has been infecting all aspects of the party for some time.

    The GOP's willingness to lie directly to their base did not start with Obama's win in 2008, but it is when the party completely threw out any concern for their constituents' best interests in favor of partisan interests. The Republicans, by their own admission, intentionally voted against any legislation that sought to improve the lives of Americans out of a desire to make Obama a one-term president. Eight years of doing nothing but attacking the other party's actions, even attacking the other party when it was simply enforcing laws that the Republicans were responsible for passing. This has caused Republicans to turn against legislation that had been embraced by conservatives not over philospophical disagreements, but simply because the Democrats had come to accept it as good legislation.

    A big start would be if the GOP would finally admit that the ACA was a good plan that could be much better, and then worked with the Democrats to make it the best that it can be for all Americans.

    While Trump is the physical embodiment of dishonesty and corruption, I want to believe that Flake's book isn't so much an attack on Trump as it is a call to action to address the bigger problems that led to a Trump presidency.

    Yes, Trump is an easy target when talking about what is wrong with the GOP, but if he was booted out of office tomorrow, it would be the equivalency of cutting one large tumor out of a body riddled with cancer. It might be necessary at the time, but it won't change the overall prognosis if that is the only action taken.

  2. [2] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Aren't Trumps poll numbers still higher than Congress?
    Considering that we get to re-elect or NOT RE-ELECT Congress in 2018 and we have to wait until 2020 to dispose of Trump electorally, maybe an article about the poll numbers of Congress and what we can do about replacing them would be a good idea.
    And speaking of good ideas, let's give credit where credit is due. Trump may have a point about moving on to greener pastures.

    You know that political party that is controlled by Big Money contributors that pretends to be two separate parties controlled by Big Money- it's time to move on to greener pastures.

  3. [3] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    It’s ugly business burning bridges
    inviting bad luck, building up those walls
    You’re wasting precious bullets
    Taking shots at anything that crawls
    I can see your back is against the wall
    You keep hoping for the best
    But the hammer’s gonna fall

    Martin Zellar

  4. [4] 
    Paula wrote:

    [1] Listen: Yep!

  5. [5] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    Hmmm. Trump's base of support was 40%? A better take might be that 45% of the voters are GOP-or-no-one voters (i.e. Never Dem). A portion of those (5 or so percentage points) are Never Trump-ers. It is not unreasonable to suggest that Trump's actual base of support is a rock-solid 20-25% and the remainder are GOP voters. The erosion, then, becomes GOP voters who are disillusioned some, both with Trump and with the GOP Congress.

  6. [6] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Speak2 [5] -

    I hear you, but the way I see it is that the difference between Trump's vote (46? 47? whatever it was back in November) and 40% is the GOP voters who didn't care particularly for Trump but voted for him anyway and wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. But over Trump's non-honeymoon period, they've fallen away.

    We could both be right, to some extent or another. Mine's just a gut feeling, really.

    Also interesting to watch is the shift in "strongly approve" numbers:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/08/02/more-signs-that-trumps-base-is-increasingly-dissatisfied-with-his-presidency/?utm_term=.8eb11a4a5c8e

    Which is why your 20-25% might be on the mark, really.

    -CW

  7. [7] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Technical note:

    Between when I wrote this and the end of the day, RCP updated their numbers for Reuters/Ipsos, from 35/59 to 37/59, as newer numbers were posted.

    This means the final numbers for today on RCP will be slightly off from the numbers I quoted in the article. That's the way it goes... these poll numbers come in all the time, so "today's numbers" can shift around a bit.

    But just did want to point it out, in case anyone clicked the link and was confused at the slight discrepancy.

    -CW

  8. [8] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    CW: The firing of the Mooch, and hiring of Gen. Kelly as Chief of staff ought to have to have a positive effect on his numbers, at least temporarily. If Kelly succeeds at turning things around, this could be a watershed moment for this administration. I give Kelly a 30% chance of curbing Trump long term, but 70% chance of stopping the bleeding in the short term.

    Today's horse and pony show on immigration is a sign that Trump is finally cognizant of his need to 'woo back' his base. The trouble is, these are not new immigration proposals, having been first presented back in April, and McConnell has repeatedly said that there's no room on the Senate calendar for any big new business for the rest of the year. (Everyone else, thank you for coming, see you next year!) The base could get even more restless if they start to realize that they're being patronized.

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, I think it is cute the way ya'all put yer faith in polls that were so utterly and devastatingly WRONG about Trump in the past..

    And, as Don points out, Trumps numbers are still BETTER than the Dumbocrat Party numbers...

    So, if you want to live by the polls, then the Dumbocrats die by the polls... :D

    NOTHING posted indicates that Trump's base support is fading..

    But I have posted fact after fact after fact that PROVES President Trump's base still fully supports him... :D

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    McConnell has repeatedly said that there's no room on the Senate calendar for any big new business for the rest of the year.

    No problem. President Trump (I just LOVE saying that!! :D ) will just take a page from Emperor Odumbo's playbook and bypass Congress and do it by Executive Order.. :D

    No muss, no fuss, Dumbocrats' heads explode :D

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    While Trump is the physical embodiment of dishonesty and corruption,

    You mean, Trump-R is the physical blaa blaa blaaa..

    Trump-D was ya'all bestest buddy... :D

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    And please remember, when responding to it, how happy you were to brag about the Rasmussen 50% approval poll just a few weeks ago...

    I am NEVER "happy" to brag about poll numbers..

    For this exact reason..

    They aren't indicative of much beyond the attitudes of the poll takers...

    Add to that, the *FACT* that they were so unequivocally and dead on ballz WRONG about Trump in the past.....

    One has to wonder why ANYONE would put faith in what they say...

    Ahhh yes... Because they are saying what ya'all want to hear.. :D

    Remember how I told ya'all (and you agreed with by the by) that the polls don't take into account the disgust that patriotic Americans feel for Democrats??

    This is simply more of the same...

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    You haven't shown that to be true. Even if 82% of those people surveyed claimed to have contemplated suicide, that doesn't mean that 82% of all trans individuals have contemplated suicide! Your "group" consists only of people that took the survey.

    Even if 57% of the people surveyed claim to be against President Trump, that doesn't mean that 57% of all Americans are against President Trump..

    Ya'all's group consists of ONLY those who took the poll....

    And it's entirely likely that the vast majority of the people taking the surveys are JUST people who don't like Trump to begin with...

    If 60% of the people who TOOK the poll are Anti-Trumpers than it would naturally follow that the poll would reflect the anti-Trumper attitude..

    Polls don't mean dick as the 2016 Presidential Election proved beyond ANY doubt..

    But ya'all swear by the polls because they say what ya'all want to hear...

    "Simple logic"
    -Admiral James T. Kirk

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    Didn't ya'all claim that Bannon was here to stay??

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/inside-the-mcmaster-bannon-war/article/2009109

    Maybe not... :D

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Trump...

    Foxconn considering a second Wisconsin facility — this one in Dane County
    http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2017/08/02/foxconn-considering-second-wisconsin-plant-one-dane-county/533918001/

    Making America Great Again....

    :D

    President Trump is following thru with his campaign promise..

    JOBS, JOBS, JOBS, MORE JOBS and STILL MORE JOBS....

    President Trump is going to see Reagan-1984 numbers in 2020... :D

  16. [16] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    President Trump is following thru with his campaign promise..

    Rare as that is...

  17. [17] 
    neilm wrote:

    Didn't ya'all claim that Bannon was here to stay??

    Didn't you claim that Mars was made from Cheese and the "Moon/Cheese" conspiracy was nonsense as it was obvious to you that the Moon was made from Marshmallow?

    Or maybe you could post links when you decide to quote us'all Michale?

  18. [18] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    The Orange One didn't make promises. He made "suggestions" because he need the flexibility to do what the president of China tells him to do.

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    For the first six months of his presidency, Donald Trump has always been able to count on a "floor" of public support of around 40 percent.

    And Trump's support is STILL around 40%... :D

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Trump is following thru with his campaign promise..

    Rare as that is...

    Actually, he has a better track record than Odumbo..

    How did that Gitmo Closing work out for ya'all?? :D

    JOBS...

    Economic Turnaround

    Illegal Immigration

    The Wall

    President Trump is keeping a LOT of his promises..

    And, if President Trump had a -D after his name, ya'all would be agreeing with me.. :D

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Or maybe you could post links when you decide to quote us'all Michale?

    If the "ya'all" doesn't apply to you, then it doesn't apply to you and you shouldn't have a problem with it..

    But hay... I aim to please.. :D

    But if it will make you happier, I'll re-institute the NEN disclaimer..

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Trump...

    5th Trump judicial nominee confirmed, outpacing Obama, Bush

    President Donald Trump has outpaced his immediate predecessors when it comes to having his choices for federal judgeships confirmed.

    The Senate this week approved a fifth Trump nominee, placing Trump on a faster pace for approvals than either President Barack Obama or President George W. Bush.

    Most recently, Alabama lawyer Kevin Christopher Newsom was confirmed to a seat on the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, on a 66-31 vote, with 16 Democrats joining the GOP on the affirmative side, the Washington Times reported.

    Newsom was the third Trump pick for circuit judge to be approved so far. Combined with one district judge and the Supreme Court appointment of Neil Gorsuch, the Trump administration and the Republican-led Senate are well ahead of the normal pace for judicial approvals.

    “The Trump administration has moved faster on filling judicial vacancies compared to the past administrations, thanks to its commitment to working with and extensively consulting all senators, regardless of political affiliation, to select high-caliber nominees,” Kelly Love, a White House spokesperson, told the newspaper.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/03/5th-trump-judicial-nominee-confirmed-outpacing-obama-bush.html

    Making America Great Again

    :D

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    So much for the BS claim that President Trump isn't accomplishing anything.. :D

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    DREAMer accused of brutally raping woman in Seattle suburb

    A 23-year-old DREAMer in Washington state is accused of brutally raping a 19-year-old woman in her apartment complex's gym and leaving her with severe facial injuries -- including a broken jaw and dangling ear.

    The woman ended up stumbling home with missing teeth, a bloody head and wearing only a black tank top, according to court documents obtained by Fox News. She was working out in the gym in Burien, a Seattle suburb, before the June 25 assault and did not know her attacker, police said.

    Salvador Diaz-Garcia, an illegal immigrant who was a recipient of Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, is now facing second-degree assault and rape charges in the vicious attack. He also faces child molestation charges for allegedly assaulting a 14-year-old the same day the rape occurred.
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/02/dreamer-accused-brutally-raping-woman-in-washington.html

    Ah yes... Let's have illegal immigrants here in the US...

    What could POSSIBLY go wrong... :^/

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    JFC,

    The Orange One didn't make promises. He made "suggestions" because he need the flexibility to do what the president of China tells him to do.

    Cite??

    If you can't back up what you claim, then you are a lying troll...

    Hay, don't get mad at me..

    I don't make the rules.. :D

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    From reading these, you're just going to LOVE today's article.

    Heh.

    And please remember, when responding to it, how happy you were to brag about the Rasmussen 50% approval poll just a few weeks ago...

    :-)

    Having said all of the afore, yes...

    I am kinda bummed that President Trump is not doing a LOT better...

    BUT....

    But, like ya'all did with Obama, I put more of the blame on President Trump's obstruction-happy opponents than I do on President Trump..

    And yes..

    Acting now like ya'all did then ALSO bums me out.. :D

  27. [27] 
    TheStig wrote:

    DH-2

    "Aren't Trumps poll numbers still higher than Congress?"

    Yes, but it's basically meaningless. Congress always has relatively low popularity....but your own congressperson almost always polls higher than "Congress."

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    TS,

    Yes, but it's basically meaningless.

    Yea.. When President Trump's numbers are bad, that means EVERYTHING...

    When yer Democrat numbers and your media numbers are WORSE it's "meaningless"...

    How ya'all can indulge and wallow in such blatant Party bigotry with a straight face and ANY sense of self-credibility is truly astounding...

  29. [29] 
    Paula wrote:

    Martin Longman on Blotus' making up story to cover for Junior's getting-stolen-goods meeting:

    Instead, I’ll just give a little timeline. Sometime around June 20th, the president learned that the media was aware of a meeting his son had organized at Trump Tower with Kremlin-affiliated Russians. At that point, he presumably asked for all relevant information about the meeting and tasked people with organizing a response. While he was in Germany at the G20 meeting, he and his advisers learned that the story was about to break. They strategized about what they could use as a defense. The president spontaneously joined Putin at the July 7th dinner with no American interpreter present and discussed the Russian adoption cover story with him. On July 8th, on Air Force One, he drafted or “dictated” the Russian adoption cover story over the protests of his legal team. After the story broke, Trump insisted that he had no prior knowledge of the meeting. He and his lawyers and surrogates insisted he had no role in drafting the statement.

    http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/02/it-looks-like-trump-and-putin-colluded-on-adoption-story/

  30. [30] 
    Paula wrote:

    My goodness, this one is fun!

    WaPo just posted a scoop using leaked transcripts of calls Trump had with Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto shortly after taking office. The conversations reveal Trump to be a peevish, vain weakling who’s more concerned with his image than how policy affects Americans. Hoocoodanode, right?

    rump’s negotiating strategy appears to consist of whining and begging foreign leaders not to publicly pants him for telling cynical lies during the campaign.

    They have an excerpt in which Blotus tries to get Enrique Peña Nieto to agree to just not talk about the wall funding because Blotus knows Mexico isn't going to pay for it, but the meatheads are still screaming for that to happen and Blotus is cornered. Nieto says "no".

    https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/08/03/worlds-greatest-negotiator-in-action/

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    They have an excerpt in which Blotus tries to get Enrique Peña Nieto to agree to just not talk about the wall funding because Blotus knows Mexico isn't going to pay for it, but the meatheads are still screaming for that to happen and Blotus is cornered. Nieto says "no".

    Do you have any FACTS to back up yer claim??

    Because, if you don't, you're just a lying troll...

  32. [32] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale: here's a direct link to the story that Paula was referring to:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/australia-mexico-transcripts/

  33. [33] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Stig-
    It is true that the local congressman polls higher than Congress. But I would disagree that citizens not satisfied with Congress in general is meaningless.
    But what about the rest of the comment, you know, the part about doing something about it?
    Is all that meaningless or less than meaningless or did you choose not address it because you only want to address meaningless issues to reinforce your support of the Big Money Democrats (if that is who you support) and help maintain the status quo?

  34. [34] 
    Paula wrote:

    [32] Balthasar -- yes, the link was in the story I shared -- I just like the blogger's commentary on it, and graphic.

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya see, here is the credibility dilemma ya'all face when it comes to touting polls.....

    On the one hand, the polls are totally and utterly whacked when it comes to President Trump... This is well-documented..

    "But THIS time, the polls are right!!!!!" ya'all hysterically exclaim..

    aww right... aww right... THIS time the polls are right...

    DUMBOCRATS HAVE WORSE POLL NUMBERS THAN PRESIDENT TRUMP!!!

    So, if ya'all want to claim the polls are right this time, that means you MUST concede that President Trump has better approval numbers then yer Dumbocrats!!!

    EITHER way, the Left is frak'ed.... :D

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale: here's a direct link to the story that Paula was referring to:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/australia-mexico-transcripts/

    Any evidence to support the transcript is factually accurate???

    It *IS* WaPoop after all.. And since you are on record as making the Absurdum Fallacy argument (or whatever JL calls it) then you accept that, since WaPoop has a well-documented history of pushing anti-Trump BS.....

    Yer gonna need more than single sourced anonymous BS to back up yer claims..

    Remember.. Ya'all make the rules.. I simply decimate yer arguments by them... :D

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    Don,

    Is all that meaningless or less than meaningless or did you choose not address it because you only want to address meaningless issues to reinforce your support of the Big Money Democrats (if that is who you support) and help maintain the status quo?

    Of course, it's all meaningless in their eyes...

    You don't toe the Big Money Democrat Line, everything you say is "meaningless"...

    Of course, you and I both know that facts and reality say different.. But people like TS, et al are living in a delusional fantasy world where Democrats are always right and win every election and NOT-45 is POTUS and KOOM-BYE-YA is the song of the day...

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:
  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hay...

    If ya'all are feeling a little overwhelmed, can't hang and need me to ease up and take it easy on ya'all...

    Just say the word.. :D

  40. [40] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Word.

    :-)

  41. [41] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Thursday's Trump Tweets started a bit earlier than yesterday, but are still unusually mild mannered. Bombastic, with some dubious claims, but clearly written and nothing said that would require the WH or WH staff to put more lawyers on retainer. No ellipses causing The Joint Chiefs to wonder if we are going to war in the next 20 minutes.

    So, is this two day trend attributable to the new Chief-of-Staff? Are Trump tweets being reviewed and edited? We will just have to wait for more tweets and additional leaks to the NYT, WAPO etc.

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yer wish is my command.. :D

    I'll ease up on 'em...

  43. [43] 
    Paula wrote:

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/08/mcmaster-susan-rice-did-nothing-wrong/

    "National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster has concluded that Rice did nothing wrong, according to two U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to me on condition of anonymity. That might explain why Trump has yet to declassify more information on the prior administration’s unmasking requests."

    Yes, that would explain it, all right. Rice did nothing wrong; McMaster (and therefore Trump) know she did nothing wrong; and declassifying further information would simply make that clear. It’s much more fun to let things dangle. That allows the conspiracy-theory crowd to continue believing that Rice is a partisan hack who lied about Benghazi and tried to smear Trump’s campaign team.

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    "National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster has concluded that Rice did nothing wrong, according to two U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to me on condition of anonymity. That might explain why Trump has yet to declassify more information on the prior administration’s unmasking requests."

    Cite???

    Other than the Left Wing version of Info-Wars???

    Sorry, Liz.. But that's just TOO low-hanging fruit....

  45. [45] 
    TheStig wrote:

    33-DH

    I didn't say the low poll numbers of Congress are meaningless, they are a red flag showing that people are not happy with the Congress. What's meaningless is comparing the unpopularity of Congress with the unpopularity of President Trump. It's an apples to oranges comparison. The institutions of Congress and the Presidency are clearly separated and have different functions. As a practical matter you need to tinker with both.

    Consider this. I like my I house, but I like my car less. Should I get a new car based on that simple statement? I dunno, it depends on a lot of factors not obvious from the overall one on one comparison. The one to one comparison of house to car is meaningless because it has no practical utility.

    I'm not a single issue voter. No candidate is ever going to match my profile of the ideal candidate. I don't like pay to play politics, but that's one issue and deeply ingrained in our system since DAY ONE OF THE REPUBLIC. Likelihood of winning factors into my election day calculus, and factors fairly highly. What you trying to convince me to do is become a single issue voter, based on source of campaign finances. That's an important issue, but not the only one, and not even the dominant one in the aggregate.

    You are proposing a faith driven Children's Crusade. The original did not end well for the Children, who packed plenty of faith but lacked experience, arms, logistics and a plan. Go if you must, I'm defending my little manor. If a Proxmire shows up in my district, I'll be suiting up to follow him into the fight.

  46. [46] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Stig-
    Thank you for addressing the rest of the comment and admitting you are defending your manor.
    But I am not asking you or anyone to be a one issue voter. The small candidate commitment is a starting point, the candidates still have to meet the criteria that is important to the individual participant.
    And it is the dominant issue as it effects every other issue. No other issue can be properly addressed until the Big Money issue is solved.
    There is a plan, a plan that has been proven to work by the Tea Party (taking on the establishment candidates in the primaries, by Bernie Sanders (the ability to raise competitive money from small contributions) and by many internet campaigns that have moved the public discourse in ways previously thought impossible (such as the Mother's March).
    If you prefer to stick with the Big Money Democrats that have proven over the last thirty plus years to offer nothing more than empty promises and excuses that is certainly up to you, but that has not ever worked and most likely never will.
    It just doesn't make sense to claim that the likelihood of winning is important when the likelihood of the candidate living up to their promises is nil.
    And 2016 has proven that the likelihood of winning isn't as likely as it used to be.

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    For those who claim that President Trump can't fire Mueller???

    “The bottom line is that President Trump has the raw power to fire Mueller — despite it being a catastrophically bad decision that should lead to his impeachment,”
    -Neal Katyal, Lead Author Special Counsel Rules

    Yer wrong....

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    West Virginia Governor to Switch from Democrat to Republican

    WASHINGTON — Gov. Jim Justice of West Virginia, a Democrat who was elected last year even as President Trump carried the state by 42 points, is expected to announce Thursday night at a rally with Mr. Trump that he is changing parties, according to three sources familiar with the plans.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/03/us/politics/west-virginia-governor-to-switch-from-democrat-to-republican-trump.html

    And the hits just keep on coming... :D

    That puts 26 states in the country that are fully in GOP hands...

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats begin to see Pelosi as a 2018 problem
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article165213507.html

    Democrats will NOT win in 2018 with Pelois at the helm...

    It's THAT simple..

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    That puts 26 states in the country that are fully in GOP hands...

    By comparison, Democrats only have total control in 5 states....

    The Democrat Party has been fully, completely and unequivocally rejected by patriotic Americans...

  51. [51] 
    Paula wrote:

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/08/now-theres-a-grand-jury-investigating-the-trump-russia-connection/

    Short and SWEET! -- here's the entire entry:

    The Trump-Russia investigation is entering a new phase. The Wall Street Journal has the story:

    Special Counsel Robert Mueller has impaneled a grand jury in Washington to investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections, a sign that his inquiry is growing in intensity and entering a new phase, according to people familiar with the matter.

    ….Grand juries are powerful investigative tools that allow prosecutors to subpoena documents, put witnesses under oath and seek indictments, if there is evidence of a crime….“This is yet a further sign that there is a long-term, large-scale series of prosecutions being contemplated and being pursued by the special counsel,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas.

    More specifically, this strongly suggests that Mueller is contemplating criminal charges. You don’t need a grand jury for anything else.

  52. [52] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Paula - 51 Thanks for the links!

  53. [53] 
    LeaningBlue wrote:

    In terms of base erosion, we can't forget the Kremlin. If you haven't done so, this full statement deserves a careful reading, keeping in mind that while it's a public Facebook post, it's written by and for diplomats as well.
    https://www.facebook.com/Dmitry.Medvedev/posts/10154587161801851

    Someday soon, a discussion has to start about international order in an age of escalating resource scarcity. For at least four thousand years, successful rulers of great powers concentrated on assurance of vital resources.

    Whatever the President was, is, could have been, or will be, he sees the same synergy, denominated in billions of barrels, that the Russian state sees. The union of the world's greatest extraction technology with what could prove out to be the greatest extractable reserves in the world. Genuine energy independence, deliverable in pipelines under the ice free arctic if Canada is cut in, and by tankers if not.

    Medvedev writes that for the "US establishment," Trump is a "non-systemic player [which] has to be removed." The US establishment can think of reasons six ways from Sunday why even entertaining such a deal with devils is so far outside norms of international order as to almost certainly lead to regional and great-power wars.

    If he fails -and it seems incresingly certain that he is going to- that should start a discussion of how the USA should pursue its long term social and economic domestic objectives while at the same time being mindful of its international responsibilities and prerogatives in an era of increasingly unreliable or scarce resource supplies.

    The ending prepositional phrase above is what's new. Neither the climate change deniers, nor Al Gore, nor the Paris Accord will admit to the world's resource predicament.

    Although for different fears, I'm as dystopian as the President seemed in his acceptance speech and inaugural address and elsewhere. I think there's a high probability that such a discussion will continue to be blocked by the political class until the responses and outcomes are forced in ways that won't be pretty.

  54. [54] 
    TheStig wrote:

    LeaningBlue - 53 Interesting post. Russia's only good card is fossil fuel and that's not the card it was in the previous century. Behind the klepto veneer, Russia is pretty desperate - they can't even make enough babies to keep their population stable. The vast agricultural hinterland is being abandoned. Desperate people are risk prone. Trump is pretty worried too as more shoes drop on. Bad mojo.

  55. [55] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CW- "Real Clear Politics aggregates recent polls, and included in today's average are five polls that are pretty outdated."

    I have never liked the RCP rolling average. Since the various polling firms have individual biases, and they tend to report in a fairly consistent pattern, the rolling average introduces a wave pattern that tends to obscure long term trends.

    Even so, Trump's disapproval has been increasing overall since Feb - and the trend has been basically linear for the last 6 months. There aren't a lot undecideds, so Trump approval declines in almost mirror image. If the rates don't change, Trump runs out of support about 6 months before the Congressional Elections. If you are an alert rat on the SS Trump, you are looking to jump onto anything that floats. That psychology explains a lot of the bipartisanism that has started to crop up in Congress.

  56. [56] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Having lived through Watergate, the Trump remake seems to be progressing much, much faster.

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    More specifically, this strongly suggests that Mueller is contemplating criminal charges. You don’t need a grand jury for anything else.

    Of course Mueller is contemplating criminal charges.. He has to justify his existence SOMEHOW..

    Any real evidence to support that President Trump is the target of those charges??

    No??

    Didna think so...

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, in the spirit of serious conversation and discussion..

    What is the significance of West Virginia's governor becoming a Republican and leaving the Democratic Party??

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Having lived through Watergate, the Trump remake seems to be progressing much, much faster.

    TRUMP IS TOAST prediction #7986

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya'all have your polls which have a PROVEN track record of being wrong as wrong can be...

    Krauthammer: Trump's West Virginia rally shows he has a 'formidable army' of supporters

    Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer labeled President Donald Trump’s rally in West Virginia on Thursday night a “very important demonstration” by the president to reaffirm that his base still had his back.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/03/krauthammer-trumps-west-virginia-rally-shows-has-formidable-army-supporters.html

    And then there is the reality....

    President Trump's base is just fine... :D

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why did the governor make the switch, Michale?

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why did the governor make the switch, Michale?

    My guess is that he wanted to be on the winning side.. :D

    Seriously, I haven't delved too much into it..

    It just seems that every time a GOP'er defects to the DEM Party, the rank and file Weigantians (NEN) swoon how this "proves" that the GOP sucks..

    I was simply curious if that works in reverse.. :D

    But, if you would like to discuss it in detail, I'll be happy to research it..

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seriously, I haven't delved too much into it..

    TRANSLATION: I was being shallow and just looking to score points.

    :D

  64. [64] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @ts,

    nixon was a very bright guy, but nothing like the showman donald is. it may be going faster, but that movement is mostly in circles.

    @liz/michale,

    my guess is polarization. republicans from blue states and democrats from red states switch for self-preservation. some of those states are so polarized that the minority party can no longer win, no matter how much an individual candidate is liked by the voters.

    JL

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    my guess is polarization. republicans from blue states and democrats from red states switch for self-preservation. some of those states are so polarized that the minority party can no longer win, no matter how much an individual candidate is liked by the voters.

    In other words, politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle will likely look out for themselves first and foremost and switching from one Party to the other Party is not indicative of one Party being "better" than the other Party...

    That about sum it up??

Comments for this article are closed.