Discussion » Questions » Politics » Despite all the sturm und drang about him, President Trump's approval rating has hovered around 40% for several months.

Despite all the sturm und drang about him, President Trump's approval rating has hovered around 40% for several months.

Why do you think this is? And are these polls as inaccurate as those that promised a Clinton victory last November?

Posted - August 1, 2017

Responses


  • 13277
    I know - I'm bored with it. Actually, it seems to me that it's only about 10-12, maybe 15 to be generous, left on here. And there are lots of days when I just take a look at the Politics questions and don't even bother posting anything.
      August 1, 2017 8:24 PM MDT
    2

  • 7126
    "If you believe in something higher than human beings is that something higher compassionate/merciful or judgmental/terrifying? Why? LOL"


    And stop editing your comments after I've already responded! It's driving me batshit crazy!!
      August 1, 2017 7:15 PM MDT
    0

  • 46117
    You don't give me a chance to finish.

      August 1, 2017 7:41 PM MDT
    1

  • 7126
    Your comment is already there! How the heck am I supposed to know you're gonna edit?  
      August 1, 2017 8:25 PM MDT
    0

  • 16792
    Trump won largely due to Democratic complacency. All the polls had Hillary so far ahead that she was supposed to be a slam dunk, so many of those who would have voted for her didn't turn out. Trump got his votes out - still lost the popular vote but given that the EC is gerrymandered up the wazoo, he still won as his loss was narrow enough.
      August 1, 2017 7:11 PM MDT
    0

  • 46117
    I think Trump won because they fixed the election.  Period. 
      August 1, 2017 7:12 PM MDT
    0

  • 13277
    Of course you would think that, whomever "they" are. Period.
      August 1, 2017 8:10 PM MDT
    2

  • 46117
    I am pretty sure I think that because it was fixed.  I think that Bush's election was fixed as well.

    Just two of them.  Not all of them. 
      August 1, 2017 8:21 PM MDT
    0

  • 13277
    But not so you can prove it or anything.
      August 2, 2017 9:01 AM MDT
    0

  • 16792
    Bush only had to buy the Florida legislature. Relatively cheap. Trump (allegedly) got hackers to smear Hillary, which (if true) would have been far more complicated, but still doable. Whether it's true or not is immaterial, it's undeniable that he leaned on the FBI,  is receiving emoluments, assaulted the leader of an allied nation, is signing unconstitutional decrees ...
      August 2, 2017 6:35 PM MDT
    0

  • 13277
    The key word being "allegedly". None of that can be proven, and believing it must be true BECAUSE it can't be proven is the epitome of paranoia.
      August 2, 2017 7:07 PM MDT
    1

  • 16792
    As I said, it doesn't matter now. Nixon wasn't impeached for bugging the Watergate, he was impeached for obstructing the course of justice. He fired the investigators, PRECISELY as Trump has done - although in firing the acting AG Trump is worse, as Nixon didn't fire Richardson, he resigned.
    Trump is also receiving emoluments, in breach of Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 ot the Constitution. He could have avoided that by placing his real estate assets in a blind trust. He chose not to.
      August 2, 2017 7:30 PM MDT
    0

  • 2500
    Nixon was not impeached although he may have been well on the way to that end. He resigned and then accepted a blanket pardon from his successor, the only US President in history to not be elected to that office.

    The alleged emoluments violation(s) is a bogus argument unless you can show he's receiving direct payments from a foreign entity for "services rendered" or some other renumeration to gain favor. Making a profit by providing hospitality services at fair market prices to non US citizens is no more a violation of that clause that is any other government employee (and they're ALL subject to that clause) profiting from a gain in, say, Boeing's stock price because Boeing closed a big deal to sell planes to Aeroflot.
      August 4, 2017 11:17 PM MDT
    0

  • 2500
    And just how do you think the election was "fixed"?
      August 4, 2017 11:35 PM MDT
    0

  • 739
    The Russians, surely. She probably thinks that because of a little thing called a Grand Jury Investigation.
      August 4, 2017 8:42 AM MDT
    0

  • 2500
    You do know that there's no grand jury investigation of the President? No?

    By the way, a grand jury only investigates to determine if there's possible cause to actually pursue legal action. Many grand juries end up saying, in essence, "Move along people, nothing to see here . . . ") Getting to the truth is only one of many reasons grand juries are convened. Over zealous prosecutors trying to make a name for themselves and malfeasance of someone trying to injure a political opponent are also very common usage, unfortunately.
      August 6, 2017 3:16 PM MDT
    0

  • 2500
    Trump won largely because people outside of New York City and Los Angeles county are sick and tied of "business as usual" inside I495 and because people have been exposed to the poison of Hil-LIAR-y's (and Bubba's) political machinations for over 25-years. If either party had a credible candidate to run the outcome would have likely been very different.

    Gerrymandering can only impact two States in the Presidential elections, Maine and Nebraska. (House races are the ones that gerrymandering sometimes has a big influence over.) In the last Presidential election Clinton took the three EC votes from Maine while Trump got the 5 EC votes from Nebraska. So it's a split with Trump up by two whole votes between those two States. Nothing to see here . . . 
      August 4, 2017 11:34 PM MDT
    2

  • 13277
    You're pissing in the wind. Slartibartfast doesn't wish to be hampered by actual facts.
      August 6, 2017 2:38 PM MDT
    1

  • 2500
    Yes, I know that.
    But at least I'm wearing a dark blue suit so while it gives me that warm, fuzzy feeling no one actually notices.  This post was edited by Salt and Red Pepper at August 6, 2017 4:23 PM MDT
      August 6, 2017 3:06 PM MDT
    1

  • 16792
    38%. And his DISapproval rating is 56%.
    With evidence surfacing that he dictated his son's SWORN testimony (perjury, that's what they impeached Clinton for), it's probably going to get worse.
      August 1, 2017 7:00 PM MDT
    1

  • 46117
      August 1, 2017 7:04 PM MDT
    2

  • 13277
    If he isn't impeached (and, unlike Bill, convicted) and the Democrats don't nominate a better candidate in 2020, we're stuck with him for 8 years.

    At this point, it's questionable if there's enough actual evidence, as opposed to hearsay, to warrant impeachment proceedings. Much of what's out there is noise created by the media.

    If he does get booted from office, get ready for President Mike Pence!
      August 1, 2017 8:19 PM MDT
    0

  • 46117
    EIGHT YEARS????!!!!!
      August 1, 2017 8:20 PM MDT
    1

  • 2500
    It's gonna be GREAT!
      August 6, 2017 6:10 PM MDT
    0

  • 16792
    Pence is dumb, but the US can handle that - you survived eight years of Dubya. He keeps his nose clean, isn't implicated in tge Russia business (having joined the campaign later than that), hasn't leaned on or fired investigators (which would have had Nixon convicted has he not chosen to fall on his own sword), hasn't manipulated anyone else's sworn testimony, doesn't have an itchy Twitter finger, isn't receiving kickbacks when representatives of foreign governments stay in hotels he own (emoluments by definition) because he doesn't own any, is unlikely to assault the leaders of allied nations - in short, he doesn't have the shortcomings that Trump can (and I believe WILL) be either impeached for, or removed from office under section IV of the 26th Amendment, as he's casting some serious doubts as to his fitness to discharge the duties of his office (senile dementia).
      August 2, 2017 5:54 PM MDT
    0