Quantcast
Trumps Approval Outpace Reagan, Clinton and Carter

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trumps Approval Outpace Reagan, Clinton and Carter

Do you Approve of President Trump?

Yes 42 39.62%
 
No 59 55.66%
 
In the middle. 5 4.72%
 
Total:106
SpokenTruth said:
RJTM1991 said:

What success?

He had the highest unemployment rate in history and racked up more debt. He did nothing for the black community either.

I always felt like Obama cared more about pandering to celebrities and appearing on chat shows rather than actually doing his job.

*sigh*  No, he didn't even come close to the highest unemployment rates in history.  But if you want to talk unemployment, you can't forget we had a massive global recession before he took office.  He inherited a rising unemployment economy.

Notice the stock market?  Interesting trajectory, no?

And debt/deficits.  Obama had massive deficits because of the recession.  Notice how they fell year on year as he tried to get things balanced again?  And now what trajectory we are on thanks to Trump yet without a recession?

 

 

Oh well, I'm wrong.

Still stand by everything else though. He cared more about celebrities than doing his job.



Around the Network
RJTM1991 said:

Oh well, I'm wrong.

Still stand by everything else though. He cared more about celebrities than doing his job.

Interesting.  But if we're going to talk via hyperbole, Trump cares more about golf than doing his job.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

RJTM1991 said:
SpokenTruth said:

*sigh*  No, he didn't even come close to the highest unemployment rates in history.  But if you want to talk unemployment, you can't forget we had a massive global recession before he took office.  He inherited a rising unemployment economy.

Notice the stock market?  Interesting trajectory, no?

And debt/deficits.  Obama had massive deficits because of the recession.  Notice how they fell year on year as he tried to get things balanced again?  And now what trajectory we are on thanks to Trump yet without a recession?

 

 

Oh well, I'm wrong.

Still stand by everything else though. He cared more about celebrities than doing his job.

I think President Obama actually cared about dping right by the American people. He had some mistakes and couldn't accomplish as much as he would have liked to but the way he talked about bringing change to America and his reaction to shootings like Dandy Hook makes me believe he cared for Americans and was doing the best he could.



Jumpin said:

This says a lot about how stupid a large portion of the American people are becoming.

On the bright side, despite the surge against the Euro during the Obama administration, Trump has successfully damaged the US dollar and brought it back down below 90 Euros since 2016, upped the inflation rate to the highest since 2007, enacted policy that dropped the wages of the middle class; and despite the US economy coming off of huge gains and increased stability coming off the Obama era - Trump's policies have seen US stock market has also been stall for the past 8 months, and ballooned US deficit to some of the highest levels in history thanks to his disastrous budget. On top of that, US environmental, educational, and foreign policy have become a disaster zone, thanks to Trump.

On dropping the unemployment rate - that happened between 2010 and 2017, Trump was only President for one of those years. Despite such low unemployment, Trump keeps digging the US further into debt at an accelerated rate.


The only thing Trump has been successful at is an anti-intellectual crusade.

 

 

QFT!



RJTM1991 said:
smroadkill15 said:
I don't approve of Trump because he's an idiot. He acts like knows what he's talking about to get everyone on his side excited, but at the end of the day, he knows very little. I don't expect the president to know everything because that is what the people he hires around him are for, but they keep hiring people, like Peter Navarro, who are not qualified for their position. As of now, Trump is riding the success of the last president, but in a couple years, shit is going to hit the fan.

What success?

He had the highest unemployment rate in recent history and racked up more debt. He did nothing for the black community either.

I always felt like Obama cared more about pandering to celebrities and appearing on chat shows rather than actually doing his job.

A. Wrong

B. Obama was a likable person, who went on a few late night shows to show he is a down-to-earth guy. Big deal. Was he a perfect president? Nope. But he actually tried to do his best with the situation that was in front of him, and showed that he cared about the American people. It seems like Trump cares more about sticking it to the left than actually doing his job. 

Speaking of not doing their job, how much money has Trump spent on vacation time and golf outings?? 



Around the Network

Do I approve of Trump? No. Do I agree with his actions on the issues most important to me? Yes. Do I disagree with some actions he has done? Yes. There is no easy way to poll this.



smroadkill15 said:
RJTM1991 said:

What success?

He had the highest unemployment rate in recent history and racked up more debt. He did nothing for the black community either.

I always felt like Obama cared more about pandering to celebrities and appearing on chat shows rather than actually doing his job.

A. Wrong

B. Obama was a likable person, who went on a few late night shows to show he is a down-to-earth guy. Big deal. Was he a perfect president? Nope. But he actually tried to do his best with the situation that was in front of him, and showed that he cared about the American people. It seems like Trump cares more about sticking it to the left than actually doing his job. 

Speaking of not doing their job, how much money has Trump spent on vacation time and golf outings?? 

I don't give a shit about Trump either to be honest. I'm just calling it like I see it.



When viewed in context, that's not as good as one thinks. Trump's approval rating, averaged across multiple pollsters, has hovered in the low 40s for the past eight months. Reagan, and Clinton were at or near career lows at this point. It's not so much that Trump caught up with them, as theirs had dropped to Trump levels at this particular point in their terms. Trump has also maintained a disapproval rating of over 50% his whole term, something that Reagan and Clinton only managed briefly.

What matters isn't where he compares to those other guys right now. Sure, Reagan and Clinton got re-elected, but they also didn't have net negative approval their entire terms, either. In their third year, their net approval ratings ended up back in the positive.

No, what matters is how his approval rating is doing as we close in on Nov. 3, 2020. If Trump is still in the negative, he likely will not be re-elected. The only other one-term presidents we've had in modern history also happened to be the ones that had more people disapproving of them than approving. And in these highly partisan times, it's independents that hold the most sway in the approval ratings. According to Gallup, Trump has struggled to get much more than a third of independents to approve of his job performance. This is considerably worse than the last few presidents. Also, let's not forget about that Electoral College that most Republicans hated during the Obama era but now suddenly love. Trump's approval rating is significantly underwater in several major Rust Belt states that he picked up in 2016. If the Democrat can flip just Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania (states Trump only barely won) back to blue, then they win. Iowa could flip. Ohio is once again pure toss-up. Arizona and possibly Georgia could become highly competitive. If the election were held today, Trump likely wouldn't win. But he has bit over two years to get his net approval into the positive, at least in the places that matter (and let's be honest: most of America doesn't matter in presidential elections). These past 19 months aren't exactly encouraging for that prospect.



Machiavellian said:

What conflict was there in North Korea.  They still have their bombs.  Nothing seems to be stopping them from making any more bombs.  Yes they destroyed test sites but then again, you do not need test sites anymore when you can make the bombs.  Nothing was done with NK, we did not get them to sign anything to remove their nukes from the playing field and since this has been an ongoing thing for decades, why has anything changed now.  As for Syria, they still have their civil war, the only thing is that russia is now their patron saint so the US has decided to move on.  I guess you can call that a win.

I give you record job growth and unemployment but then again its not like it wasn't steadily going in that direction before he came into office.  At least we can agree he didn't do anything to screw it up.  Why people keep throwing black people into this category as if lower unemployment would not be representative for all people in the US.

I am sorry but if you believe that cyber attacks isn't considered a military attack, you have no clue about how our world is run.  Every nation has a cyber attack squad because infiltration of information, disruption of financial, political and utility systems is a direct means to hurt anyone.  We were never close to WW3 but you definitely do not let any state sponsored attack on your nation be considered some off hand attack and ignore it.

A military attack is an act of war that absolutely constitutes a military response: between nuclear powers a direct military confrontation inevitably and rapidly escalates to nuclear war.  This is what made the cold war such a fearful time to be alive.  If you don't believe me just look at the buildings, music and culture back then, everybody was obsessed with fallout shelters, drills etc...

Like you said, cyber-attacks happen all the time and both private corporations, governments and individuals can carry them out.  A cyber-attack does not justify a military response and anybody who thinks that it does (especially against another nuclear power) does not belong anywhere near office.

As for Syria, please show me how ISIS still controls this region?  ISIS was the creation of Obama and the establishment Republicans because it was in their political interest to destabilize the middle-east.  Trump is no genius, he just took his foot off the neck of Syria and actually worked with Russia and Syria to eliminate the threat (instead of backing "rebels" who always turned out to be ISIS) and, guess what, the threat is now gone.  

Who cares about whether agreements have been signed with NK or not.  The tension in that part of the world is basically 100% gone, as opposed to the world war level tension that we had there a year ago.  We, of course, have the Clintons to thank for NK getting nukes in the first place seeing as how they gave the fissile material to North Korea so that the region could be another chess-piece for the globalists to destabilize at a later date.

The Democrats and establishment Republicans have been a bunch a demonic low-lives who routinely started wars and depressed their own people so that a tiny elite at the top can get off on turning the planet into a rotting trash-heap.  Make no mistake, the Democrats are worse than the Republicans which is why basically every billionaire minus Trump votes for them.  Trump is no magician, he is just somebody who isn't a complete monster who actually wants to make things better.  Just by ceasing the self-sabotage of the country and of the world-abroad, America and many regions of the world are now coming back with great vigor.  This is why everything is improving under his watch despite the media telling you that electing Trump would have resulted in an immediate economic collapse.  It really should just show you how absolutely hideous the establishment is and that you shouldn't trust a word they say. 



Illusion said:
Machiavellian said:

What conflict was there in North Korea.  They still have their bombs.  Nothing seems to be stopping them from making any more bombs.  Yes they destroyed test sites but then again, you do not need test sites anymore when you can make the bombs.  Nothing was done with NK, we did not get them to sign anything to remove their nukes from the playing field and since this has been an ongoing thing for decades, why has anything changed now.  As for Syria, they still have their civil war, the only thing is that russia is now their patron saint so the US has decided to move on.  I guess you can call that a win.

I give you record job growth and unemployment but then again its not like it wasn't steadily going in that direction before he came into office.  At least we can agree he didn't do anything to screw it up.  Why people keep throwing black people into this category as if lower unemployment would not be representative for all people in the US.

I am sorry but if you believe that cyber attacks isn't considered a military attack, you have no clue about how our world is run.  Every nation has a cyber attack squad because infiltration of information, disruption of financial, political and utility systems is a direct means to hurt anyone.  We were never close to WW3 but you definitely do not let any state sponsored attack on your nation be considered some off hand attack and ignore it.

A military attack is an act of war that absolutely constitutes a military response: between nuclear powers a direct military confrontation inevitably and rapidly escalates to nuclear war.  This is what made the cold war such a fearful time to be alive.  If you don't believe me just look at the buildings, music and culture back then, everybody was obsessed with fallout shelters, drills etc...

Like you said, cyber-attacks happen all the time and both private corporations, governments and individuals can carry them out.  A cyber-attack does not justify a military response and anybody who thinks that it does (especially against another nuclear power) does not belong anywhere near office.

As for Syria, please show me how ISIS still controls this region?  ISIS was the creation of Obama and the establishment Republicans because it was in their political interest to destabilize the middle-east.  Trump is no genius, he just took his foot off the neck of Syria and actually worked with Russia and Syria to eliminate the threat (instead of backing "rebels" who always turned out to be ISIS) and, guess what, the threat is now gone.  

Who cares about whether agreements have been signed with NK or not.  The tension in that part of the world is basically 100% gone, as opposed to the world war level tension that we had there a year ago.  We, of course, have the Clintons to thank for NK getting nukes in the first place seeing as how they gave the fissile material to North Korea so that the region could be another chess-piece for the globalists to destabilize at a later date.

The Democrats and establishment Republicans have been a bunch a demonic low-lives who routinely started wars and depressed their own people so that a tiny elite at the top can get off on turning the planet into a rotting trash-heap.  Make no mistake, the Democrats are worse than the Republicans which is why basically every billionaire minus Trump votes for them.  Trump is no magician, he is just somebody who isn't a complete monster who actually wants to make things better.  Just by ceasing the self-sabotage of the country and of the world-abroad, America and many regions of the world are now coming back with great vigor.  This is why everything is improving under his watch despite the media telling you that electing Trump would have resulted in an immediate economic collapse.  It really should just show you how absolutely hideous the establishment is and that you shouldn't trust a word they say. 

First it was not the US that beat back ISIS in the area, it was Turkey and Russia.  If anything, the US gave up the region to Russia and Bashar was kept in power.  Now with the US pretty much gone from the region, Bashar and his government is gaining control of the whole area without any resistance.  I guess you can call that winning.  You can claim that Isis was beat back but then you let another group just as vicious control the region and completely handed it over to Russia.

 I believe you are forgetting who started the tension with NK to begin with.  From my understanding it was yours truly President Trump.  The stage has not changed one bit, NK got the US off their back, got a promise that US troops will leave the area and they can keep their bombs.  If that is what you call winning than Trump could have just kept his mouth shut did absolutely nothing, move our troops out and we would still be in the same place as we are today.  We have tried and failed numerous times to get NK to denuclearize, not show up for a photoshoot, and basically get national recognition without giving up anything. As to blaming the Clintons on NK getting nukes where are you getting that information from.  Can you share that link.

Trump is in the same category as all the billionaires you seem to condemn.  He even stated during his run that he paid for favors.  Why would you believe from a serial liar and a person who is known to tell people what they want to hear all the time that anything has changed with him.  If anything he is one of the biggest crook out of any Dem or Republican.  Why would you believe Trump wants to make anything better that does not make him better.  In his 70 years, he has never did anything for anyone unless it made him either look good or he profited by it.  

I continue to wonder why there is this opinion that Trump is some just and altruistic person when he has never been such a person.  There is nothing in his business or personal life up to this point that shows he has been anything other than a greedy opportunist. I will not argue the point about seeing things improved under his watch as I have a totally different opinion.