Now every time i see Sappys name in a thread, that's the face I'll see.
Here and I thought it was this one...
View attachment 119521
Rasmussen poll shows Trump approval rating continues to drop
- Thread starter Sapidus
- Start date
After the election, I would think you would be smart enough not to believe these polls. At a minimum you have a very short memory! At a maximum, well, you can draw your own conclusion about how intelligent you seem.
He's a ####ing MENSA candidate, don-cha-know! Just ask him.
NOPE - if a poll shows Trump approval or GOP approval drops [ie people hate trump] then Progs are all in
philibusters
Active Member
Some of the state polls were really off for the election, but in fairness most of the major national polls which had Hillary up 3% or so were within their margin of error. For example if a national poll had her up 4% and a 3% margin of error, then it was correct and she won the popular vote by a little bit under 2%. Polls in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and about a handful of other states were outside the margins of error, but most of the national polls were within the margin of error so technically there were not wrong.
philibusters
Active Member
Its far from a given, but its possible the Republicans still get some type of repeal and replace bill through Congress. Its probably not going to be a great bill, it may be like skinny repeal but that possibility still exists. Even if that doesn't happen (and that is probably 50-50 at this point so its certainly possible it does not happen) then he has opportunities on tax cuts and infrastructure stimulus bill. In terms of tax cuts, the angle Trump pursued in his speech yesterday was middle class tax cuts. In terms of tax cuts and electorate a middle class tax cut will generate the most goodwill. Originally there were talks of a massive corporate tax cuts, but I think that talk has died down. Corporate tax cuts would mainly increase corporate profits which would benefit share holders. Since the wealthy own most of the stock in corporations in the U.S. the main benefits would go to them. I think Trump has realized his base is the key to him winning re-election and a large corporate and small middle class tax won't give him nearly as much bang for his buck with his base as a small corporate and large middle class tax cut. I think Congress will give him the tax cuts he wants, especially if they are aimed at the middle class (as Congressman also generate the most goodwill through middle class tax cuts). Obama had a trillion dollar stimulus bill and Trump is talking again about his own trillion dollar stimulus bill.
And of course there is the economy. That has become the new talking point for the administration. Solid second quarter GDP growth and a stock market reaching new record highs. I actually don't think Trump done much to get the economy where it is, but likewise if a recession comes (and we are due) I don't think he would have caused it at all. But from a purely political point of view, whether he is responsible for a good or bad economy is moot--regardless a good economy will make him a lot more electable and a bad economy will make him vunerable with independents and moderates.
But there is clearly a path for Trump to win re-election even without healthcare. Taxes, infrastructure, and a good economy.
Well he has little political capital or goodwill despite having his party in control of both houses. The american people at this point overwhelming want to keep Obamacare so even a skinny repeal won't help him. If he can do something with taxes and and infrastructure he has a shot but he needs to not only keep his base but grow it.
Looking at the numbers more people today would come out and vote against him so unless he can turn that tide around he won't be getting reelected. There is also the continuing and widening Russia probe and the continued leaks that show he is an ineffective negotiator which isn't help his cause.
philibusters
Active Member
All true. He has a lot of roadblocks but he does have a path to re-election.
As of August 4, 2017 if I had to bet money I would bet money he wouldn't win re-election in 2020. But its 39 months till the election. On August 4, 2016, just three months before the 2016 election, I would have confidently bet money he wasn't going to win the 2016 election, so I have kind of learned that these have a lot twists and turns.
Absolutely agree.
We may well find out however that Russia had a hand in the first election is so that would negate the second
dream on short bus
unless the progressives quit rioting and throwing a tantrum, your side is guaranteeing Trumps Reelection
hotbikermama40
New Member
The Russians involve themselves in other countries' politics. It's what they do. In the case of the 2016 election, you can't, or you shouldn't disregard Hillary's role in losing the election.
"Another country may have interfered with our election in collusion with the Trumps" "But Hillary"
I swear on your death bed your last words are going to be "but Hillary"
And where was your outrage at Obama DIRECTLY interfering in the Israeli elections?
hotbikermama40
New Member
Wrong...again. I said one thing, you added to it to make a totally different statement...again.
When discussing the 2016 Presidential election, Hillary is going to be mentioned in some of those conversations - such as why Trump won. You want to blame Pres. Trump & the Russians for the outcome of the election; I'm suggesting you consider Hillary's role in losing, which is very real, instead of relying on nothing proven to be factual regarding collusion between Trump and Russia.