US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Well I'd say he's doing better than I expected, but I didn't expect much either.

Same here, and even doing better than expected, he's not doing much except changing his position 3 times a day.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by vienna

So, once again, proof is presented that Trump is widely popular among Republicans;

(..)

So, its very nice the GOP really, really likes Trump, but, like the 2016 Popular Election results have shown, the rest of us, the majority of the US voters, are a long way from jumping for joy...


<O>

interesting analysis, but you are answering a question which was not asked.

I was following up on August's post of the article and the current Democratic/Liberal media attack line that Trump's base is turning against him.

The facts don't bear that out, Trump is as popular among his "base" as he has ever been.

Now as to his overall aproval rating, the "40%" number really does not mean anything.

First, depending on the poll, his overall approval is actually between 40 and 50%.

second, even in a Poll where his overall approval rating is in the low 40%, the numbers vary depending on the groups and the issues.

for example, you look at the Pew poll, his overall approval rating is 39%, but among white voters, it is 50%. White voters make up the largest bloc of voters in the States he won in 2016, which puts him in a good position in 2020:

http://www.people-press.org/2017/04/...es-april-2017/

another example, you look at the Reuters Poll where his overall rating is 43%, but you ask voters on how they rate him on specific issues and his approval numbers go up:

-handling U.S. economy : 49%
-employment and jobs : 51%
-dealing with ISIS: 53%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/doc...13-17_2017.pdf

so "40%" support makes a good slogan for anti-Trumpers, but it does not really reflect reality.

The numbers are still soft, but as long as he keeps up his GOP support and can get a good chunk of independent support, Trump is in good shape for 2020.

[vienna]

Interesting polls from The Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/...elease_466.xml

I found this most interesting:

Q: Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a...

Democrat 31%

Republican 24%

Independent 36%

Other (Vol.) 6%

No opinion 4%

For the first time I am aware of, the number of voters calling themselves Independent exceeds the number calling themselves Democrats and is now the largest block (Independents have exceeded the number of Republicans for several years now). Both parties have been losing members to the ranks of the Independents for a long time and it appears the trend is only growing; not good news for the two main parties...



<O>

[Platapus]

Polls, not matter how many decimal places are reported, are intended to only represent general trends. Decimal point poll reports are an example of false precision.

When I look at poll reports, I only look at the first significant digit. Anything after that is probably false precision unless you have a real good understanding of the data, and pollsters often don't.. and the people who use the results probably don't care... and the people who read the results get spun up.

So 49% and 41% to me are equal for practical purposes. Unless there is a 10 point spread, I don't worry too much about the results of a political poll... especially political polls.

That people will be honest when replying to polls is one of the biggest assumptions in polling. It may or may not be a good or valid assumption, but it sure ain't a fact.

[August]

Very interesting article from Politico.

The Media Bubble Is Worse Than You Think

We crunched the data on where journalists work and how fast it’s changing. The results should worry you.
By Jack Shafer and Tucker Doherty
May/June 2017


How did big media miss the Donald Trump swell? News organizations old and new, large and small, print and online, broadcast and cable assigned phalanxes of reporters armed with the most sophisticated polling data and analysis to cover the presidential campaign. The overwhelming assumption was that the race was Hillary Clinton’s for the taking, and the real question wasn’t how sweeping her November victory would be, but how far out to sea her wave would send political parvenu Trump. Today, it’s Trump who occupies the White House and Clinton who’s drifting out to sea—an outcome that arrived not just as an embarrassment for the press but as an indictment. In some profound way, the election made clear, the national media just doesn’t get the nation it purportedly covers.
What went so wrong? What’s still wrong? To some conservatives, Trump’s surprise win on November 8 simply bore out what they had suspected, that the Democrat-infested press was knowingly in the tank for Clinton all along. The media, in this view, was guilty not just of confirmation bias but of complicity. But the knowing-bias charge never added up: No news organization ignored the Clinton emails story, and everybody feasted on the damaging John Podesta email cache that WikiLeaks served up buffet-style. Practically speaking, you’re not pushing Clinton to victory if you’re pantsing her and her party to voters almost daily.



The answer to the press’ myopia lies elsewhere, and nobody has produced a better argument for how the national media missed the Trump story than FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver, who pointed out that the ideological clustering in top newsrooms led to groupthink.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...t-coast-215048

[Dowly]

[STEED]

Donald Trump: I would be honoured to meet Kim Jong-un

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39773337

Really.

[Jimbuna]

Everyone would like to meet a "pretty smart cookie" b ut I suspect it would be with the intention of slapping him across the back of his head.

I believe Trumpis relying on China to do some remedial work behind the scenes and should that fail then there is a possibility military action may ensue.

Either way, Trump/the USA cannot and will not allow NK to develop a means of delivering a nuclear strike on the American mainland.

[Bilge_Rat]

Trump is probably keeping the meeting on the back burner as a carrot. The fat NK kid really wants international respect and Trump buttering him up wont hurt with the negotiations. We have to assume everything said about the "Great Leader" in the western press is relayed to him by his minions.

[Catfish]

Problem is Trump sends out contradicting messages. You cannot rely on anything he says. As long as it's with Kim i am fine with it though

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Either way, Trump/the USA cannot and will not allow NK to develop a means of delivering a nuclear strike on the American mainland.

One should never forbid what one lacks the power to prevent. - Napoleon Bonaparte

[Bilge_Rat]

A Kim - Trump summit may not be as impossible as everyone thinks.

In 1971, everyone thought this was impossible...



...and the opening to China turned out to be one of the smartest move in U.S. foreign policy.

[vienna]

Hmm...

Comparing Mao to Kim? IIRC, Mao was not a 'mad dog', unpredictable dictator who was not given to volatile, irrational threats to the outside world in general and the US in particular; not a very good comparison...

...and comparing Trump to Nixon? Sir, that is a insult to Tricky Dick...




<O>

[ikalugin]

Wasn't that during the cultural revolution?

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by vienna

IIRC, Mao was not a 'mad dog', unpredictable dictator who was not given to volatile, irrational threats to the outside world in general and the US in particular;

read your history sir.

Third biggest mass murderer in the history of Mankind, after Hitler and Stalin.

or first according to this site, with an estimated 50-70 million deaths under his rule:

http://www.popten.net/2010/05/top-te...of-kill-count/