Trump hits highest Gallup approval rating of his presidency

  
Via:  Vic Eldred  •  5 months ago  •  111 comments

By:   BY BRETT SAMUELS

Trump hits highest Gallup approval rating of his presidency
 

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



President Trump 's approval rating hit 49 percent in a new Gallup poll released Tuesday, his highest mark in that poll since he took office.

The  poll , released on the eve of a likely Senate vote to acquit him on impeachment charges and at the outset of an election year, found 50 percent of those surveyed disapprove of Trump's job performance. Just 1 percent of respondents said they had no opinion.

Trump's previous high approval rating in the Gallup poll was 46 percent, a number he reached in  May 2019  after the conclusion of former special counsel  Robert Mueller 's investigation did not charge him with obstruction of justice or establish he conspired with Russia.

The boost in Tuesday's poll is largely attributable to a surge in support for Trump from Republicans and independents. The poll found 94 percent of Republicans approve of Trump's performance, up from 88 percent in early January.

Among independents, 42 percent said they approve of Trump, up from 37 percent in early January.

Seven percent of Democrats said they approve of Trump's job performance, down from 10 percent in early January.

The poll surveyed 1,033 people and was conducted Jan. 16-29. It has a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

Trump has struggled throughout his presidency to reach 50 percent approval ratings in most polls, but Tuesday's Gallup data caps what many in the White House viewed as a strong month. Trump ordered a strike that killed top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, a move that gained positive marks in the Gallup poll after military tensions deescalated.

The president also signed a pair of trade deals with China, and with Mexico and Canada, capping off months of negotiations in each case.

While Trump's Senate trial took place during the latter half of January, it is expected to end Wednesday with his acquittal. The Gallup poll found 52 percent of Americans are in favor of acquitting Trump, compared to 46 percent who support convicting him and removing him from office.

The House in December impeached Trump along party lines for abuse of power and obstruction of justice after Democrats alleged he used his office to get Ukraine to investigate his political rivals.


Article is Locked


 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Vic Eldred
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    5 months ago

In the end it is the people who get to decide on a President's character and policy agenda


Rules of civility apply

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    5 months ago
In the end it is the people who get to decide on a President's character and policy agenda

51 - 54%  wanted him impeached and removed from office.  How does that fact jive with your statement?

Fox News Poll: Record support for Trump impeachment

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    5 months ago

It doesn't. I believe in elections. If those numbers are correct he will be turned out in November. That's the way it's done.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    5 months ago

From October?

hahahaha

 
 
 
zuksam
1.1.3  zuksam  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    5 months ago

Trumps poll numbers are amazing considering the Media bias for the last three years. The Media has been campaigning for the Democrats against Trump throughout his whole 1st term. To have numbers like this on a Gallup poll now when Trump hasn't even begun his reelection campaign doesn't bode well for the Dems come Nov. Their only contender was Biden but now it's clear to most Americans that Biden did intervene in the Ukraine on behalf of his sons company and Trump's request for an investigation was reasonable and warranted.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.4  It Is ME  replied to  zuksam @1.1.3    5 months ago
The Media has been campaigning for the Democrats against Trump throughout his whole 1st term.

Exactly !

And the "Gullible" eat it up ! Most are still in "School" though. jrSmiley_75_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.2    5 months ago
From October?

Yet I see someone (not necessarily you) is too lazy to look up newer polls for himself. 

I only posted the October one because FoxNews has learned their lesson and never do another poll like that again, and certain people here like to downplay poll takers as liberal agencies.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  zuksam @1.1.3    5 months ago
Trumps poll numbers are amazing considering the Media bias for the last three years.

His poll numbers are amazing considering he is a KNOWN liar, crook, bigot and moron. What the hell is wrong with people? 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1.7  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.5    5 months ago

Wow,  First you intentionally  post an outdated poll. If that's not bad enough you tell another falsehood about Fox after getting caught (which posted an impeachment poll just last week), and then try to  justify your repeated falsehoods by bizarrely claiming that others like to downplay poll takers.

Brave of you to continue to post after being embarrassed like that. Hard to come back from that.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.2  squiggy  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    5 months ago

Impeachment, dead from the start, put a nuclear boiler on the Trump train.

 
 
 
lady in black
2  lady in black    5 months ago

Fake poll

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  lady in black @2    5 months ago

It's Gallup.....Aren't they the good ones?

 
 
 
pat wilson
3  pat wilson    5 months ago

So you're crowing about 49% ? That's hilarious ! The guy's been underwater the entire time of his campaign and presidency and you want to celebrate, hahahahahahahahahahaha.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  pat wilson @3    5 months ago
The guy's been underwater the entire time

Under siege the entire time!

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    5 months ago

Under siege?  How so?

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.1.2  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    5 months ago
Under siege?  How so?

Sadly, there are a lot of ignorant people that have access to a microphone. 
Diego Luna

You don't know ? jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

https://thenationalsentinel.com/ 2019/02/22 /despite-near-universal-negative-media-coverage-trumps-approval-still-better-than-obama/

Despite near-universal negative media coverage, Trump’s approval STILL better than Obama

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @3.1.2    5 months ago

tRump's approval could never be better than President Obama.  

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.1.4  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.3    5 months ago
tRump's approval could never be better than President Obama.  

The PROMISE "FREE" (cell phones and insurance) jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif , is hard to overcome, but Trumps done it ! jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

Did you read what I supplied to you ? jrSmiley_100_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Ozzwald
3.1.5  Ozzwald  replied to  It Is ME @3.1.4    5 months ago
The PROMISE "FREE" (cell phones and insurance) , is hard to overcome, but Trumps done it !

Ignorance is not a good thing to be proud of...

The Obama Phone?

Q: Has the Obama administration started a program to use "taxpayer money" to give free cell phones to welfare recipients?

A: No. Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.

The SafeLink program has actually been offering cell phones to low-income households in some states since 2008, not beginning "earlier this year," as the e-mail claims. But the program is rooted in a deeper history.

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.1.6  It Is ME  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.5    5 months ago

So "Friends of Obama" were spoon fed what already existed, for a "Vote" ?

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.1.7  It Is ME  replied to  It Is ME @3.1.6    5 months ago

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/19/these-states-depend-on-obama-phone-the-most.html

"Lifeline subsidizes wireline and mobile service for the poor, and served at least 12 million low-income Americans last year. The program is often referred to—often derisively— as the “Obama phone” because although the program technically began in 1985, disbursements grew to $2.2 billion during President Barack Obama’s first term . "

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @3.1.7    5 months ago

So what?

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.1.9  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.8    5 months ago
So what?

So what ?

Really ? 

Do you know what the original conversation was about ? jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.10  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @3.1.9    5 months ago

Yes I do.

Do you?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
3.1.11  Ozzwald  replied to  It Is ME @3.1.7    5 months ago

Wow, I'm impressed, you are now including links to show that your own earlier claims were wrong.  Very big of you.

However I also notice that you are once again trying to misrepresent the facts.

as the “Obama phone” because although the program technically began in 1985, disbursements grew to $2.2 billion during President Barack Obama’s first term   .

But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
3.1.12  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.11    5 months ago

You know who DOES pay for the phones/service? You, and me, and everyone here on your monthly telephone bill. It's called The Universal Service Fund (look at your bill. It's right there) and is anywhere from a few cents to a couple dollars a month for each and every phone account cellular or land line thanks to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Income redistribution basically). And if you don't think they pocket some of those bucks you are sadly mistaken. 

And therefore, yes. It is funded with taxpayer (you and me) funds. GovCo just isn't in the middle of it. It's just us involuntarily "giving".

 
 
 
loki12
3.2  loki12  replied to  pat wilson @3    5 months ago
So you're crowing about 49% ?

I wonder what douchebag had this approval rating and got re-elected?

                                approve       disaprove   no opinion

2012 Jan 30-Feb 5 46 47

8

3 points better than "O"dickhead the daft at the same time.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4  JohnRussell    5 months ago
In the end it is the people who get to decide on a President's character

Obama was elected twice , had a majority of the popular vote both times, and had a larger electoral margin than Trump both times. 

And there are still those who call him a Muslim and a traitor and worse. 

You are just not a serious person Vic. 

-

It doesnt matter who says Trump has character, reality says otherwise. Whatever popularity Trump has ,be it 39 or 49, is a reflection on those who support him in the face off overwhelming evidence he is a piece of shit. 

Nothing on God's earth can change that. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @4    5 months ago
Obama was elected twice , had a majority of the popular vote both times, and had a larger electoral margin than Trump both times. 

Very historic....our first black president. The second win was interesting.


And there are still those who call him a Muslim and a traitor and worse. 

A Muslim or worse? Not I.....I have called him a radical, which he certainly was.


You are just not a serious person Vic. 

It's not necessary to get personal. A natural tendency of progressives!


It doesnt matter who says Trump has character

Nor who says he lacks it. Elections are all that counts.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    5 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @4    5 months ago

Despite billions worth of Free media support and trumps manifest inadequacies, Democrats are still struggling mightily to convince people to support them. Why is that?

do Democrats ever wonder why the public isn’t buying what they are selling?

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.3.1  evilgenius  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.3    5 months ago
Democrats are still struggling mightily to convince people to support them. Why is that?

Current aggregate polling is showing 52.2% Trump disapproval rating among likely voters and losing to 4 of the top 5 Democrat candidates. As much as polls mean anything this far out from November...  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  JohnRussell    5 months ago

I blame moderates and independents for this poll result.  We know Trumps base is only 35 or 40%. Now he has 49% approval this week. The only way that could happen is for a lot of independents and moderates to say they approve of him. 

This is just after the House managers proved he was guilty in the Senate trial. 

Only independents can "normalize" Trump and make a path for him to re-election.  The ones that gave him approval in this poll need to be ashamed of themselves. 

 
 
 
zuksam
5.1  zuksam  replied to  JohnRussell @5    5 months ago

The moderates and independents are going to reelect Trump despite the fact they don't like him personally. They approve of his Policies and the Economy and they're scared shitless of the Progressive Agenda.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  zuksam @5.1    5 months ago

So they would rather see a pathological liar con man life long crook and bigot be president than a Joe Biden or Pete Buttigieg? 

Fuck people who think like that. 

America does not have to last forever. Every empire in world history has come to an end. This one will too. Having Trump in power for 8 years will only hasten it along. 

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.3  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    5 months ago

If Sanders or Warren gets the Dem nomination, Trump's re-election is practically a shoe-in.

I personally will hold my nose and vote for one of them if I have to - there is no way I could vote for Trump - but there are a lot of independents who would decide that their far-left policies are scarier than Trump. I disagree with them, but that's their viewpoint. If the Dems can't come up with a decent moderate candidate this time around, that's on them. They've had 3 years to learn from their mistakes in the last election. And from the GOP's mistakes in the last election, which brought us Trump.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  katrix @5.1.3    5 months ago

In the first place neither Warren or Sanders would be able to implement "far left" laws when 60 votes are needed in the Senate.  And I seriously doubt if the House would vote for "far left" policies either. 

Sanders and Warren both want a better deal for the 99%, if thats what you call "far left" . Every other advanced country on earth has some form of universal health care, why shouldnt we?  Trump wants to reneg on guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions.  Is that what you want? Is that better than Warren or Sanders? 

I'm beginning to think America deserves to go to hell, between Trump and these "independents" who think it is fine to support a pathological liar. 

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.5  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    5 months ago

No most would rather see someone besides a leftist or socialist.

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.6  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    5 months ago

I'm beginning to think that ultra-partisan Democrats deserve to go to hell, since they think independents and moderates - who make up most of America - are so evil.

Since you seem to agree that Sanders and Warren are too far left for most Americans - by your statement that they wouldn't actually be able to implement far left laws - then one might think you'd realize that a moderate is the way to go for the Dem nomination. I want Trump out, and Sanders or Warren are not the way we get there.

As soon as Bernie said he is a democratic socialist, he shot himself in the foot.

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.7  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    5 months ago

Sanders and Warren want what is best to feed their cronies.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.1.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    5 months ago

The Democrats will get rid of the legislative filibuster if they have 50 Senators and the Presidency. People understand that. 

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.9  MUVA  replied to  katrix @5.1.6    5 months ago

Maybe at some point there will a third party for independents and the swamp will finally start to drain.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.10  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  katrix @5.1.6    5 months ago

It's really about making the indies and moderates the fall guys if Trump wins. 

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.11  katrix  replied to  MUVA @5.1.9    5 months ago
Maybe at some point there will a third party for independents and the swamp will finally start to drain.

And then they'll turn into the swamp - but hopefully that would take some time.

Unfortunately, both parties keep coming up with such crappy candidates that people are afraid to vote third party; everyone feels we have to choose the lesser of two evils, even if we can't agree on which is lesser. And a third party vote often ends up being a vote for the other side.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @5.1.9    5 months ago

A party for independents makes no sense to me.   The idea behind independents is that we do not rely upon a party to set the direction for our thinking.   This means that independents could vote for a candidate regardless of party.   So members of a true independent party would be voting for candidates of a 'competing' party.

A better third party, IMO, would be a Libertarian party.   The third party needs to be something that has an ideological basis (not simply critical thinking) otherwise it does not seem to make sense as a party.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.13  JohnRussell  replied to  katrix @5.1.6    5 months ago

Trump is the worst president in American history. 

The worst. There is not a sliver of doubt that is what history will judge him as. 

History judges presidents on their character. 

Do you seriously believe that Bernie Sanders will be worse than Trump? 

Come on. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.14  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.10    5 months ago
It's really about making the indies and moderates the fall guys if Trump wins. 

It's up to you. If you don't want to be the fall guy then stand against Donald Trump.  The Democrats cant do it alone and the Republicans sure as hell are not going to help. 

Are you seriously going to try and tell me that if Trump gets 50% of the vote it will be all the Democrats fault? Who are you trying to make the fall guy? 

 
 
 
It Is ME
5.1.15  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.13    5 months ago
Trump is the worst president in American history. 

And what makes for a supposed "good" president ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.16  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.13    5 months ago
History judges presidents on their character. 

Mostly the judgment is a function of accomplishments and failures.

FDR's infidelity is an asterisk among his accomplishments and failures.   Same with Kennedy and Clinton.

Nixon certainly is judged on his character flaws leading to Watergate, but otherwise would have been judged on what he did in office.

Do you seriously believe that Bernie Sanders will be worse than Trump? 

In terms of accomplishments, Sanders would be a failure as PotUS.

The electorate continues to largely ignore Trump's character flaws and I believe that is because he is presiding over good times.

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.17  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.14    5 months ago

Some people vote for the person who they think would be the best President, rather than voting against one of the other candidates. And often that is the third party candidate. Deal with it and provide them with someone they can vote for, rather than spouting off about fall guys.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.19  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.16    5 months ago

Trump's accomplishments are largely partisan accomplishments.  He's not going to be judged a good president because put a couple far right judges on the Supreme Court, or put the most unqualified judges in history on the federal bench. 

What are the accomplishments? The unemployment rate was less than 5% when Trump took office. 

The stock market always goes up. 

He gave a big tax cut.  President are not judged good presidents just because they gave the wealthy billions of dollars in tax cuts. 

What else? Has he brought peace between Israel and the Palestinians? Ended N Koreas nuclear threat?  

Did he preside over comprehensive immigration reform? 

Has he given us a health care plan? 

What has he done that makes him a good president? 

He's lied 10,000 times.   Maybe thats good. 

He's tried to cheat in two elections. maybe thats a good thing. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.20  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.16    5 months ago
character flaws

Character flaws? He's a fucking pathological liar.  He's an open buffoon.  He's an ignoramus. 

Character flaws? lol. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.21  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.19    5 months ago
What are the accomplishments? 

His accomplishments are those which history decides as good under his watch.   Do you not even realize that he will get credit for the economy (as do all presidents)?

Character flaws? He's a fucking pathological liar.  He's an open buffoon.  He's an ignoramus.  Character flaws? lol. 

Yes, John, 'character flaws'.    This is again how you shoot yourself in the foot.   Instead of agreeing that Trump's key problem is his flawed character you mock my comment because, it would seem, my language was not sufficiently bat-shit crazy emotional.    


Don't let your hatred of the individual cloud your ability to objectively analyze reality.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.22  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.21    5 months ago

I dont hate Donald Trump, I see him clearly. You make excuses for him. 

If you didnt have a habit of making excuses for him, I never would have said a word about it to you. 

Trump should be out of office TODAY. He's not qualified to represent this country. He has never been qualified, unless the qualifications are that you be a KNOWN liar, crook, bigot, and moron ON THE DAY YOU TAKE OFFICE!

And he was ALL of those things on Jan 20 2017. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.23  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.22    5 months ago
You make excuses for him. 

Quote where I am making excuses for Trump.

If you didnt have a habit of making excuses for him, I never would have said a word about it to you. 

Quote where I am making excuses for Trump.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.24  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.23    5 months ago

No one is making excuses for him. I am utterly confused at where John would come up with that.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.25  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.22    5 months ago

Hell he was all of those things on Nov 8 2016. 

and on the day in Jun of 2015 when he came down the escalator

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.26  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.24    5 months ago

Oh please. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.27  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.24    5 months ago
I am utterly confused at where John would come up with that.

It is bizarre.  jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

It is also ill-advised.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.28  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.12    5 months ago

Libertarians have a specific ideology that I can't get on board with. I would rather have a moderate party. One that could bring unification. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.29  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.28    5 months ago

I doubt we will see a viable third party in our lifetimes, but my point was that a party needs a platform and that necessitates an ideology.   Critical thinking is not an ideology.

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.30  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.22    5 months ago
Trump should be out of office TODAY. He's not qualified to represent this country. He has never been qualified

Now I can understand why some people claim the impeachment was an attempt to invalidate the election. You are not helping those of us who think he legitimately deserved to be impeached for specific acts he committed while in office. And I admit that I despise Trump. I detest him. I wouldn't spit on him if he were on fire - but he still got elected and we don't remove a president just because I didn't want him in office. That would be a very dangerous precedent to set.

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.31  Ender  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.28    5 months ago

There are some extreme Libertarians that would literally want lawlessness.

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.32  Ender  replied to  katrix @5.1.30    5 months ago

Can't stand him either but sadly he still has a large following.

A lot of people will bite their tongue and vote for him, especially when the attacks begin after we have a Dem nom.

There is a lot of people that think things like tax cuts are good and him trying to push around other leaders/nations, is in our best interest.

Some would cheer on cuts/restrictions to Medicaid and Medicare (which I think will come in a second term) until it impacts them. Then they would still find a way to blame others for not helping him to do it right.

I know some don't agree with me but someone like Bernie (Imo) has no chance. Once they start on the socialist meme, he would be toast.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.33  TᵢG  replied to  Ender @5.1.32    5 months ago
I know some don't agree with me but someone like Bernie (Imo) has no chance. Once they start on the socialist meme, he would be toast.

I agree.   The general electorate is simply not on board with giving more power to the federal government (statism).   Frankly, I am surprised Bernie is taken seriously by anyone.   What he wants is something that cannot be accomplished in even 8 years as it goes against the culture (and hard infrastructure) of the nation.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.34  JohnRussell  replied to  katrix @5.1.30    5 months ago

Katrix, on the day Trump was elected, it was KNOWN that he is a liar, crook, bigot, and moron.  KNOWN. Although the media didnt do a good enough job showing all that before the election, it was there pretty much in the open for any interested people to see. 

I knew early on that the problem in the country was not only trump, or maybe even mainly trump, the problem is that there are a LOT of people who will knowingly vote in a known liar ,crook, bigot and moron. 

Trump supporters ARE THE problem in America today.  Without this group of people, who daily support and cheer on someone who has lied 15,000 times since he took office, the impeachment would not have failed. We would have got Bolton to testify and he incriminates Trump. But because of his support and his cult like hold over his supporters, only two republicans voted for witnesses at the impeachment. They are afraid Trump will sic his supporters on them if they go against him. 

I want to ask Tig where on this forum he has criticized TRUMP SUPPORTERS.   Do you know? 

Trump supporters are THE number one problem in America today, not Bernie Sanders. 

Tig and Perrie criticize Sanders. When have they criticized trump supporters? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.35  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.33    5 months ago

Tig, when are you going to criticize and belittle Trump supporters?  They are sustaining a known liar crook bigot and moron.  Without that support he blows away. 

We see you can attack Sanders, when are you going to attack Trump supporters? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.36  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.35    5 months ago
Tig, when are you going to criticize and belittle Trump supporters? 

Hopefully never.   I do not want to personally attack / belittle people.

We see you can attack Sanders, when are you going to attack Trump supporters? 

Do you know the difference between analysis and personal attack?   Seems to me that you do not.

I am not going to attack Trump supporters, Sanders supporters, Warren supporters, Biden supporters, etc.   You should follow my example.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
5.1.37  r.t..b...  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.33    5 months ago
I am surprised Bernie is taken seriously by anyone. 

Hence his support from the youngest and most idealistic demographic, not realizing that the 'socialism' tag is even worse than 'impeached' in today's electoral reality. Iowa continues to have a difficult time, but from exit data, the main factor in making their choice indicates  'defeating trump' was double any singular issue or policy point. Sanders (and Warren for that matter) will be painted with the divisive, incendiary brush, though the final tally may fly in the face of the polling data. Expect a 'socialism' sobriquet tonight in the State of the Union rant.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.38  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.36    5 months ago
Do you know the difference between analysis and personal attack?   Seems to me that you do not.

OK. Analyze them. Make excuses for people who sustain a known liar crook bigot and moron in the most powerful position in the world. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.39  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.36    5 months ago

Trump supporters are WHY impeachment failed. The senators who could have assured the evidence would be heard said no out of fear that trump would turn his supporters on them. 

If I remember correctly, you said impeachment shouldnt have happened because the Democrats didnt have enough evidence.  Not one word from you demonstrating the understanding that the evidence wouldnt happen because of Trump supporters. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.40  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.34    5 months ago
I want to ask Tig where on this forum he has criticized TRUMP SUPPORTERS.   Do you know? 

Make up your mind John.   Have you backed down from your ridiculous allegation that I make excuses for Trump?   Are you now changing your complaint to my lack of personal attacks on Trump supporters?    Well I do not intentionally criticize Trump supporters.   I criticize Trump.   You should try focusing on Trump and not individuals.

Trump supporters are THE number one problem in America today, not Bernie Sanders. 

The logic behind that (it seems) is, at best, that Trump is in office because of his supporters.    You can criticize supporters until your face grows even bluer but that will continue to be nothing short of personal attacks.   The credible criticism is of Trump.   If someone makes a pro-Trump argument then rebut the argument factually and with reason.  That will be far more effective than attacking your interlocutors.   And, noting again, it is tactically stupid for you to attack those who do not support Trump but fail to reach a level of shrill emotional rhetoric that you find to be acceptable.

Tig and Perrie criticize Sanders. When have they criticized trump supporters? 

So here you compare criticism of a political candidate to criticism of individual voters.   Focus on the issues rather than fellow members.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.1.41  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.34    5 months ago
Although the media didnt do a good enough job showing all that before the election,

Bullshit. MSNBC, CNN and several others all couldn't wait to get the next gotcha on Trump from the moment he came down the escalator......almost non stop. It was out there. No one cared. It was time for a change and, as Steyer puts it in one of his ads, "Trump defies conventional wisdom" and THAT my friend is exactly what got him elected. And the Democrats are going down that same dead end trail. Libs never learn.....................................

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.42  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.38    5 months ago

I think the point is, sometimes when attacked people dig in.

Harden their hearts, so to speak.

Hillary still gets lambasted for the deplorable meme.

His die-hard supporters are never going to abandon him. The people that need to be won over are the more independent/moderate people.

If someone is tired of trump being nasty and negative, why would they respond to someone being nasty and negative on the other side. 

Let them show their true colours and offer something more.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.43  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.40    5 months ago
The credible criticism is of Trump.

There is WAY more than enough criticism to go around. 

His supporters enable him to survive when he lies every day, acts like a complete buffoon, and tries to cheat on his next election. 

It is totally obvious that his supporters are a major issue in America today. I would say THE issue. 

One you have totally avoided for three or four years. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.44  JohnRussell  replied to  Ender @5.1.42    5 months ago
His die-hard supporters are never going to abandon him. The people that need to be won over are the more independent/moderate people.

If someone is tired of trump being nasty and negative, why would they respond to someone being nasty and negative on the other side. 

Let them show their true colours and offer something more.

Trump survives only because he has supporters that dont care if he lies cheats and steals, as long as he attacks and punishes people they dont like. 

This is obviously a major issue in America. Saying to everyone "be nice" is not an answer. 

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.45  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.44    5 months ago

I don't think having other people turn into a trump type person is an answer either.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.46  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.1.41    5 months ago

Just Jim NC TttH, 

Every word you just said proves I am right. Thanks. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.47  JohnRussell  replied to  Ender @5.1.45    5 months ago

This discussion here began because I said independents must be approving of Trump at least to some extent otherwise he wouldnt have 49% approval. 

So why are they supporting someone who is completely unqualified to hold office? 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.48  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.1.41    5 months ago

You have a short memory my friend. Even then the Republican party didn't want Trump when he first came down the escalator. The difference is that the Republicans sucked it up, when he became the President, and the Dems said "never". 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.49  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.48    5 months ago
the Republicans sucked it up,

Sucked what up? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.50  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.38    5 months ago
OK. Analyze them. Make excuses for people who sustain a known liar crook bigot and moron in the most powerful position in the world. 

Focus on Trump, not the voters.   You will not persuade anyone by attacking them personally.   The best chance you have at persuading someone is to make a good argument.   Thus, make good arguments for why people should not vote for Trump.   Demeaning them is counter-productive.

Trump supporters are WHY impeachment failed. The senators who could have assured the evidence would be heard said no out of fear that trump would turn his supporters on them. 

I think you are looking at this far too emotionally.   To convict (and thus remove) a President is a very big deal which has never occurred in our history.   The case supporting an impeachment should be solid before it is walked to the Senate because that body requires a 2/3 majority vote to convict.   This is especially true when the party of the President is in the majority.   If I were Pelosi, I would not even consider an impeachment vote unless the case assembled was sufficient to get at least a bi-partisan vote in the House.   Short of that, how on Earth did she or the managers ever expect to get a 2/3 quorum conviction in the senate?   

A partisan impeachment being met by a partisan acquittal does not surprise me in the slightest.   And I do not interpret this as the R senators all being Trump supporters.   To me this is a partisan act being met by partisan refutation.

If I remember correctly, you said impeachment shouldnt have happened because the Democrats didnt have enough evidence.  Not one word from you demonstrating the understanding that the evidence wouldnt happen because of Trump supporters. 

Is this your half-assed attempt to try to argue that I defend Trump?    My analysis is indeed that the Ds failed to deliver a case that would persuade a 2/3 quorum vote of an R-majority Senate.   That is analysis of an action.   You think that is defending Trump?    Buy a vowel.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5.1.51  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.49    5 months ago

They learned from their mistake of thinking he couldn't win. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.52  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.50    5 months ago

I dont want to discuss the specifics of impeachment. They impeached him because they had a great deal of evidence and it is their duty. 

It is the duty of the republican senators to seek additional evidence if requested and they denied it out of fear of trump and his voters. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.53  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.52    5 months ago
It is the duty of the republican senators to seek additional evidence if requested and they denied it out of fear of trump and his voters. 

You have access to all 51 minds?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.54  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.50    5 months ago
My analysis is indeed that the Ds failed to deliver a case that would persuade a 2/3 quorum vote of an R-majority Senate.   That is analysis of an action.   You think that is defending Trump?    Buy a vowel.

Why were the Democrats unable to complete their case in the Senate? Because of trump ( the defendant of all people) and his voters who hold a "sword" over the Republican senate. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.55  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.54    5 months ago

Seems to me you are the one making excuses.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.56  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.55    5 months ago

I've never suggested that Trump should win unless the Democratic nominee is a moderate, but I think you have. 

Trump is not fit for office, and should lose to anyone. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.57  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.56    5 months ago
I've never suggested that Trump should win unless the Democratic nominee is a moderate, but I think you have

Deliver the quote John.    I suggest you stop making shit up.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.58  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.34    5 months ago
Tig and Perrie criticize Sanders. When have they criticized trump supporters? 

First of all, I am tired of being called out by you. 

I am criticizing Sanders because there is a chance that I can get a candidate I can get behind. Trump is a fait accompli. There is not a chnace I am voting for him.

And to clarify things, I don't criticize Sanders' supporters so I am very consistent in not criticizing Trump supporters. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.1.59  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.46    5 months ago
Every word you just said proves I am right. Thanks.

Read it again. It was all negative. Billy Bush ring a bell? How about Porny Daniels? And a plethora of other negative pushes trying to discount his viability as a candidate.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.60  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.58    5 months ago
And to clarify things, I don't criticize Sanders' supporters so I am very consistent in not criticizing Trump supporters. 

Oh, I wasnt aware that Sanders supporters support someone who lies multiple times every day, and is a crook, bigot and moron. 

Nice to know you put Sanders supporters and Trump supporters on a similar plane. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.1.61  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.48    5 months ago
You have a short memory my friend. Even then the Republican party didn't want Trump when he first came down the escalator.

Never said they did want him and they too jumped on the negative. And I have a short memory? I don't think so.

The difference is that the Republicans sucked it up, when he became the President, and the Dems said "never". 

The Republicans heard the voice of the American people and the Electoral College. You know that little snag that Mrs. Clinton didn't anticipate. The Republicans got behind their candidate due to that fact. They didn't want to jump on the petulant cries for impeachment from election day and actually paid attention to their constituents. The dems said never from the get go. From never be the candidate to won't last six months. Just because it was non stop Trump in the media, they did him no favors except to build his base due to the attacks. You know the old "well if the Dems don't like him, he may be just what we want" mantra. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.62  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.58    5 months ago
Trump is a fait accompli. There is not a chance I am voting for him.

Well , I do have to congratulate you for that decision, though I suspected as much. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
5.1.63  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.60    5 months ago
And to clarify things, I don't criticize Sanders' supporters so I am very consistent in not criticizing Trump supporters. 
Oh, I wasnt aware that Sanders supporters support someone who lies multiple times every day, and is a crook, bigot and moron. 

That's what you got from that ? jrSmiley_103_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.64  JohnRussell  replied to  It Is ME @5.1.63    5 months ago

Butt out. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
5.1.65  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.64    5 months ago
Butt out. 

What is it about Butts and Rumps that fascinates Liberal types ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Raven Wing
5.1.66  Raven Wing  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.58    5 months ago
First of all, I am tired of being called out by you. 

jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.68  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.19    5 months ago

I enjoy my tax cut and I’m not a billionaire I think you mean he gave successful people a tax cut.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.69  XDm9mm  replied to  MUVA @5.1.68    5 months ago
I enjoy my tax cut and I’m not a billionaire I think you mean he gave successful people a tax cut.

Actually, anyone with a job and earning realized they got a tax reduction.  The operative word of course is JOB.   Those without jobs, or living on welfare don't grasp that reality.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.72  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.1.61    5 months ago
The Republicans heard the voice of the American people and the Electoral College. You know that little snag that Mrs. Clinton didn't anticipate. The Republicans got behind their candidate due to that fact.

Our representatives seem to have forgotten what Edmund Burke, a member of parliament said:" "that a representative owes the People not only his industry, but his judgment, and he betrays them if he sacrifices it to their opinion." The individuals or the party are supposed to think for themselves. A few do, and they are called traitors, but I admire their independence of thought.

As for Mrs. Clinton, her mistake was taking 3 states for granted and not doing her due diligence by visiting them. For that, her whole party should be pissed at her.

They didn't want to jump on the petulant cries for impeachment from election day and actually paid attention to their constituents.

Why would they do that to one of their own who won? No party commits suicide. 

The dems said never from the get go. From never be the candidate to won't last six months. 

Of course, they wouldn't. As far as they were concerned he was the last person they wanted as President. I get that, and I am not a dem. I seem to remember a similar feeling when Obama was voted in. In fact, Trump led it. Birtherism was an attempt to get him thrown out of office. 

So really, all we have stated is the obvious. This is partisanism at it's worst.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.73  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.64    5 months ago

Hey, I have to agree with him.

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.74  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.34    5 months ago

Attacking the people that voted for Trump again. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6  Jeremy Retired in NC    5 months ago

Funny how the people who swear by polls when they put the left in a good light cry when it shows their opposition in a good light.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
7  Sean Treacy    5 months ago

Trumps favorability rating was 37.5 when he was elected, for context. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

The Magic Eight Ball
igknorantzrulz
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
devangelical


34 visitors