Of course, new poll numbers are flying thick and fast, mostly showing Joe Biden’s lead growing slightly to moderately, especially in key swing states.
In general, they show Biden with large leads, ranging from high single digits to a few reaching double digits, nationally, and edging upward over recent days. There’s also a small, presumably insignificant and temporary, uptick in Donald Trump’s approval rating, perhaps out of sympathy over his illness with COVID-19.
But, as I’ve often noted, while Trump’s approvers are stalwart, they are too few to win him a second term. And Trump trails in most of the swing states.
One of the most amazing things about the Trump phenomenon is the astounding stability of his base. He once famously bragged that he could shoot someone in broad daylight in the middle of New York’s Fifth Avenue, and not lose any support. And that’s roughly backed up by the polling during his entire term, if we focus on his approval ratings, and if we stipulate that Trump, who deserves some blame for the number of COVID deaths, has not, apparently, shot anyone on Fifth Avenue.
Those ratings are bad, quite bad, generally mired in the very low 40s, but they never go up or down by much. I’ve watched them obsessively for more than three years and have been astonished at their stability given Trump’s horrendous performance as both a president and, especially, a human being. It seems that the members of Trump’s hard-core 40 percent will never change their view (and I’ll defend to the death their right to give their vote to whoever they think will make the best president).
But even the ridiculous vagaries of Electoral College math are not enough to win with 40 percent of the popular vote in a year without a significant third party or independent candidacy. (Bill Clinton won in 1992 with 43 percent, the year Ross Perot got 19 percent.)
(An aside to the previous remark about Trump’s horrendous performance: His supporters might dispute the part about his performance as president, especially on the economy. But that argument requires them to ignore that his atrocious performance in the management of the COVID pandemic wiped out all those good quarters of economic growth and more, while his terrible performance as a human being continues to test new lows, including his not only obnoxious but politically damaging performance in the first debate.)
But, no matter how hard you torture the ability of the Electoral College to undermine the popular vote, Trump can’t win without getting his share of the I-don’t-like-either-of-them vote. Many in this category are less focused on policy than on humanity. Unfortunately for Trump, his opponent, Joe Biden, is hard to portray as obnoxious or radical. Biden has led in the polls throughout, by a margin generally large enough to overcome the vagaries of the Electoral College, and the polls currently show him leading in a huge portion of the so-called swing states, which are the only states that matter under the above mentioned Electoral College vagaries.
So, one gathers, Trump decided to spend the first debate acting like a gorilla fighting for primacy, presumably trying to turn the election into a question of who-is-the-alpha-male. In some ways, that might have worked with his base, many of whom seem to love the alpha-male routine. But hardly anyone else.
All of which is meant to lead up to some poll numbers published Monday by the New York Times, based on the Times’ ongoing polling partnership with Siena College, of post-debate reactions in two of the biggest swing states, Pennsylvania and Florida. Both are “in play” (although Biden has led in Pennsylvania for a while, and Florida has only recently joined the list of swing states, since Trump led there by quite a bit for quite a while). Trump needs to win them both. Biden has other paths to victory.
But Trump’s primate strategy seems to have done him considerably more harm than good. According to the above-referenced Times Siena poll of likely voters in those two states combined:
- By 37-21, the likely voters said Biden won the debate.
- 65 percent said they disapproved of Trump’s “conduct” during the debate, compared to 37 percent who said that about Biden’s.
- And, 48 percent said they were less likely to support Trump after the debate, compared to 31 percent who said the same about Biden.
They’re just poll numbers. Technically, it’s just a reaction to one debate, although it’s reasonable to assume they mostly reflect underlying feelings about Trump and Biden more generally.
There’s a debate scheduled for Oct. 15. Given Trump’s health, I don’t know if that will occur. When told that some new rules might be imposed to cut down on Trump’s ability to destroy the debate by refusing to be quiet when it was Biden’s turn to talk, Trump has, so far at least, refused to accede to any such rule changes.
Apparently, there is no right in the Constitution (this isn’t really in the Constitution) that Trump values more than his right to do his dominant male primate routine at all times and places. If I had to guess, his brain tells him, contrary to what polls suggest, that constant demonstrations of an out-of-control testosterone rush is what the country really wants to see when deciding whom to trust with the nuclear launch codes for the next four years.
In case that last reference seems unkind, I would remind all that early in his term Trump complained that he didn’t see the point of having nuclear weapons if you could never use them (Trump reportedly wanted to build more of them). It was this remark, according to many sources, that caused retired Gen. James Mattis to refer to Trump as a “moron,” shortly before Mattis resigned his position as Trump’s first secretary of defense.)
Oops. As I’m sure Eric knows, Rex Tillerson was Trump’s first, secretary of state, and it was Rex who memorably called his boss a “moron.” I believe the full quote was: “He’s a f—ing moron.”
One suspects that former secretary of Defense Mattis shared that view, along with roughly 60% of the American people.
“I would remind all that early in his term Trump complained that he didn’t see the point of having nuclear weapons if you could never use them (Trump reportedly wanted to build more of them)” -Eric Black
Because I love needling Eric when he mocks Trump for something Obama did with flair, to the silence of Dems at the time – on Obama’s trillion dollar nuclear upgrade.
(Even as I am well aware, there are many a Dem here who will say it isn’t true, just because it is Obama, and the link I offer is from the Intercept, which some of you are convinced is propaganda because it doesn’t parrot whatever the Intelligence community and corporate media tell us is the Truth.)
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/23/obamas-new-rationale-for-1-trillion-nuclear-program-augurs-a-new-arms-race-with-russia/
Just so you know, some of us left-of-center types were appalled at Obama’s call for nuclear expansion. As an aside, The Intercept is not widely regarded as a credible source, at least, not in this household. It’s “a” source, but often being in opposition to “corporate” media and “the intelligence community” doesn’t automatically make it more accurate or credible. Qanon is also often in opposition to “corporate” media and “the intelligence community,” and it, too, is – so far – not widely regarded as a credible source. The number of sites decrying “corporate” media and “the intelligence community” is, frankly, staggering, but we live in times when denial – in various forms, and of various truths – is pretty popular. I’m not a big fan of “corporate media” myself, but there are those who insist – all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding – that Trump has been a fine President.
The Intercept is an independent media outlet questioning bipartisan imperial pursuits and abuses of regular people and the earth by corporations, banks and the elite.
Qanon is an anonymous trickster dropping mind-**** bombs making an ever deeper hole for evangelicals and militia types to fall into.
I get accused quite regularly of false equivalency with my Obama/Clinton/Trump-all-do-it talk, but come on man 🙂
Actually, I think the Intercept and Qanon are a good comparison. Both are just made-up nonsense.
That would be like comparing MinnPost to InfoWars. Except your comparison is far, far less accurate. Proof positive, “moderates” have no lock on truth and good faith.
So, a column on polling just days before a historic election prompts you to reply immediately with an article from 2016 just so you can beat the same drum you’ve been pounding the hell out of over and over? We get it– Democrats also bad.
This is supposed to somehow to make us pause and think there is no real choice in this election? The day after this sociopath does everything possible to undermine what medical experts and scientists have been telling us about this pandemic? I’m sure standing on the balcony; removing his mask; and then standing there like a corpulent Mussolini thrilled his flag waving cult. But it also made sure more people are going to die because even simple actions will be ignored since the other side, who believes in science, is mostly doing what the experts are advising.
By the way, since you’re so clever about needling Eric, you might be missing sort of an important point. His comment about about Trump and the nuclear button is to illustrate how really stupid and unstable the guy is. Quite sure, as hard as you look, you’re not going to come up with a quote illustrating that Obama is also stupid and unstable. Even though–he Democrat–he also bad.
All I’m trying to do is get Dems to question more seriously the course and policies of the Democratic party, as opposed to be the notTrump BAU party.
I believe Obama’s nuclear upgrade had to do with design and “use by” dates, not numbers.
I don’t think that article says what you imply.
While denuclearization is a desirable outcome, there’s a valid question as to whether it’s a smart goal if our adversaries don’t also denuclearize.
There’s a separate, also valid, question about whether modernizing the weapons is necessary. I’d flip that on its head and ask whether NOT modernizing our weapons sytems is a viable alternative. Some of these systems run on computer software that’s no longer supported by the vendors, using hardware that’s increasingly difficult to procure. That might pose a significant danger – doing nothing could pose more risk than replacing these systems.
Another trillion for nukes, trillions upon trillions for corp and bank bailouts, trillions ever year for war/security/surveillance, trillions in corporate subsides, so many trillions of debt debt debt, but nothing much for basic health care, ecological cleanup or national broadband etc.
Media like the Times, the WaPost and the major networks employ people to verify rumors.
Does the Intercept?
Obama dropping a trillion on nukes was not a rumor in need of the WaPo/NYT to ordain as truth or not, though I imagine it was ordained as necessary and good.
Waiting for an answer about the Intercept………
That is what journalists are, they verify info they receive. The Intercept surely does it just as well as the WaPo/NYT, unless it has to do with Trump, and then the corporate media run it like it is a bombshell to bring down a president before it becomes clear that it was mostly rumor. Or unless it has to do with war – If an Intelligence agent talks, WaPo/NYT squawk.
“The Intercept surely does it…”
In other words, you don’t know.
Actually, all I had to do is not practice amnesia, and then duckduckgo ‘Obama trillion nuclear.’
The problem with the Intercept isn’t its conclusions. Its how it gets them, which is by completely disregarding facts that don’t mesh with its conclusions. There are a lot of terrible right-wing news sources out there, but the fiction masquerading as journalism at the Intercept has them beat. I’m not even sure the Intercept is even left-wing since they spend so much time lying about Russia’s involvement in our elections.
History will show, most of the lying in America about Russia came from those who WANT a war against Russia. Every ruling elite needs an enemy to rally the people against, and for the eternal war profiteers especially connected to the DNC, that is Putin/Trump/Russia.
People in the leadership of both parties who despise The Intercept are Imperialists who hate any media that is not Mockingbirded, repeating whatever the Intelligence community says is the Truth with a Capital T.
As for the debate hurting Trump, I’m not surprised. He overestimates America’s tolerance for his alpha male schtick; that is only attractive to men who aspire to be one or aspire to genuflect before one, or women who want one, and there are a dwindling supply of all but the lickspittles in consumer America.
He also represents something that is dying in this entertainment paradise, love of country and the ability to conspicuously consume. Hard to say though, how much of that spirit remains, to support the Great Entertainer….
“Love of country”?! Where does that come from? Trump’s authoritarian appeal is to those who are terrified by the basic premise of the aspirational democracy that supposedly defines America – that each of us individually, and all of us together, are responsible to build a community in which all may have an opportunity to share the blessings of liberty. When the Republican base proclaims that the left hates America, it simply is projecting its own nihilism. What it deifies in Trump is the immanent rendering of all into violence and chaos.
Your comment reveals to me that the left and right in America are ever ready to talk about the other side but never to the other side. Projection works both ways when we assume we know everything about the other.
As for the left and “patriotism”, I can’t ever remember someone from the left telling my they love this country. As for “love of country” dying in America generally, that would be a classic death by a thousand cuts, most of that having to do with abject greed.
Well, WHD, I have to congratulate you on leading this thread (ostensibly about the collapse of Trump support) into merry “What About Obama!” goose chase.. Well done, sir! That Mr Markle quickly demonstrated that there is actually no real comparison between Obama’s modernization proposal and Trump’s wasteful and bellicose one slowed you down not in the least.
As for “no one” on the left “loving America”, it seems to me that we are the ones actually distressed about the “conservative” movement’s quite obvious war against the nation’s democratic traditions, the perversion for its own ends of institutions like the Supreme Court, the devolution into a country run by a political minority faction openly suppressing the vote to stay in power, and Trump’s destruction of the nation’s civil service and its accomplished bureaucracy. We are the ones distressed that the fate of the country (and perhaps the globe) has been hijacked by an anti-democratic movement. And if you can’t apprehend that this is what is going on, then your daily reading of the “Intercept” (and so much else from all sources as you maintain) has not much aided your perception of events.
Have a good day.
The Republican “perversion” of democracy has been achieved by political tactics, which political tactics between “sides” being essential to democracy. You call me a purist, but the Democratic Party for 30 years has evolved from tactical politics, to identity politics and virtue signaling. The Obama Admin was largely Dems assuming Dems were on the right side of history and the universe would reward Dems with political primacy forever. Obama and his people, in this assumption, let the national party collapse, while Republicans organized. Then Dems assumed naturally, Hillary deserved to be President, and she wore it like a royal robe. “Virtue signaling” is showing how anti-Trump I am while assuming being virtuous means I deserve to win.
Assuming Republicans too are dismantling democracy because they are destroying bureaucratic institutions is partially the false belief that bureaucratic institutions are inherently democratic, or necessarily represent democracy. But bureaucratic institutions, such as the Intelligence community, can be fundamentally undemocratic, and a casual stroll through the history of the FBI, CIA and NSA should reveal to anyone with any sense that these institutions are less about democracy and more about the consolidation of power by an unelected elite.
And that’s the view from the bubble:
Politicians know better than the experts, who have strong incentives to be accurate.
If they’re not, other experts will be on them like sharks. Failure to replicate is the ultimate intellectual sin.
Politicians, on the other hand, mostly preach to the choir.
I was slightly concerned that, after having contracted Covid-19 and needing to have a barrage of experimental treatments poured into him to keep him on his feet, Trumpolini actually would “get it”, reverse course and order the creation of an actual national Covid-19 suppression policy, which might actually boost him in the polls. Instead, he’s become even more unhinged, tweeting (in a drug-addled state) “there’s nothing to fear from Covid!” and fallaciously equating Covid with the flu, a position many of his braindead supporters have never abandoned. Once an ignoramus, always an ignoramus.
As the rafts of polls get (weekly) worse and worse for him, Trumpolini’s strategy is to have the “conservatized” courts (especially the Trumpified Supreme Court) uphold Repub minority vote suppression schemes and curtail counting of mailed-in (absentee) ballots after the tsunami hits the state election officials. This is fast becoming his only plausible route to “victory”, as at a certain point even the anti-democratic electoral college cannot save him.
“Because I love needling Eric when he mocks Trump for something Obama did with flair, to the silence of Dems at the time – on Obama’s trillion dollar nuclear upgrade.” – William Hunter Duncan
Classic what-about-ism.
PS–I’m not a Democrat.
I know. Obama was a truly great president. Trump is the personification of evil. Biden will be a truly great president. The next Republican President will be the personification of evil.
That is why some of my acquaintances in alternative media are calling 2016 Year Zero for Dems, because many a Dem acts like Trump sprouted out of nothing, and nothing about the bipartisan policy so good for corporations, banks and billionaires, and so very bad for wage earners and small business these past 40 years, could possibly explain the rise of Trump.
My “what about-ism” is assumed by many here to be about support for Trump. In fact, it is me trying to get Dems to take responsibility for Dem policy that lead to a crass entertainer like Trump becoming President of these United States.
Yes, indeed. No one here at EB Ink has maintained that Trump is a symptom and not a cause of the long festering disease. We were simply amazed that an unqualified demagogue became the leader of an authoritarian movement that sprang out of nothing! Year Zero!
As for you (and your friends) thinking that very few Dems share your political purity about corporatism and plutocracy, that back-patting is really getting rather tiresome and threadbare.
When the Biden presidency leads to ever more corporate and plutocratic power, and Dems congratulate themselves that Progress is restored, perhaps I will remind you about your concern about the destruction of democracy and the Institutions of governance under the Trump regime.
“My ‘what about-ism’ is assumed by many here to be about support for Trump. In fact, it is me trying to get Dems to take responsibility for Dem policy that lead to a crass entertainer like Trump becoming President of these United States.”
Your assumption isn’t reading *my* mind. Whatever your motivation, your response was off the topic.
Mr. Black wrote about tRump’s debate performance and its effect on his polls. You responded by writing about Obama.
That’s a classic what-about-ism change of subject.