Poll: Trump Approval Falls Below 40%

A new CNN/SSRS Poll for the period September 06, 2018 to September 09, 2018 shows that Trump's approval level has dropped 6 points just in the last month. Overall, only 36% approve of the way Trump is handling his job.

Here's the actual poll results, the results begin on page 16 (no link to CNN news article due to auto-play video and too many ads).

< S.C. Prepares for Florence | Hurricane Florence Rips the N.C. Banks >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It really feels like (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 12, 2018 at 11:45:07 AM EST
    The frame has changed.  

    We are now discussing broadly the possibility the president is a demented child.

    This is not, as the say, sustainable

    Holy hell (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 12, 2018 at 11:56:21 AM EST
    Literally as I typed that (commercial delay) Piggy Noonan just said - I fu@king swear - "...it's a "funny thing" with Donald Trump.  He knows he doesn't sound "presidential" .....I think feels if he acts "presidential" and "fully dignified" it is a consession to his critics"

    I swear to god

    And rest my case


    Donald Trump's resume and obituary (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by fishcamp on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 10:05:30 PM EST
    should read `fired due to insanity'.

    Morning Joe (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 11, 2018 at 02:39:52 PM EST
    Was quoting 5 recent polls that all had him mid 30s


    Trump can (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 11, 2018 at 04:40:18 PM EST
    commiserate with his dear friend, Vladimir. Putin's popularity, too, has fallen as a result of his proposal to increase the retirement age (a left over from the Sovietsky era); and, his attempt to soften the proposal appears to not have had the desired effect.

     No wonder, since the change, for women is from age 55 to 60 (instead of 63), and for men, it is unchanged: from 60 to 65.  Putin's plan for women is reflected in his statement that "in our country, there is a special, gentle attitude to women."

     With the retirement age for men at 65, and the life expectancy of men in Russia being 66 (the European average is 79), the plan does portend budgetary economies.  

    Putin has appealed to Russians, taking the uncustomary step of discussing the "painful" matter on T.V., claiming that without urgent action, Russia risked economic collapse, hyperinflation, and threats to national security.

      Putin's unpopularity is aggravated by his promise in 2005 that he would never raise the retirement ages. However, Russia is faced not only with an economy hobbled by falling oil prices and Western sanctions, but also, concerns for demographic changes over time.

      Russia's population decreased by 164,000 for the first six months of this year, compared with 119,000 during the same period last year. By 2044, the government predicts that the number of pensioners may equal the number of people at work.

    Putin's proposal has resulted in wide-spread protests... no doubt to the envy of that other leader whose popularity is cratering, Putin has arrested and jailed Alexi Navalny, a protest leader, who says the change in retirement ages is a robbery masquerading as necessary reform.

     It would seem prudent for all such Russian proest leaders to use a geiger counter to stir their tea.


    No wonder (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 11, 2018 at 05:13:33 PM EST
    the GOP loves Putin so much. He sounds just like them. I can see Paul Ryan saying the exact same thing Putin just spouted.

    I think (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 11, 2018 at 02:41:11 PM EST
    This will help (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 06:45:18 PM EST
    "3000 people did not die in the two hurricanes that hit Puerto Rico. When I left the Island, AFTER the storm had hit, they had anywhere from 6 to 18 deaths. As time went by it did not go up by much. Then, a long time later, they started to report really large numbers, like 3000 . . . This was done by the Democrats in order to make me look as bad as possible when I was successfully raising Billions of Dollars to help rebuild Puerto Rico. If a person died for any reason, like old age, just add them onto the list."

    -- President Trump, in a series of tweets, Sept. 13, 2018

    Just heard an interesting question (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 06:56:41 PM EST
    Would it be worse if he's just lying here and knows he's lying of if he really doesn't know he's lying?

    Worse (none / 0) (#9)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 07:28:03 PM EST
    for whom? Our country is fked no matter what.

    Lying has been part of tRump's MO for decades, he was well aware of it in the past so I suspect that he is aware of it, at least at at some level. It's also probable that he is so far around the bend that he is unable to even discern the truth of anything so he almost unerringly defaults to his trying to lie his way out of anything and everything.

    Why did he even tweet this? The story was already disappearing from the headlines, soon to become almost forgotten by the general public and he goes ahead and throws gas on the embers.


    Why? (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 07:37:17 PM EST
    Great question.  One reason I think it may well be he really no longer knows the difference.

    Personally, I think that's probably worse.


    Indeed (none / 0) (#14)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 14, 2018 at 08:07:43 AM EST
    delusional is way more scary than deceitful.

    The Manafort hearing tomorrow (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 07:40:41 PM EST
    Is probably going to make some news.   One way or another.

    Just heard a lawyer point out the Cohen also got a deal with no "co-operation".

    Then implicated Trump in at least two crimes in his statement.


    We now (none / 0) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 08:12:19 PM EST
    seem to have Felonious Friday quite often since Trump has been in the Kremlin Annex.

    Category (none / 0) (#15)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 14, 2018 at 11:05:39 AM EST
    Five news from from Manafort front
    President Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort is pleading guilty Friday to two criminal charges under terms of a plea deal that includes his cooperation as a potential witness for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III.

    Collins is appalled (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 02:02:39 PM EST
    Sen. Susan Collins is "appalled" by President Donald Trump's tweet attacking the woman who accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, she told reporters in her home state Maine on Friday.

    Welcome to our world

    All Talk (none / 0) (#17)
    by jmacWA on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 02:15:36 PM EST
    Never Action

    Collins (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 02:49:54 PM EST
    action will be to confirm Kavanaugh, if he gets that far.

    How convenient. (none / 0) (#18)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 02:33:05 PM EST
    The NYTimes has a so-called blockbuster article on Rod Rosentein recording his conversations with Trump, during the period between firing Comey and appointment of Mueller.  And, of Rosentein discussing the 25th Amendment.

    The NYTimes article was co-authored by White House stenographer, Michael Schmidt.   And, Ben Witters, of Lawfare blog, often on MSNBC, as a non-lawyer giving legal opinions, has weighed in that Rosenstein's denial was a non-denial.  Wittes, a friend of Comey's, was ready with his opinion/tweets. And, ready to go on that Whelan fiasco.  

    A great time for a distraction, and, of course, to give an even bigger distraction of firing Rosenstein. Schmidt usually works with Maggie Haberman, another WH access maven.  Sorry the NYTimes found it necessary to present these allegations today.

    A thinly (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 03:49:55 PM EST
    sourced hit job if you ask me. Empty wheel has a good take
    Not a single one of these people, by this description, was actually a witness to the episodes. Indeed, by description, none of them have even read the memos memorializing the events directly, but have instead simply been briefed secondhand.
    and the smear
    All that leads the NYT to the paragraph where they let a bunch of third hand sources to the events claim this is proof that Rosenstein was acting erratically when he made the decision to appoint Robert Mueller.

    [T]hey called Mr. Rosenstein's comments an example of how erratically he was behaving while he was taking part in the interviews for a replacement F.B.I. director, considering the appointment of a special counsel and otherwise running the day-to-day operations of the more than 100,000 people at the Justice Department.

    Not sure, anyway, (none / 0) (#22)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 04:09:01 PM EST
    how Rosenstein, as deputy attorney general, would be involved in effecting the 25th Amendment. Section 4 names the vice president or the majority of the principal officers of the executive departments. Even though Sessions recused himself from Russian matters, it would be the Attorney General, not the Deputy who would be a part of determinations of the president being unable (unfit?_to continue as president.  

    There (none / 0) (#24)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 05:16:33 PM EST
    is probably a lot they talked about at that time, including methods of removal and/or investigating a sitting president.

     Given the context of the times it was probably understandable and of course there was chaos, all of it caused by tRump.

    Consider the time line in the three weeks between Rosenstein's confirmation and his appointment of Mueller, Comey had been fired(and McCabe attacked), tRump had lied about it to the public using Rosenstein as cover, and then bragged about the real reasons to the Russians while passing them top secret information. Then(and still) the DOJ and the FBI had many reasons to believe that tRump was a danger to national security, he was essentially committing obstruction of justice in plain sight, there had to be a lot of barnstorming on what do we do now.

    Even if you look at all this in the worst way, it goes to show that the appointment of Mueller was the best move for the country and the justice system, despite the apologists claims.


    And (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 07:29:17 PM EST
    I'm kind of past worrying about Trump "stopping" Mueller.
    Mueller has been 10 moves ahead of Cheeto from day one.  I am confident he has so may ways to win if Trump tries anything crazy.

    He will have farmed stuff out to states.  I would bet he has a blizzard of indictments and subpoenas ready to drop at a moment's notice.


    I'm (none / 0) (#26)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 07:56:02 PM EST
    optimistic on that front also, but still worry what then? Indictments can be pardoned away, state charges might hit close to home, but Trump is arguably Constitutionally immune while from those while in office.

    There still is no good way to curb his powers in the short to mid run.  I believe if and when Mueller is fired his previously tight ship will spring a million leaks and some completely damning facts will come to light. However even then we will be dependent on the blue wave coming to fruition, impeachment by the House and convincing enough goobers in the Senate to convict. None of those are a given.

    Even that best case scenario is four or five months into the future and meanwhile the damage he could do is immense.


    There (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:16:43 PM EST
    really is no solution in the short run and that is a sad fact. The only solution right now is to take the house and if that happens gum up his entire agenda. Nothing will be passed and he will be investigated to the hilt and all his dirty laundry made public.

    It could (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:18:21 PM EST
    It reminds me of my kidney stone.  The choice was to keep the kidney stone or send a laser up my urinary track.

    Neither option sounded good.

    But in the end I was happy and stone free.

    I don't mean to sound unserious.  If you have ever had a kidney stone you will know it's very very serious.

    On Kavanaugh, I'm starting to think ramming him through might be, at this point, the best option for us.  Kavanaugh is the most unpopular court nominee in the history of polling.  His numbers are literally crashing.  He is -20 with women and -19 with independents.  There are multiple polls including a brand new one from USA TODAY.   If they do this the Senate is ours.  Given Bretts performance it seems quite possible he might be removed.

    If they are forced to pull him they will almost certainly push through someone even worse in the lame duck session who might in fact be much harder to remove.


    And BTW (none / 0) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:23:07 PM EST
    Ralph Reeds theory is if they ram him through it will mean the right will turn out in droves in Nov.

    Will they?  Why would they? They will have what they most want.

    It will damn sure make dems vote


    My thoughts (none / 0) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 09:21:01 AM EST
    are evangelicals will definitely sit home in November if Kavanaugh fails. I mean the GOP has been promising them this for literally DECADES. If Kavanaugh gets on the court they maybe show up but the angry women way outnumber the maybes.

    It's becoming clear (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 11:47:28 AM EST
    They will never allow an FBI investigation because they know it happened.  And an investigation would show that.  I think they would pull the nomination before allowing that.

    The "other person" defense also suggests they know it happened and the only out is it was someone else


    The "other person" (none / 0) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 12:06:44 PM EST
    defense may be something that the Democratic senators may want to explore with Kavanaugh if there is a hearing--as in,  did he help his friend Whelan, who also was a part of the nomination guidance for Kavanaugh, with this scheme.  And, for that matter,  anyone at the White House.

    And, Garrett Ventry, age 29, suddenly resigned from Grassley's Judiciary Committee staff (communications aide/spokesman for Kavanaugh nomination) amid reports that he lost his last job due to allegations of sexual harassment (a Republican lawmaker) and for padding his resume.


    Sean Hannity warns Trump (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 10:27:20 PM EST

    you absolutely should NOT fire anyone.  They are trying to set you up.

    I swear.  Not making this up.


    Yes, the timing is a bit convenient. (none / 0) (#20)
    by vml68 on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 03:18:13 PM EST
    Takes some of the attention away from the Kavanaugh allegations and the news that Cohen has had multiple interviews with Muller.

    I've Missed Something (none / 0) (#23)
    by RickyJim on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 05:12:47 PM EST
    What did Prof. Ford hope would happen after she contacted her Congressperson with her allegations against Kavanaugh?  If her intent was to  impede Kavanaugh's confirmation, did she really think her campaign would go anywhere while she remained anonymous?

    Are you under the impression ... (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 06:41:48 AM EST
    ... that one of us is actually Dr. Ford?  Because that's the only way your "question" makes sense as a genuine interrogatory.

    OTOH, (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Zorba on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 07:16:07 AM EST
    Maybe he thinks one (or more) of us can read minds.

    I Guess What She Did (2.00 / 1) (#43)
    by RickyJim on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 09:14:37 AM EST
    doesn't make sense to you either.  :-)

    Rachel is reading the Drs response (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:26:42 PM EST

    It's blistering (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:27:26 PM EST
    Wow (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:31:01 PM EST
    We pee in the direction of your threats.

    We will let you know tomorrow.


    Awsum.  Just awsum.  Brilliant.



    do you have a link for this? n/t (none / 0) (#33)
    by leap on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:46:00 PM EST

    No sorry (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:49:15 PM EST
    I was watching it live.  The letter should be up by now someplace.  Or very soon.

    Rachel (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 08:49:48 PM EST
    Was literally reading it for the first time on air.

    Here it is (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 09:19:25 PM EST
    thank you (none / 0) (#37)
    by leap on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 09:22:26 PM EST
    Ms Katz takes no Republican fhit. She seems to be on top of their games.

    Norm Ornstein (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 09:25:38 PM EST
    Just had an interesting suggestion.

    He said if nothing else the democrats should have their own hearing.   I like that idea.


    Grassley gave (none / 0) (#40)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 21, 2018 at 11:23:18 PM EST
    Dr. Ford an extension of his "take it or leave it" deadline of Fri, Sept 22 at 10 pm (ET), in keeping with her request for an additional 24 hours.

    The terms and conditions include separate sessions for Dr. Ford and Kavanaugh. Dr. Ford asked to go second, but Grassley said no, Kavanaugh will go second.  Actually, I think it is better for Dr. Ford to go first so as to set the stage and tone for her position. The second spot is customarily advantageous to rebut, although we know that Kavanaugh will be on the defensive anyway. At least, not a decisive factor, in my view.

    Grassley has not budged on using a female litigator to question Dr. Ford, rather than, as requested, the Republican senators.  Better to have the Republicans senators since they can be depended upon to embarrass themselves.  However, the professional questioner needs to appear fair, and even she needs to be careful.

     The Democratic senators, such as Senator Harris, can follow up on or moderate any inappropriate questions of the Republican senator's proxy. And, if necessary challenge the questions/questioning. However, Dr. Ford should not agree to having both the professional and the Republican senators act as a tag team.

    I think Grassley has agreed to using one camera.

    Dr.Ford, even though the terms and conditions are not all as asked, needs to work with them and she needs to make her decision to testify by the end of the newly extended time (Sat 10 pm), or it will  look as if she is getting cold feet. Unfortunately, this is what it has boiled down to, an expected outcome when dealing with those of bad faith intent, and as Mitch proclaimed, plow through.  

    Dr. Ford (none / 0) (#47)
    by KeysDan on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 02:22:57 PM EST
    will testify "next week" her attorney reported to Grassley..meeting the deadline laid down
    This is the headline. Discussion of details continue.

    Now that she has (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 03:49:58 PM EST
    Our attention.  

    I think he withdraws (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 03:54:09 PM EST
    Oh, this (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 07:33:25 PM EST
    is rich from the Wa Po:

    Kavanaugh grew frustrated when it came to questions that dug into his private life, particularly his drinking habits and his sexual proclivities...He declined to answer some questions altogether, saying they were too personal"

    Now the white house is leaking. I'm guessing he's going to be gone but when I have no idea.


    Yes, and as (none / 0) (#51)
    by KeysDan on Sat Sep 22, 2018 at 10:36:35 PM EST
    a Justice of the S.C., he would be at the mercy of Trump.  They know all his secrets and would never hesitate to hold them over him for what they wanted. Hope he realizes what a precarious position he would be in, and gets out in time to save his present federal judgship.

    From the guy (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 23, 2018 at 09:40:53 AM EST
    Who pushed for the most personal and embarrassing questions being put to Clinton about Monica.

    Karma is a b!tch


    That (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by FlJoe on Sun Sep 23, 2018 at 10:05:35 AM EST
    was positively lecherous, what he did to the family of Vincent Foster was just pure cruelty, all in the service of partisan aims.

    No means yes (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 23, 2018 at 11:50:29 AM EST
    Yep (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Sep 23, 2018 at 04:01:28 PM EST
    Karma is going to eat him alive.