The successes of President Donald Trump and their under-reporting by the media (please, no flaming)

[PointOfViewGun]

Yeap, back in November 2016 his approval ratings with the not-my-president etc was abysmal. 39-40% or something, perhaps lower. I don't recall the numbers. They are somewhere in the threads of 2016 when Trump won and the other "Hillary would win a landslide" posters disappeared letting me face the conservatives laughing at our predictions. The reason we made those predictions were because Trump was so unpopular.

My link today doesn't show it at 44.8% but 44.7%. They probably added an extra poll or something. My point that he's at the near highest of his career still stands whether it is 44.8% or 44.5%. The issue here is that Trump soars after mishandling a very serious crisis, not small stuff like extended draughts and fires in California, or petty wars in the middle east that are in their 20th year or something etc.

That's not what soaring means either. Bush jumped 30% after 9/11 over the course of a week. Trump's jump is at about 2% so far. Regardless of how presidents do at a time of crisis people in average are more willing to side with the authorities. The fact that Trump couldn't even managed to gather 10% is a big failure for him. He continues to be less popular than the first few days of his presidency based on your own source in contrary to your claim that he was.

[alhoon]

That's not what soaring means either. Bush jumped 30% after 9/11 over the course of a week. Trump's jump is at about 2% so far. Regardless of how presidents do at a time of crisis people in average are more willing to side with the authorities. The fact that Trump couldn't even managed to gather 10% is a big failure for him. He continues to be less popular than the first few days of his presidency based on your own source in contrary to your claim that he was.

OK, let's answer this a matter at a time.

1. You're talking about how it is a failure for him to not garner even a 10% increase. I am talking about how it is a success for him (or better, failure for the opposition) that he didn't lose 10%. Your explanation that "it happens in times of crisis" is a viable explanation. It doesn't change the fact that it's a success for Trump (or better, failure for the opposition) that he hasn't crushed whether we expected the USA voters to do it, or not.
2. My claim was "when he was elected" not "at the first days of his presidency". Thus, November 2016. In November 2016, his popularity was not 45%.
3. Even if my claim was what you say (it is not)... I also said "near highest". Trump's average is about 40-41% or something. He has passed 44% at very few occasions during his presidency. As I write this, his latest approval rating is 45.3%, a number he has reached only at the his best weeks.

4 and most important: You are arguing miniscule details (and getting them wrong) while my point is: Trump's popularity is increasing during his mismanagement of a national crisis worse than the Great Recession and unseen since 9/11. The Media still act as if his popularity is falling while it is increasing. Whether you expected that it would increase or not, doesn't change the fact that it is increasing and the democrats ignore it.

[PointOfViewGun]

OK, let's answer this a matter at a time.

1. You're talking about how it is a failure for him to not garner even a 10% increase. I am talking about how it is a success for him (or better, failure for the opposition) that he didn't lose 10%. Your explanation that "it happens in times of crisis" is a viable explanation. It doesn't change the fact that it's a success for Trump (or better, failure for the opposition) that he hasn't crushed whether we expected the USA voters to do it, or not.
2. My claim was "when he was elected" not "at the first days of his presidency". Thus, November 2016. In November 2016, his popularity was not 45%.
3. Even if my claim was what you say (it is not)... I also said "near highest". Trump's average is about 40-41% or something. He has passed 44% at very few occasions during his presidency. As I write this, his latest approval rating is 45.3%, a number he has reached only at the his best weeks.

4 and most important: You are arguing miniscule details (and getting them wrong) while my point is: Trump's popularity is increasing during his mismanagement of a national crisis worse than the Great Recession and unseen since 9/11. The Media still act as if his popularity is falling while it is increasing. Whether you expected that it would increase or not, doesn't change the fact that it is increasing and the democrats ignore it.

If your house catches fire and only half your kids think you're doing OK with handling the fire, that's no success. Your standards for what success means is clearly what it usually means... The earliest your link shows is Day 4, January 23, which is marked at 45.5%. That's the earliest number we get from the link you yourself provided repeatedly... You used the phrase "near highest" later on, not when you made the claim that "he was less popular when he won the election in 2016".

I am indeed arguing minuscule details since Trump's approval rating rise remains to be minuscule. Do provide us with an article from the media acting like Trump's popularity is falling, or that the Democrats are ignoring it.

[alhoon]

Do provide us with an article from the media acting like Trump's popularity is falling, or that the Democrats are ignoring it.

Those demands are becoming tiresome... don't you have google?
Here. Like the first search I did. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...y-over/607969/
Here is another one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-...failing-him%2f

And then, it's your post a few days ago where you said his numbers aren't growing.
And then, it's your post, the one I am responding to, where you say the example with the kids.


Now, on the example with the kids: If your house is on fire and your response is to take photos of the burning house, then call your neighbor an idiot for telling you that this fire is damn dangerous and it will consume your house, then think whether you should cook ribs on the flames as they spread and finally call the fire department after your brother jumped out from window to escape the flames...
And half your children consider that you do a good job?!?
Yes, that's a success.


The earliest my link shows is 4 January but I am not using that number, I said quite clearly: when he was elected in 2016. I didn't give numbers on his popularity in November 2016. Frankly, I could be wrong (I doubt it) and he maaaay had more than 45% in November following his election despite the non-my-president thing but as far as I recall, his popularity then was ~40% or so.
I still claim he was less popular than when he won the election in 2016, I just don't have numbers to show nor I am in the mood to look. If you don't believe me, find his popularity in November 2016. Perhaps I remember wrong (I doubt it).
I also made a different claim: That Trump's numbers (when I posted that) were "near highest" of his presidency. That one is based on the link I showed you. For that one, I have numbers.

As such: Two different claims: "He is more popular than elected, thus Democrats should worry" and a different claim "His ratings are near highest of his presidency and the Media under-reported it for days." (I haven't checked today but I would be surprised if they're flooded with "Trump's ratings at near-highest/highest" of his career!" with the same fervor as they were reporting his number when he was at 37-38%)

[PointOfViewGun]

Those demands are becoming tiresome... don't you have google?
Here. Like the first search I did. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...y-over/607969/
Here is another one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-...failing-him%2f

And then, it's your post a few days ago where you said his numbers aren't growing.
And then, it's your post, the one I am responding to, where you say the example with the kids.

Now, on the example with the kids: If your house is on fire and your response is to take photos of the burning house, then call your neighbor an idiot for telling you that this fire is damn dangerous and it will consume your house, then think whether you should cook ribs on the flames as they spread and finally call the fire department after your brother jumped out from window to escape the flames...
And half your children consider that you do a good job?!?
Yes, that's a success.

The earliest my link shows is 4 January but I am not using that number, I said quite clearly: when he was elected in 2016. I didn't give numbers on his popularity in November 2016. Frankly, I could be wrong (I doubt it) and he maaaay had more than 45% in November following his election despite the non-my-president thing but as far as I recall, his popularity then was ~40% or so.
I still claim he was less popular than when he won the election in 2016, I just don't have numbers to show nor I am in the mood to look. If you don't believe me, find his popularity in November 2016. Perhaps I remember wrong (I doubt it).
I also made a different claim: That Trump's numbers (when I posted that) were "near highest" of his presidency. That one is based on the link I showed you. For that one, I have numbers.

As such: Two different claims: "He is more popular than elected, thus Democrats should worry" and a different claim "His ratings are near highest of his presidency and the Media under-reported it for days." (I haven't checked today but I would be surprised if they're flooded with "Trump's ratings at near-highest/highest" of his career!" with the same fervor as they were reporting his number when he was at 37-38%)

So much made up stuff in a single post. Sigh...

Neither of those articles claim that Trump's popularity is failing.
I didn't argue that his popularity numbers were not growing with respect to the coronavirus crisis. Quote me.

If your house is on fire and you some how continue to cook pancakes your little kid will still be jumping up and down in joy. That's not success.

Sigh... The earliest your link shows is January 23. It's stupid to say you're not using it when you repeatedly linked to it. The fact is, the earliest you were abled to reference for his popularity was January 23 showing a rating of 45.5%. The fact that you're acknowledging not having any numbers for the time of his election while insisting on your claim shows us that you're simply lying.

Let's not ignore the fact that while Trump was elected in November, he was inaugurated in January. So, in your deflection, you're trying to use presidential approval ratings for a time he was not president. Perhaps that's why you're unable to find rating for that time which further supports the idea that you're lying. You specifically claimed that he was more popular back when he was elected. Let's not ignore how you're trying to run away out of that.

Overall, your posts are all over the place. Your arguments have no real direction. Why you'd go for such petty lies to venerate Trump is beyond me. Good luck.

[alhoon]

Sigh... The earliest your link shows is January 23. It's stupid to say you're not using it when you repeatedly linked to it. The fact is, the earliest you were abled to reference for his popularity was January 23 showing a rating of 45.5%. The fact that you're acknowledging not having any numbers for the time of his election while insisting on your claim shows us that you're simply lying.

Let's not ignore the fact that while Trump was elected in November, he was inaugurated in January. So, in your deflection, you're trying to use presidential approval ratings for a time he was not president. Perhaps that's why you're unable to find rating for that time which further supports the idea that you're lying. You specifically claimed that he was more popular back when he was elected. Let's not ignore how you're trying to run away out of that.

" you're trying to use presidential approval ratings for a time he was not president." No, I am not. As I said before, two different things.
- When he was elected in November ... A
- Near highest in his career... B

I gave presidential approval ratings for the "near highest of his career".
I also said, that in November 2016 that he was elected, he had worse ratings than he has now, so the Democrats have to worry.

What's so hard to understand?

"You specifically claimed that he was more popular back when he was elected. "
No I did not. I specifically claimed that he was less popular in November 2016 when he was elected.
I also mentioned that his current ratings are among the highest in his career.

Again: What's so hard to understand? Where are the "lies" here?
How all this twisting of things I said and claiming I said things I didn't say, have to do anything with the point I am trying to make, that Trump's ratings should worry the democrats?

What are you talking about?!

Overall, your posts are all over the place. Your arguments have no real direction. Why you'd go for such petty lies to venerate Trump is beyond me. Good luck.

I do... what?

my point is: Trump's popularity is increasing during his mismanagement of a national crisis worse than the Great Recession and unseen since 9/11.

his management of the crisis was... subpar to say the least (catastrophic would be better).

Suuuuuch praise and veneration...

and those are not hidden 200 posts back, they're literally what I say every other post.

What are you talking about?!


The only description I have for this mess that you're posting is something I recently read on a forum:

So much made up stuff in a single post. Sigh...
Overall, your posts are all over the place. Your arguments have no real direction. Why you'd go for such petty lies to venerate Trump made up stuff that has little to do with the point I am trying to raise is beyond me. Good luck.

[alhoon]

Judging by the recent Media headlines, one would be justified to think that Trump is crushing and burning in the polls.

The reality though appears to be different.

Trump's numbers are raising since the end of July and at the time of this post, he stands at 41.7% approval. By far not ideal, but actually around where he was at the Autumn of 2019 before the Pandemic. All in all, he saw a small raise during the Pandemic that now receded and he's back to what he was.

All those headlines about this group and that group turning on Trump are ignoring the fact that his numbers are again about what they have been throughout his 3rd year.


While it boggles the mind how Trump's number are more or less the same before he disastrously tried to play down the pandemic and while the economy was booming ... it is also undeniable that the articles that give us the impression Trump is on his last throes are ignoring the very basic facts: Trump is at the levels he was before the Pandemic.


He is below every president in the past 50 years that won re-election and above each president in the past 50 years that didn't win re-election.

[Gaidin]

Are you saying anybody's ever denied he's ever gone anything other than low fourties his entire term? Because either (A)he has people who are heartbreakingly loyal to him, or (B) because they're still supportive of him but so embarrassed by him, they have to say no to the pollster?

Nah. What we've said is he's lied about the pandemic and crashed the economy in an election year. Oh, don't forget. He's trying to kneecap the postal service. Which is not only about the election. But about communication, business, and money. Sometimes you just reach too far and even your own party says "nuh uh".

Reminds me kind of Liberty University's Board of Trustees being so damn loyal to him until he got caught with his fly unzipped on a yacht with someone not his wife. Then they couldn't not look the other way. I mean...you know...everybody knows this stuff happens. But, when the real problem finally comes up.

[alhoon]

Are you saying anybody's ever denied he's ever gone anything other than low fourties his entire term? Because either (A)he has people who are heartbreakingly loyal to him, or (B) because they're still supportive of him but so embarrassed by him, they have to say no to the pollster?

What I say is that I haven't seen many (or any in fact) major stories about "Trump's numbers reach pre-pandemic levels" or "President Trump as popular as he was a year ago".
Not even a "Despite constant lying, crashing the economy he helped to make and disastrous handling of the Pandemic, only Twitter thinks Trump's numbers are changing."

All those articles of "X group is getting tired with Trump!" or "Bad news for Donald! Y group said they're sick of him!" ... ignore the fact that his numbers are not budging at all. Those groups are not leaving the Trump train.
At least not yet.

Less than 3 months to the election and Trump is more popular than he was at 15 of November 2016.
Is it enough? Probably not... I doubt Biden is as unpopular as Hillary was. Baring a random upset like Comey's 2016 "revelations" on Hillary's emails, Trump will probably lose.
But it's no different than it was a year ago. Or 2 years ago.
Nothing sticks. Pandemic, unemployment, debt, Russians, corruption, scandals... nothing. I give it to him: He has set the bar so low that he's unable to get hurt. He can shoot someone on NYC as he said and he will drop from 41-42% to 40-41%.

Those groups are either not leaving Trump, or other groups move in to replace them.

[wanderwegger]

Ask anyone in finance and they will tell you the stock market is not the economy for good reason. Yes. The upper classes have crushed it under Trump. But the poor have gotten much poorer. The safety net jobs provide has decreased as most jobs are less not more as they were under every president since Reagan until Trump. Housing is a looming society breaking crisis which isn’t really Trump’s fault but he has sped up.

Most aspects of Trumps economy as mentioned have nothing to do with him and his policies and would have seen similar growth under Hillary had she won.

The tax cuts will bite us sooner than later. And he has propped the economy up with unimaginable spending pre covid. Post covid what was once thought impossible.

[alhoon]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-mis...014057025.html

" Even as Trump's poll rankings drop, Lauder hasn't stepped forward to help."
Nope. Try again. They are raising for the past month or month and a half. Even during the Democratic convention. Even during the horrid first night of RNC.

As usual, I am stunned at how successful Trump can be in keeping his base and I am not surprised the Progressive Media Machine completely under-reports it as if admitting that Trump's ratings are increasing would harm the Democrats.
Keep telling people that Trump is losing and give Trump another stunning success: Election victory.

[AqD]

I will start with:
- Under Trump, Al-Baghdadi dies. And half the articles I see are more focused on how bad Trump presented this great success than on the terrorist-boss that caused the death of hundreds of thousands and led to the displacement of millions of others being killed.
Yes it was a great success for Trump and yes, the Media should be much much more positive on their report than stick to how Trump talked about it.

Al-Baghdadi didn't need Trump to get himself killed.

On the other hand, Trump has:

- Made zero progress on peace talk with North Korea. The insistence on nuclear disarmament is just stupid if not meant to block any agreement from being reached.

- Made zero progress to topple Iranian government (under the guise of nuclear restriction or whatever). He killed a few guys, good, but that's it. It's a huge pro-west country oppressed by a theocratic government and I had high hope he'd start a full scale war, restore democracy and western society in Iran.

- Negotiated with Taliban and effectively gave up Afghans to those crazies.

[Gromovnik]

Hell yeah, that guy for not starting another neverending war!

[Cyclops]

...
- Made zero progress on peace talk with North Korea. The insistence on nuclear disarmament is just stupid if not meant to block any agreement from being reached.

No one ever does. This isn't Trump's failure, its now the status quo. Trump did try something different, but Obama and Bush got played just a hard.

- Made zero progress to topple Iranian government (under the guise of nuclear restriction or whatever). He killed a few guys, good, but that's it. It's a huge pro-west country oppressed by a theocratic government and I had high hope he'd start a full scale war, restore democracy and western society in Iran.

That's just silly. You want another US military commitment in the region? Not possible unless you want US to go full evil empire. Once again this is status quo.

- Negotiated with Taliban and effectively gave up Afghans to those crazies.

Everyone "wins" their first Afghan War. Everybody loses there eventually. This one is actually pragmatic if shameful.

So OP's premise is correct there seems to be a lot of unjustified criticism of the President. Its a shame because it drowns out real criticism like "he lies constantly" "his inconsistent messaging undermines peoples faith in their own country" and "he can't find enough people to fill the positions in government needed for it to function efficiently".

[alhoon]

Well, Bahrain also moves to stabilize relations with Israel. Trump is pacifying the Middle East. No, I am not saying Middle east is conflict-free!
But there are steps towards peace and conflicts are dying out.

[PointOfViewGun]

How is Trump doing that?

[Cyclops]

How is Trump doing that?

Well by not intervening negatively as we saw with Bush II and Obama. Obama's negative efforts may have been Clinton's fault but he gets the blame because she was his pick.

Likewise Trump's choices in his dealings with Israel reflect more sensible behaviour than I would expect, including his choice of negotiators. Maybe his son in law was the right guy for the job? Occasionally nepotism isn't a disaster. Trumps often ugly brinkmanship style may have been effective here, showing Israel a big favour with its move to Jerusalem and IIRc making positive statements about more annexations that thankfully haven't happened.

The US was promised that Trump was a slimy bastard "but he's our slimy bastard", maybe its partially true?

[PointOfViewGun]

Well by not intervening negatively as we saw with Bush II and Obama. Obama's negative efforts may have been Clinton's fault but he gets the blame because she was his pick.

Likewise Trump's choices in his dealings with Israel reflect more sensible behaviour than I would expect, including his choice of negotiators. Maybe his son in law was the right guy for the job? Occasionally nepotism isn't a disaster. Trumps often ugly brinkmanship style may have been effective here, showing Israel a big favour with its move to Jerusalem and IIRc making positive statements about more annexations that thankfully haven't happened.

The US was promised that Trump was a slimy bastard "but he's our slimy bastard", maybe its partially true?

How did Bush Jr. and Obama intervened negatively?

[Lusitanio]

How did Bush Jr. and Obama intervened negatively?

Obama legacy in the Middle East was a total failure.

From sending weapons to rebel groups in Syria that everybody knew was ISIS or other minor groups that promply sold their weapons to ISIS, therefore equipping terrorists with US tax dollars and worsening the situation in the civil war.

Obama intervention in Libya resulted in a failed state, makings things much worse for the people there then what it was before.

The only success story was really the Iranian nuclear deal which Trump pretty much destroyed soon after.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Obama legacy in the Middle East was a total failure.

From sending weapons to rebel groups in Syria that everybody knew was ISIS or other minor groups that promply sold their weapons to ISIS, therefore equipping terrorists with US tax dollars and worsening the situation in the civil war.

Obama intervention in Libya resulted in a failed state, makings things much worse for the people there then what it was before.

The only success story was really the Iranian nuclear deal which Trump pretty much destroyed soon after.

The only thing the Iran deal "succeeded" in was bringing the Gulf states and Israel closer because both had realised that the US and EU had abandoned them. It allowed Iran to increase its spending on its proxies all over the middle east creating further instability and ramping up the Sunni-Shiite conflict.
Then came Trump who tore up the terrible deal and gave Israel the freedom to act, even allowing talks and plans of annexation to go ahead without American condemnation, something Obama would never do, which directly led to the deal with the UAE and consequently Bahrain. While previous administrations created the impression that Israel would have to give up everything it gained after the six day war and that all the Arab states had to do for that to happen was wait while American (and international) pressure on Israel continued to rise (culminating with Obama not using his veto on a condemnation of Israel), the Trump administration turned that on its head: suddenly the American peace plan gave Israel all the settlements, bringing with it the realisation that the longer they wait the worse (for the Arabs) the deal will get if settlements continue to grow and plans of annexation go ahead. Just like that there was created a need to give Israel something in return for preventing the annexation.