Note: This poll was taken before President Trump’s wildly successful Middle East trip.

Especially. as you point out, when the change is within the margin of error.
Also, most of the other polls are negative as well according to the RealClearPolitics average.

You make a good point there. On the other hand, it’s a positive trend showing up in his worst poll (using a spread metric) or second worst poll (using approval number metric).

They’re about as popular as freeway potholes.

One small improvement within the MOE is hardly a trend.

He is the LOWEST rated president in the history of polling this far into his presidency. Stop being a hack.

I post one of Trump’s lowest polls. Would a hack do that? No.
I point out of that low poll has him edging upwards. You object. What a hack.

Is Reuters “bogus”? Are they “hacks”?

Remember when I had to bust you on ALL those? This is just more of the same. It's pathetic you would try and make something of a minute bump when again, he is still the LOWEST ranked president in polling history.

Replying back to my same post twice is bad enough but showing a poll at a lousy 44% less than 4 months into his presidency is hackery at its finest.

So it was hackish for Reuters to cover the Ipsos poll with a stand alone story?  And it’s “desperate” for me to post one of Trump’s most negative polls?! The reality is that you know the upward tick in this poll is a harbinger of things to come, and that pisses you off to no end.

I called you one.  
.
"A harbinger of things to come." Exactly what a hack would say! hahahahahaha!

He's a prescient

So it’s legitimate for Rueters to cover the Ipsos poll, indicating they thought it was newsworthy, but hackish for anyone to repost that story on a political forum? Very shifty logic. I guess we shouldn’t expect less from an Islamophobe.

It's hackish to frantically mis-characterize its significance.

-- Modified on 5/16/2025 3:15:15 PM

Good lord man. That's rich. The guy who for DAMN sure cherry picks polls, accused someone else of cherry picking polls. You belong in the democrat party. You serve the crooked finger pointing, rules for thee but not for me crowd well. Bravo respectful Rhonda.

Nicky had this to say about the Iowa poll that had Harris winning.

 
"The Des Moines Register's polls have a history of being spot on. So your citing of other polls is irrelevant.
Apparently, the Trump campaign is in a panic about it."

 
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/what-wanker-is-ignoring-453450?page=

 
Happy Gulag Guard had this to say:

 
"Trump won Kansas by 14pts on 2020. So how’s Trump doing against Harris, you say? Trump is Only leading by 5 pts
Not saying Kansas serious play but trump is loosing his mojo and this could spell trouble in MI,WI and PA
Something not bueno is happening to Trump"

 
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/ok-non-believers-hows-trump-doing-in-kansas-you-ask7-453506?page=

 
Gulag got even dumber when he said this:

 
"I think that survey was based on the “Secret” voter. I have a feeling that this so called “secret” voter is real and is under reported. Hence, Iowa."

 
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/i-think-that-survey-was-based-on-the-secret-voter-453525?page=

 
As some of you may recall, come Election Day, Trump won Iowa by 13 points.  

 
In this same thread, I said this:

 
"I did some rough calculations From the Florida numbers I’m seeing. This is rough back of envelope stuff, so keep that in mind. In 2020, Trump won Florida by 4%, or 300,000 votes. Each candidate got 5+ million votes and some change. This suggests 75,000 votes = 1%. Right now Republicans have a million vote advantage. 4 million GOP, 3 million Dems. This translates approximately into Trump having a 13% lead. Nate Silver predicted 7%."

 
And on Election Day, Trump won Florida by 13%.  

 
Lefties should just start ignoring polls. They don't seem to be very kind to them.