And he got more votes than Washington,Lincoln and Reagan too.I'll let you're simple little mind figure out why that is.
LOL. Your brain is incapable of math that would show you that adjusted for population growth, Trump still crushed Obama. Amazing. Biden +17 in Wisconsin though...LOL. BIDEN IS THE WORST FAKE PRESIDENT ELECT IN HISTORY (according to the polls)
Trump is the worst real president in US history,didn't even get a second term. According the polls he never even had a 50% approval rating his entire one term presidency.
Trump got more votes against him than Obama ever did,more than any president ever did lol!!! ONE TERM!!!!!!!
He actually briefly went above 50%...amazingly earlier this year. Just as amazing in which shows how people were so forgiving of his performance as a President and attacks on Democracy... Hist approval rating took a big dip over the summer and started to rise again going into the U.S. elections but he never again retested that 50% barrier. In reality, his approval rating coincides with his loss in the Presidential elections and the electoral / popular votes. Simply, his approval rating actually validates everything...he wasn't cheated...he was beaten...badly. In fact, I'm shocked he actually received 46.9% of the vote when I thought he'll never break the 45% barrier...maybe the Russians helped him get a few % more. Another way to view the below graph...he will go down in history as the worst President so far if we only viewed approval ratings statistical analysis and the way he's attacked / ridiculed Democracy. That's his legacy. wrbtrader
Definitely.Approval ratings are the best predictor for a president winning re election.Losing re election guarantees a spot in history as a bad president
You still talking about polls having any value? Excerpts of each article below: This time, prognosticators made assurances that such mistakes were so 2016. But as votes were tabulated on November 3, nervous viewers and pollsters began to experience a sense of déjà vu. Once again, more ballots were ticking toward President Trump than the polls had projected. Though the voter surveys ultimately pointed in the wrong direction for only two states—North Carolina and Florida, both of which had signaled a win for Joe Biden—they incorrectly gauged just how much of the overall vote would go to Trump in both red and blue states. In states where polls had favored Biden, the vote margin went to Trump by a median of 2.6 additional percentage points. And in Republican states, Trump did even better than the polls had indicated—by a whopping 6.4 points. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-polls-were-mostly-wrong/ The real polling story four years ago was in the battleground states that decided the White House winner. Trump narrowly edged Clinton by razor thin margins in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – states that public polling on the eve of the election showed Clinton with the lead. Trump also outperformed the public surveys in Ohio and Iowa. Fast forward to present day and the president once again put many public pollsters to shame. The president carried battleground Florida and its 29 electoral votes over Biden. At last check, his margin of victory stands at 3.4 points. But an average of the final public surveys on the eve of the election that was compiled by Real Clear Politics indicated the former vice president with .9 point edge. Biden has a razor thin edge over Trump in Wisconsin, which had yet to be called as of early Wednesday morning. But an average of the public opinion surveys on the eve of Election Day pointed to a 6.7 point lead for the former vice president Michigan’s also still up for grabs, with Biden holding the slight edge. But an average of the public opinion surveys on the eve of Election Day pointed to a 4.2 point lead. The president once again won battleground Ohio by 8 points, when an average of the final public polls indicated Trump with just a 1-point edge. It was a similar story in Iowa, which the president also carried by 8 points on Tuesday. An average of the final surveys showed Trump with a 2-point advantage over Biden https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wh...got-wrong-trump-outperforms-predictions-again It may well be days, if not weeks, before the winner of the 2020 presidential race is decided, but one clear lesson from Tuesday night’s election results is that pollsters were wrong again. It’s a “giant mystery” why, says Nick Beauchamp, assistant professor of political science at Northeastern. There are a number of possible explanations, Beauchamp says. One is that specific polls undercounted the extent to which certain demographics—such as Hispanic voters in specific states—shifted toward President Trump. Nick Beauchamp, assistant professor of political science. Photo Matthew Modoono/Northeastern University Another is that, just as in 2016, polls undercounted hard-to-reach voters who tend to be less educated and more conservative. Beauchamp is less convinced that “shy” Trump voters deliberately misrepresented their intentions to pollsters. “Whatever the cause, it has huge implications not just for polling, but for the outcome of the presidential and Senate elections,” Beauchamp says. “If the polls have been this wrong for months, since they have been fairly stable for months, that means that campaign resources may have also been misallocated.” Beauchamp pointed to a tweet by political pollster Josh Jordan, which showed just how much Trump over-performed the FiveThirtyEight averages in nine swing states. In Ohio, for example, he ran seven points better. In Wisconsin, it was eight points. “Trump over-performed relative to the polls in these states by a median of 6 points,” says Beauchamp. “That’s a shockingly large error, though in other states it may have been smaller.” This year’s polling errors, Beauchamp said, were “enormous” even compared to 2016, when polls failed to predict Trump’s defeat of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Indeed, just days before the presidential contest, FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver predicted that Biden was slightly favored to win Florida and its 29 Electoral College votes. The race was called on election night with Trump comfortably ahead https://news.northeastern.edu/2020/...ction-even-after-accounting-for-2016s-errors/ The pollsters got Donald Trump wrong — again. When all the votes are tallied, Joe Biden isn’t going to win the popular vote by double digits. Trump lost Wisconsin by a point, not the 17-point defeat one survey suggested. And Trump obviously didn't go down in an election night landslide, as some polls suggested would happen. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/06/polling-industry-blows-it-again-434591 Edited for spelling.
Of course.RCPs aggregate polling have predicted the popular vote winner in every election since they started in 2004.They predicated the overall winner in 04,08,2012 and 2020 only got The EC wrong in 2016. Approval ratings are 100% in predicting if a president will win re election since Eisenhower. https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black...p-break-this-six-decade-u-s-election-pattern/ Can Trump break this six-decade U.S. election pattern? How many of the laws of history can Donald Trump repeal? I don’t claim to know. And history doesn’t really have “laws” that can be enforced, just precedents and patterns formed by the accumulation of those precedents. One such pattern, which has held in every election that involved an incumbent president since the emergence of the political polling industry, is this: If the president’s approval rating is “above water,” meaning more approvers than disapprovers, he wins a second term. If the president has a negative approval rating, he loses. This has been true in 10 out of 10 instances in the era of modern polling, dating back to the 1950s, the era that includes the last 16 presidential elections — including the 10 that involved an incumbent president. In every one of those 10, as I just mentioned, if the president had more approvers than disapprovers, he was re-elected. If more disapprover than approvers, he was defeated. (The pattern starts in the 1950s and doesn’t include 1948, when Harry Truman beat Thomas Dewey. Approval polls existed, but weren’t taken very often. Gallup’s last such poll in 1948 showed Truman with a terrible 36 percent approval rating, but that was taken eight months before Election Day. Now we have a zillion pollsters measuring approval/disapproval and get fresh numbers every few days.) But this is about the six decade pattern, and it fits every instance in which an incumbent president sought a second term. In 1952, there was no incumbent, and General Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected. In 1956, when President Eisenhower won a second term by defeating Adlai Stevenson, the pattern was born. Eisenhower during 1956 had a very healthy Gallup approval rating (73 percent in Gallup’s last pre-election poll), and he easily re-elected. There was no incumbent in 1960. In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson, who had become president in November 1962 after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, had a high positive approval rating and was re-elected in a landslide. In 1968 there was no incumbent on the ballot. In 1972, President Richard Nixon had a 68 percent Gallup approval rating six months before Election Day and easily won a second term. But in 1976, President Gerald Ford sought a full four-year term with an approval rating of 45 percent (as measured by Gallup’s last approval poll before Election Day). Ford was defeated in 1976 by Jimmy Carter. Carter also had a below-water approval ratings (below 40 percent in the last three Gallup readings pre-election) when he sought a second term in 1980, and he was defeated soundly by Gov. Ronald Reagan. But Reagan had a positive 56 percent approval rating in 1984 when he sought a second term and he won easily. There was no incumbent running in 1988. But in 1992 President George H.W. Bush’s approval had fallen into negative territory, and he lost his re-election bid to challenger Bill Clinton. Clinton came up for re-election in 1996 with very positive approval numbers (Gallup: 60 percent pre-election) and he was re-elected by a comfortable margin. 2000, no incumbent. 2004, incumbent George W. Bush. Positive approval. Re-elected. 2008, no incumbent. 2012? Incumbent Barack Obama was struggling to stay above 50 percent approval, but had substantially more approvers than disapprovers in November of 2012 and was re-elected. 2016, no incumbent. Trump shocks the world by winning, but with neither a majority nor even a plurality of the popular vote. Trump has never been above 50 percent in a Gallup approval poll since taking office. As I have tracked ad nauseum during his term, he has not only been below 50 but has fairly consistently been about 10 points “under water” (meaning more disapprovers than approvers) throughout his term). Based on that, and claiming no ability to see the future, I expect his approval rating will be below water on Election Day 2020. Of course, Trump was elected the first time with just 46 percent of the vote, two percentage points less than his opponent, Hillary Clinton. There are current polls that show Trump trailing some of the Democratic contenders (especially Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders) and leading others. I don’t attach much importance to those, and they will bounce around. Whoever is the Democratic nominee, Trump will assign him or her an insulting nickname, like “Crazy Bernie” or “Crooked” (your name here) and, especially if it’s a woman, will attack her looks. Trump breaks a lot of rules, including rules of thumb like the one described in this piece, that no president with a below-water approval rating has ever been re-elected. He didn’t break that rule in 2016 because he wasn’t president. The thumb rule applies only to elections in which an incumbent president is on the ballot. In 2020 Trump will be running as president. The argument is that when there is an incumbent, the election becomes much more of an up-or-down referendum on that incumbent. Approval polls of incumbent presidents are locked into that frame. If Trump cared about that, he would try to turn disapprovers into approvers. But that’s not how he rolls. His strategy will be to take his 40 percent and see if he can find another few million voters, especially in swing states, and get them to view him as the lesser of evils. It may work. If so, the rule of thumb described above suggests, it will be the first time in presidential election history, since the advent of polling.
Being off by 200 to 700 basis points, especially anything over 500 basis points is outside the statistical margin of error, yet polls conducted by many pollsters on a frequent basis over Trump’s term have been conistently grossly wrong. It is safe to say polls in modern US Presidental Elections are fake news. Remember, the pollsters got it wrong in 2016 and still failed to adjust in 2020. One has to wonder if this was by design on ideas of suppressing Conservative voter turnout. Remember the debates we had on the usefullness of polls in determining Trump’s popularity? I argued that Trump supporters are more distrustful of the media and associate pollsters with them, resulting in Trump supporters “Guarding” their opinions more than other groups. Voter turnout for Trump increased to 74,000,000 in 2020 from about 63,000,000 from 2016, which is considerable, even accounting for population growth of eligible voters. Interestingly, voter turnout was highest in 120 years as a percentage od eligible voters, assuming Biden was not the beneficiary of too many invalid or fraudulent ballots.