By John Q. Hosedrinker 
As President Donald Trump marks 500 days in his second term, a new poll reveals his approval rating has hit a record low of -25. This decline is attributed in part to Operation Epic Fury against Iran, which a majority now views as a misstep, and a persistent concern over the economy. The Economist’s analysis suggests this widespread unpopularity will significantly impact the upcoming midterm elections, potentially costing Republicans control of the House and making the Senate a toss-up. Even previously strong areas like inflation, jobs, and foreign policy are now met with public disapproval.
Read the original article here
The news that Donald Trump’s approval rating has dipped to another new low, specifically around the 500th day of his return to the White House, is met with a mixture of weariness and disbelief from many observers. This recurring headline, highlighting a continuously declining popularity, seems to have lost its shock value for some, becoming almost a daily occurrence. The sentiment is that for this trend to truly signify a turning point, the numbers would need to plummet much further, perhaps into the teens or even twenties, before any substantial change could be expected.
The persistent approval from a significant portion of the population, hovering around 35%, is a source of deep concern and confusion for many, both within and outside the United States. From a European perspective, it’s almost unfathomable that such a large percentage of the American electorate remains supportive of the current state of affairs. The feeling is that this sustained approval allows a “swamp” or a detrimental force to thrive, and that lower numbers are a prerequisite for any potential healing or correction.
There’s a palpable sense of frustration that these approval ratings, even at new lows, don’t seem to translate into meaningful political consequences. The idea of impeachment is brought up, but with a caveat that it would likely require numbers far lower than what’s currently being reported, perhaps dipping into the 20s, a threshold that seems almost unattainable or too distant to inspire hope. This pessimism stems from the perceived unwavering loyalty of a core group of supporters and the lack of a strong, unified opposition willing to take decisive action.
The observation that Trump’s approval has been “hovering around 34/35% for months” underscores the feeling that these “new low” headlines are somewhat misleading or are being used to create a false sense of progress. The argument is that the underlying support base remains remarkably stable, and these incremental dips, while technically new lows, don’t represent a significant shift in the political landscape. It’s as if the situation has plateaued at a concerningly low, yet consistently held, level of approval.
The notion of a “tribe” versus individual family well-being is raised, suggesting a critical juncture for Trump voters. The question is posed whether their allegiance lies with the political “tribe” or with the practical needs of their families. This hints at a potential internal conflict for some supporters, where the abstract loyalty to a political figure might eventually clash with the tangible realities of their lives.
The passage of time and the ongoing nature of the presidency contribute to a sense of prolonged struggle. For some, the fact that 500 days have already passed offers a glimmer of hope that the end of the term is drawing nearer, offering a light at the end of a dark tunnel. Conversely, the thought of many more years stretching ahead can be incredibly disheartening, leading to a desire for immediate change or a breakthrough.
There’s a strong desire for direct confrontation, for someone to present this information to Trump live on television. The belief is that if his approval rating continues its downward trend, each day could indeed mark a new low. However, this is countered by the weary refrain that these headlines are repetitive and potentially disingenuous, designed to offer a false sense of comfort or progress as the nation potentially marches towards an uncertain future, particularly in the context of upcoming elections.
The sheer persistence of low approval ratings, coupled with the apparent inability to significantly impact his political standing, leads to a cynical view. Some express disbelief that a leader can continue to hit “a new low every day” and question why their approval isn’t already in negative figures. This highlights a perceived disconnect between public sentiment and political reality, where approval metrics seem to lose their traditional meaning.
The idea of approval ratings falling into the 20s is considered a more meaningful benchmark by some, a point at which significant change might finally occur. However, this is often framed as a distant or even impossible goal, with the prediction that Trump is more likely to cease to be a factor before his approval reaches such a precipice. This points to a deep-seated skepticism about the efficacy of polls in predicting or influencing political outcomes.
The stability of the party’s support, regardless of Trump’s personal approval, is seen as the ultimate determinant of his political power. The argument is that as long as the party remains loyal, his approval rating, however low, becomes largely irrelevant. This is a significant concern for those who believe the party itself needs a fundamental shift away from its current trajectory.
The recurring nature of these “approval rating lower” posts is a point of contention for some. They find them tiring and indicative of a repetitive news cycle that doesn’t necessarily reflect substantive change. The sentiment is that these headlines, while technically accurate, can feel like “clickbait” or a way to make people feel better without addressing the root causes of the situation.
The frustration extends to a strong conviction that voters should reject MAGA and all Republicans, as they are perceived as fundamentally opposed to the interests and well-being of many citizens. The idea of being “brainwashed” or influenced by propaganda is mentioned as a reason for the continued support of Trump, particularly when juxtaposed with the perceptions of European political trends.
The question of impeachment and conviction is frequently brought up, with a prevailing sense of realism that it’s unlikely to happen unless there’s a significant shift in the political balance of power in the Senate. The current system, including the Electoral College, Supreme Court appointments, and gerrymandering, is viewed by some as contributing to a broken system that prevents accountability.
The historical context of public opinion, like the lingering sympathy for Hitler’s regime in Germany, is used to explain the persistent support for Trump. This suggests that a certain percentage of the population may remain loyal to a belief system, even when faced with overwhelming evidence or negative consequences, particularly when influenced by propaganda.
A more nuanced perspective suggests that a portion of Trump’s supporters may inwardly disapprove but feel psychologically compelled to double down when they’ve invested too much, whether financially or socially. This “doubling down” effect, combined with a core group of individuals who genuinely embrace his agenda, contributes to the enduring support base.
The comparison to far-right movements in Europe is noted, suggesting that the US is not alone in experiencing such political phenomena. However, some express surprise at the level of support for a politician like Trump in the American context, especially when contrasted with what they perceive as a more discerning European electorate.
The degradation of the educational system is pointed to as a contributing factor to the rise of a “dumb, bigoted, cult-following populace.” The narrative of immigration angst, similar to that which fueled Brexit, is seen as a powerful motivator for a segment of the population, highlighting how social and economic anxieties can be exploited.
There’s a critique of the “as a European” viewpoint, suggesting that similar levels of “idiots” or predisposed individuals exist everywhere. This implies a universal distribution of certain societal traits, rather than a uniquely American problem. The sentiment is that the underlying issues driving support for figures like Trump are not confined to one nation.
The idea that a significant portion of the population is “functionally illiterate” is presented as a stark explanation for the sustained approval ratings. This, coupled with the perception of some Americans as inherently “evil” or “dumb,” attempts to rationalize the seemingly inexplicable support.
The article concludes with a somber assessment of the nation’s state, with phrases like “America is dead” reflecting a profound sense of despair and disillusionment among those who are critical of the current political direction. The persistent low approval ratings, while a newsworthy event, are seen by many as a symptom of deeper, more systemic issues that show little sign of resolution.