this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
252 points (94.4% liked)

politics

26252 readers
3037 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A CNN/SSRS survey of 1,245 U.S. adults shows that 63 percent are unhappy with Trump’s performance as president, the highest figure of either of his terms.#

all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Getting tired of hope-baiting only to be disappointed.

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 26 points 13 hours ago

I'm downvoting every headline like this until it's referring to more than a 1 or 2% drop as "the lowest ever". It is always a 60/40 split. Every time.

[–] redlemace@lemmy.world 111 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

More shocking : 37% isn't sure or approves his performance.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I guess you could attribute a fair share to self-destructive and contrarians but 37% is still too high.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 34 points 20 hours ago (6 children)

this. the most shocking thing to me is how low it is for disapproval. What would it take for those folks to disprove? We literally have masked paramilitary grabbing folks off the street.

[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Probably if he tried to implement UBI or forgive student loans. That would probably lose his base.

[–] Rothe@piefed.social 1 points 6 hours ago

They want masked paramilitary to grab folks off the street. As long as the paramilitary isn't grabbing them, they think it is working perfectly fine.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 14 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Stock market collapse/bubble bursy and more aggressive recession indicators. That's what it will take to really move the needle.

These things are all bad if you are paying attention and have empathy. But the number of people being DIRECTLY impacted is still too small for it to affect that 37% of consistently stupid, selfish idiots. It will need to take more impact, for millions of people, and more than gradually worsening prices and things.

[–] TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.world 8 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

You gotta account for the bigots, intellectually challenged, sociopaths, illiterate, old and senile, etc. If you've worked retail, you might even be surprised it's only 37% of people who lack critical thinking or empathy.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 9 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah and I sorta feel it. I know this is not nearly on the level but I was coming back to my car after putting the shopping cart in the return carousel to watch a woman push hers to the side of her car and get in. The return carousel let me be clear was behind us like 3 parking spaces distance down. So as she pulled out I grabbed her cart and walked the excruciating few steps to put it in the return. I then mopped my brow from my superhuman effort, got in my car, and rode away. I swear the effort bar for people to do their part is so incredibly low.

[–] TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

It may not cause excessive damage but it's certainly a red flag. One of those signs that someone is probably a shitty person, like being rude to wait staff or yelling at nurses that are trying to help them. But hey, it's been proven that you can be a scummy piece of shit and still become president.

[–] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I'd imagine a lot of those people are on food stamps so that'll hopefully impact that disapproval as well. This is pre-losing snap, it'll be interesting to see polls after.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 18 hours ago

well and the health care marketplace. unless they buy into the republican vibe argument that its the democrats fault because well they just are.

[–] CMahaff@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

You've got to remember that for most people living outside of cities, or living in red cities, this might as well not exist. Hell I bet even within big cities you might not be exposed to it depending on the neighborhood. You'd only really know through the news, and they don't get their news from anywhere that would show them the truth.

If by chance word actually gets back to them that something really is happening, it's already been carefully run through the Republican spin machine, where this is all very legal and very necessary to "restore order" - where resisting is the real anti-American thing to do.

What would it take to collapse the fantasy-land Trumpers inhabit on the daily? I'm not sure. You're fighting 50 years of conservative propaganda for some of these folks - Trump is just the latest at the helm. They won't be swayed easily.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago

I mean again. Even their own footage shows it. Their videos honsetly makes me ill because of how they try to make it out like its something good.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 9 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

isn’t sure or approves

I know it's not you, but those really need to be different categories.

[–] redlemace@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago

Absolutely!

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 8 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Gotta keep an eye on that 37% because they seem to be the only ones that matter to the country ... at the expense of everyone else.

Sure takes the "demos" out of "democracy"

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

Mr. Mander has entered the chat

[–] switcheroo@lemmy.world 63 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

This fucker is now more unpopular than the last most unpopular pres...which was him again.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 37 points 20 hours ago (1 children)
[–] chilldrivenspade@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago

I just checked and you're not wrong. IMHO it'll be even worse looking back - he's got the worst qualities of both Jackson and Buchanan.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 10 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Boy, is Trump gonna be mad when he finds out that Trump beat his ratings.

[–] Numinous_Ylem@lemmy.world 22 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

Do polls even matter anymore in this era of politics?Are 1,245 US adults enough to gather anything truly meaningful? What type of people tend to take these polls and are they really reflective of the general population?

Been seeing these bs "disastrous polling for Trump" headlines since his first term

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Take a statistics class if this is a legitimate question.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 6 points 13 hours ago

It matters but Trump’s polling is remarkably stable. Headlines are overstating the changes which are barely measurable.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 6 points 16 hours ago

Disregarding sampling bias and other effects, sure, 1,245 is enough for a statistically significant representative sample. You can’t do a lot of subsampling or cohort analysis from it, but if you just want to infer the behavior and attitudes of “Americans” and you sample that many Americans effectively enough, you’re fine.

But practically speaking, no. You’re not going to sample that many Americans effectively enough. Polling is a shitshow these days.

[–] El_Scapacabra@lemmy.zip 11 points 16 hours ago

"Polls are now illegal."

[–] MisterNeon@lemmy.world 41 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

I have a feeling that they don't care and that is terrifying to me.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 27 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

He’s not planning on winning any more elections.

[–] gdog05@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

He definitely is he's just counting on the numbers being whatever he tells the Russian hackers to make them be. He likely won't be campaigning without the ego feeding crowds. He'll (as if by magic) win the popular vote. I believe this was the purpose behind feeding all of our personal data in the government systems to Russia. They'll pinpoint people to switch their votes and while I don't know the plan on exactly how they'll use the data, Defcon hackers showed exactly how they'll be doing the vote tampering.

[–] kubica@fedia.io 4 points 20 hours ago
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 14 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

As a community can we just try to get sources that aren't paywalled?

We can really consider paywalled/ adwalled journalism.

[–] ebolapie@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I share your preference but I find it odd to say it's not journalism if it's not available for free. Newspapers weren't free but they were definitely journalism.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

but I find it odd to say it’s not journalism if it’s not available for free. Newspapers weren’t free but they were definitely journalism.

As an author, I think it depends on where you think things begin and end. I publish in scientific journals, and its quite literally not possible to do the kind of work that I do if the information isn't available. If I can't access your work, I can't "do science" on it because I can't both a) be critical of it, and b) use it as the basis of my own work. Journalism, is in this sense, all the same; its transformative work that builds on things that already exist which the author themselves did not create.

The beginning of an article on the war on terror doesn't begin or and when the author picks up the pen. That author will draw on sources and writing and journalism which already exists; while it may be transformative, it doesn't exist as an island to itself. If I can’t read your work, I can’t audit it or build on it. Journalism has the same knowledge-building logic. Reporting is transformative work that stands on prior reporting; it’s meant to be checked, contextualized, and advanced by others, and barriers that prevent that from happening.

And to be clear, I spend real money every month on journalists whose coverage I think is good and important and should be supported. But I specifically support journalists who put their work out there freely; I don't support operations that don't put there work out there for all to consume.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 hours ago

I publish in scientific journals, and its quite literally not possible to do the kind of work that I do if the information isn't available. If I can't access your work, I can't "do science" on it

Ok so maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about, but scientific journals are not free.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 9 points 19 hours ago

And this comes right after he boasts on... Truth Social, was it? about how incredibly popular he is. Interesting.

[–] salacious_coaster 9 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

He's now tied with Biden's lowest approval rating. This headline is making it sound like he's in trouble, and he's not, no matter how much we want him to be.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/116677/Presidential-Approval-Ratings-Gallup-Historical-Statistics-Trends.aspx

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 4 points 18 hours ago

Pretty sure Biden's highest disapproval rating wasn't this high as most people could just ignore what the government was doing because it wasn't imploding. Trump has made enough of a mess that the people who normally ignore things are actually choosing disapproval.

[–] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 3 points 19 hours ago

Right. He could have 0% approval rate, He’s never leaving the office.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Particularly noteworthy here is the way the 5-7% who are "unsure" in all previous polls have disappeared in the past few months.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago

I'd love to know what part of that percentage is because some people are so tuned out that they don't pay attention at all and have just realized politics cares about them, too, and under Taco, that's not a good thing? Or how many were okay with everything Taco was doing, as long as they thought they wouldn't be impacted, because fuck everyone else, and now realize that they may be impacted?

[–] Derpenheim@lemmy.zip 5 points 18 hours ago

And yet nothing will happen.

[–] chilldrivenspade@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

it doesn’t matter bc either the people have memories of goldfish or the election system is straight up rigged

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 1 points 58 minutes ago

Por que no los dos?

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

He is damned.