Polls Show Trump Holding Base And Even Improving Among Voters

While there is a general view that the Trump Administration is in a free fall with ominous investigations and calls for impeachment, the polls show a different picture. Trump actually has not dropped with all of the bad press and is holding his base. Indeed, he is close to where President Barack Obama was at this time in his term. Moreover, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll,the polls shows people with a highly negative view of the socialist wing of the Democratic party and less than forty percent believe Michael Cohen. Those are all good signs for Trump even as the legal developments loom negatively on his future. Trump however is registering at a 46 percent popularity in the latest polling.

The bad news for Trump is that, just as his base is hardened, so is his opposition. He is down to just 4 in 10 of voters. Some 58 percent do not think Trump is telling the truth on the Russian probe and 60 percent disapprove of his recent national emergency declaration to build a border wall. This week the Republican controlled Senate may vote to rescind the emergency.

Yet, Trump remains steady at 46 percent of Americans approving of Trump’s job performance. That is actually a gain of three points since January. Forty-one percent already say that they will definitely or probably vote for him in 2020.

He holds an almost 90 percent popularity with Republicans at 88 percent though he is disliked by the same percentage of African Americans.

Forty-one percent of registered voters say they will “definitely” or “probably” vote for Trump in 2020. Obama by comparison showed 45 percent in favor of voting. Trump is actually doing better than Clinton at this point. Not surprising, the hardened opposition is higher with 48 percent saying that they will “definitely” or “probably” vote for the Democratic candidate. Obama had only 40 percent saying that they would vote for a Republican.

Yet, there is a disconnect between the polls and the coverage. For a president who has stumbled through a remarkably bad period of investigations and disclosures, Trump is faring pretty well. Frankly, few presidents could hold these numbers but Trump seems to have a lock on his base, his party, and many independents.

These polls are likely to have an impact on Trump continuing his confrontational approach to the investigations. While he is convincing few people of his own veracity, polls also show that people are wary of the Mueller investigation.

Trump often speaks of his infamous former lawyer Roy Cohn, who he seems to still hold in high regard. Cohn once said “I bring out the worst in my enemies and that’s how I get them to defeat themselves.” That still seems to be the strategy and frankly it may be working for Trump.

143 thoughts on “Polls Show Trump Holding Base And Even Improving Among Voters”

  1. In 1938 the German ambassador to England told the Nazis back home that Joseph Kennedy could be a very good friend. Of course we all know that the democrat party has had ties to some very unsavory groups.

    1. Ireland was neutral in the war. There is an antipathy to England, for local strategic and also historical reasons. I don’t hold that against Joe.

  2. Sorry Fishy, every one of those statements was taken out of context and used by Dems and media to continually smear Trump as a racist. (For full context, look it up yourself, but I doubt you will).

    The charges you mention were against Trump’s father’s policies, even though his name was on the docket.

    So no, those out of context and misconstrued statements are not enough to brand him a “racist.”

    Got anything else?

    1. ‘Yes’, Trump Is A Racist

      Trump’s entire campaign was based on demonizing Mexicans and Muslims. Most of his campaign speeches were merely improvised rants against those two groups. It’s all on video; numerous campaign rallies in which Trump pandered to overwhelmingly White, angry crowds.

      Yet Trump’s latest target are Vietnamese refugees who have been in the U.S. for up to 40 years. Trump wants to deport about 7,000 Vietnamese based on criminal records going back decades. In many cases these are refugees convicted of misdemeanors 20-30 years ago. A certain number were the offspring of U.S. soldiers. In almost all cases these are people who no longer have any family or friends in Vietnam. Only a racist president would want to pursue such a mindless policy.


      1. Trump’s entire campaign was based on demonizing Mexicans and Muslims.

        Liberals manufacture caricatures then believe their own fictions (or pretend to).

        1. He made a point about Mexes and Muslims and backed it up with a point about VIetnamese. That made little sense. But the point about the Vietnamese is perhaps worth considering going forwards in a better outreach to the Asian community.

      2. link is dead

        if that specific is true, then he’s stupid on that point. He and every other Republican should be working hard to split the Asian Americans off from the Democrats.

        The Democrats are darlings of the Chinese Communist party. And probably Vietnam’s Comms too.

        However, the Chinese Taiwanese Americans are not. And the Chinese who had to flee Vietnam to save their skins are not. The Vietnamese who had to come here after the war, are not. These are natural pro Republican constituencies that could be counted in and counted on, if the effort was made. Reagan had a good support from these sectors.

        Unfortunately, the Republican party is run by a lot of silk stocking idiots. they are lazy and they fail and the party draws its strength not from them but from the people. Trump, has a good instinctive connection to the workers who voted for him, but he is a billionaire after all and only can be so savvy on details. On this he is obviously not. So a topic like this where the strategists and pollsters could actually give him some pointers, they have utterly failed.

        Antagonizing small numbers of asylees in the Asian community, as part of the overall migration restriction effort, was penny wise and pound foolish. Mostly this was Jeff Sessions’ stupid idea. A really bad and stupid idea and Sessions thank God is gone. Probably should have been fired a year earlier and would have been but for the stupid Russia BS.

        1. Those workers don’t know he regularly stiffed little guys in his business. He really doesn’t care about anyone but himself. Isn’t that obvious to you?

          Obama created the TPP – which is now cruising along without us – as an alternative to Chinese dominance in Asian business. It is true that Bernie and other democrats opposed it , but it was expected to pass with GOP help in the Senate. That all changed with the election of the Dear Leader who of course can’t abide any Obama achievements and his sycophantic GOP Senators had to go along. In any case, not sure the ChiComs loved Obama doing that.

    2. When a person is a well established racist it pure oxymoron to refer to them as “smeared with racism.”

  3. Believe it or not, I don’t trust the MSM any more than some of you do. The 6 corporate companies that own everything we see, watch, and listen too have a vested interest in keeping the horse race close. They have cycles that they do, to keep it interesting so they orchestrate performance art. The bad news that Trump gets from them is no different, then the line now they are pushing that the Democrats are going socialist. The both-sides thing can be maddening.

    1. Another way of explaining it: we have a ‘for profit’ political press that has a ‘profit motive problem’ that directly corresponds to the collapse of trust in the “news” media. And….Trump is making them all a whole lotta moola so he gets a whole lotta coverage. And they will all mi$$ him when he’s gone.

      1. And yet they banned and censored Alex Jones? How is some of the stuff prime time cable shows put on the air much different than what Info Wars did? In reality? Not that different…

        Stop the Censorship…Bring back Info Wars!

        1. TBob, Alex Jones got divorced last year. And during the divorce proceedings, his now ex-wife described Jones as truly paranoid. She said he really believes the conspiracies promoted by Info Wars. But Jones’ lawyer claimed Alex is only an entertainer.

          So TBob, if you’re a follower of Alex Jones and you want us to think he is anything less than a deluded idiot, that’s a bad reflection on ‘you’.

          1. Peter — thanks for the update on Alex Jones….I was making a point that some, not all, prime-time cable political ‘news’ shows sometimes, not always, cross the line into the category of ‘info-tainment’… in much the same way Jones’ Info Wars shows delivered a mix of actual news and information plus audience-attention-grabbing entertainment …some of the ‘conspiracies’ promoted on these cable shows are not as outlandish, but they are audience-attention-grabbing conspiracies nonetheless.

          2. anybody who believes every scurrilous thing a woman says in a divorce pleading is a big fool. I don’t believe for example, all the disgusting things morris dees’ ex wife wrote in his. you can pull that one up if you want to read some gross stuff. but see, he’s a creep for a lot of other reasons.

            now alex jones is an entertainer who talks about news. infotainment. that is not a new concept I am sure

            i could also make a list of crazy things jones said that were way ahead of the curve. like BPHs. hormone distorting chemicals in plastics. or like animal human chimera research. it’s hilarious people think he is such a crank. maybe a little but reality itself is crankier than any wise person would like to believe.

      2. The “press” is always held in low regard, though only an idiot would celebrate it’s demise. The partisan commentators and even supposed news sources like The Daily Caller get their information from the organizations with reporters and then regurgitate in a digestible form for those who can’t handle the truth. Many, including those on this board seem to think they can believe whatever they want and that they are now free of the constraints of verifiable facts. They may be, but that makes their knowledge and opinions useless garbage.

        There is no substitute for reporters in the field all over the world collecting information and the newspapers that print that information.

        1. Just out of curiosity….what are your primary sources for these “verifiable facts”? And name one of them that got the 2016 election right….

          1. Because….for all of the MSM outlets, reporters, commentators, editorial boards, pundits, pollsters, and analysts that got the 2016 election so wrong….wouldn’t that make their ‘knowledge and opinions useless garbage’? Why would you listen to them now?

          2. Predicting the future is not reporting verifiable facts.

            By the way, the polling nationally was pretty accurate with Hillary winning by 3 million votes, or 2% of the vote. That is a greater margin than that enjoyed by 11 previous presidents. State polling is not as accurate, a fact known and acknowledged by the experts, and evident in the election turning to the loser based on a total of 70000 votes in 3 states.

            1. “Predicting the future is not reporting verifiable facts.”

              Reporting unreliable facts creates delusions and delusions make predicting the future that much harder.

        2. Last thing….if you saw the WikiLeaks emails, you would know that many recognizable names of various political reporters working for some of these fine newspapers and media outlets were exposed as total hacks emailing John Podesta giving them heads up and running stories by the Clinton campaign. They were also dining together at private parties in each others homes…donating to Hillary’s campaign…and then we had Donna Brazile doing her punditry over at CNN and leaking debate questions to Hillary’s campaign….yup…and I’m guessing many of these are your ‘go-to sources’ for those “verifiable facts”….

          1. You seem confused by the difference between commentators and reporters. Donna Brazille barely makes the cut for the former since her opinions as the former head of the DNC are largely predictable. By the way, the “inside” information she passed prior to the Flint Michigan debate was that there would be a question about their water. Gee, thanks Donna!

            You also seem confused about the requirements for writing and publishing news. It is not required that you have no opinion – who fits that mold, especially among the most informed citizens – but that you don’t let that opinion color your reporting factual information. It’s called professionalism and is a necessary qualification in many pursuits. It is difficult, but not therefore something we should abandon.

            I personally count on the NYTs, WaPo, WSJ, and The Guardian for news, and so do the nation’s leaders and the many opinion blogs which would have nothing to write about without these excellent primary sources.

            1. I agree with some of your points, namely that “There is no substitute for reporters in the field all over the world collecting information and the newspapers that print that information.” You disparaged The Daily Caller, yet I would argue that Chuck Ross is one of the finer political reporters out there today.

              And I would add that “who decides” what stories get covered and reported on and whether they are plastered on front pages or buried deep down with pertinent facts omitted entirely… along with headlines written to spin more favorably for one viewpoint or another, etc etc etc….also happens regularly and is an issue that discerning news consumers should be aware of….See Sharyl Attkisson’s work for one source of good analysis of this issue….

              The onus is on the reader, the consumer of news, to seek out and read as many varied sources of information, news and analysis as their time and interest allows. To put all your faith in 3 or 4 mainstream “excellent primary sources” is foolish in today’s media environment.

              1. I hope we agree then that healthy skepticism is always warranted, but that is a far cry from the President’s attempts to discredit and destroy our news sources. The result of that would be believing whatever you want to believe and finding a blogger to support it – a behavior pattern many already follow.

                I don’t know the Daily Caller reporter you mention and he may be excellent, but their news reporters consist of a handful who hang out at the Congress and the WH. They don’t have desks around the world and reporters in dangerous locations to get the story, like the NYTs and other sources do.

                1. “…the President’s attempts to discredit and destroy our news sources…”

                  Review history….this contentious relationship is nothing new….

                  1. No, it is new. Not only does Trump have an “alternative truth” stream at Fox News and talk radio so that his followers can enjoy the reality they want, but his hostility has been institutional and on an entirely different and dangerous level than whatever grudges might have existed between past presidents and specific newspapers. They didn’t attack all news sources.

                    1. Review history…with the understanding we are in an entirely new and ever-evolving media landscape…

                2. When you begin with, “I don’t know the Daily Caller reporter you mention and he may be excellent…” and then proceed to comment on The Daily Caller saying, “but their news reporters consist of a handful who hang out at the Congress and the WH.” …. and then compare local political reporting being done by TDC with foreign correspondents based all over the world….I’m wondering….do you think offering that sort of opinion is even remotely persuasive?

                  1. Uh, that’s not an “opinion”, it’s a fact. Those who decry our major news sources are often relying on 2nd hand sources who cook the news they get from those major sources. The Daily Caller is one of them, except for DC news which I assume they collect themselves, since they have reporters on it.

              2. Which is why censorship, of any kind, such as what they did to Alex Jones and Info Wars is 100% wrong.

                1. Who censored him? The government isn’t allowed to do that unless the public may be in danger, but private entities can do what they want.

    2. hey Fishy…one last comment….you don’t have to say it again….Bunker, bubble, fresh air….I got it….;)

  4. 1. This poll was taken before Cohen testified and before he flopped spectacularly in Hanoi. The results would likely be lower. And, J.T. you can claim that the little Republican lawmakers’ phony outrage ruse worked, but documents don’t lie. Cohen had copies of checks. Who knows what he turned over to Mueller’s team? Time will tell. Because of the S.D.N.Y. and Mueller investigations, Cohen declined to openly discuss the last conversation he had with Trump or his representatives, but there is concern that he was promised a pardon. 2. Trump has never broken 50% approval rating, and likely never will. In fact, those who oppose him have very strong negative feelings about him that are never going to change because he is so spectacularly incompetent, narcissistic and deceitful. 3. Calling Democrats “socialists” is a well-researched fake talking point. The things Democrats promote that Republicans call “socialist” are supported by most Americans, like Social Security and Medicare for everyone. 4. Trump is still behind Barak Obama at this point. He has not caught up.

    More red meat. I’d like to know why J.T. finds it necessary to participate in the daily affirmation for Trumpsters. Aren’t Hannity, Rush and Faux News enough?

    1. Cohen is going to prison for lying to congress, but you find him that credible? Okay. Hanoi wasn’t a big deal. It’s a bump along the road. A country like North Korea has decades of totalitarian communism behind it – you cannot expect it to change overnight. Talks ARE moving in a positive direction and there have not been more missile tests; that is a huge success by itself.

      You have some cute talking points but nothing substantive, Anonymous. Sorry. I hear your tripe every day of the week and it isn’t convincing at all.

      1. I find credible: 1. the cancelled checks to reimburse him to paying off Stormy Daniels; 2. the 2 sets of books kept by Trump: one for Forbes, so they’d list him as wealthy, and the other for the IRS.

        Trump accomplished nothing in Hanoi except to prove once again that he will stoop to any depths to appear “successful”. He claimed that he believed the word of Kim Jon Un that he knew nothing about Otto Warmbier being beaten almost to the point of death. He did that to curry favor, just like he sided with Putin over American Intelligence, because he wants so desperately to appear to be succeeding. That’s so he can continue pretending to be qualified to be POTUS and to have something, anything to brag about. Hanoi was another flop, which he could have avoided by listening to people more knowledgeable than he. There has been no movement whatsoever, but you Trumpsters need to believe otherwise. In fact, Trump gave ground by scaling back military maneuvers with S. Korea and by siding with Un against the Warmbier family. Any other American President would have done something about the murder of this young man–at minimum, publicly condemning it, if not imposing severe sanctions. N. Korea did nothing to scale back its missile development program after the first summit. He probably tried to use the same technique with N. Korea as he did with Mexico’s President, whom tried to coax into saying publicly that Mexico would pay for the wall, even though they both understood that it wouldn’t, just to make him appear to be a success. Trump is a crook, liar and racist.

        1. I’m interested in seeing all the reasons why you call Trump a “racist.” I’m interested in hearing specific examples…that don’t include comments about Charlottesville, sh*t hole countries, Mexican judges, or Mexico isn’t sending their best (rapists, criminal gangs, drugs). Got anything else?

          1. Not to point out the statements you just covered, but isn’t that enough? Ya know Trump and his father were sued in federal court on racism charges and lost. Look it up yourself, but I doubt you will.

            1. Doh! Look upstream for my reply to you Fishy….

              And I’ll add a few thoughts…

              You know there are plenty of Democrats who have said and done far worse? Northam had a picture of himself in blackface or a Klan hood on his yearbook page…yet still no explanation for any of it…and he is still governor in Virginia. That’s one recent example. Joe Biden referred to Barack Obama as a “clean and articulate” black man, for another example.

              And there are many more like these where the media and political pundits choose to give Democrats a total pass. In each of the Trump statements above, the media and the Dems chose to take them out of context and then spread the lies in order to hurt Trump and brand him “a racist.”

              Barack Obama was given a pass for his ties to slimy corrupt developers and slum landlords in Chicago, so why won’t the press give Trump a pass? It was his father’s policy afterall, not his own, so we should hold Trump responsible for the policies of someone else? That’s what they said about Obama…they excused and brushed off his scandalous ties because ‘how could you hold him responsible for what his close friends and corrupt political supporters did?’ Obama simply said he was a young and inexperienced politician and made some “bone-headed” decisions …and then Poof! it all goes away….just like with Biden’s comments, Northam’s political mess, etc, etc, etc.

              Trump has been helping the black community and working with black leaders for decades — including Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Don King, etc. Look it up yourself, Fishy…but I doubt you will.

          2. Here at Trump Troll Central, legal division, the long history of Trump’s transparently obvious racism is disputed. Quelle surprise.

    2. I partially think he’s not totally down on trump because kellyanne Conway is is former student. The media regularly eviscerates trump on a daily basis and rightfully so. Turley has friends in both parties and is some what of a constitutional centrist. If you’ve been here long enough you’ll see he was pretty anti-bush policy, and he’s blasted a few of trumps more outrageous stunts too.

      I thank you for pointing out this poll is pre-Cohen, but I don’t think it puts JT in league with Hannity and Limbaugh to say the Dems don’t have this in the bag. That’s what Michael Moore said last time yet Clinton continued to ignore the Midwest.

      This is a different reality check in that much of America has a short term memory and is easily swayed by republicans staying in message and parroting the same talking points whether “no collusion” or “socialism is Venezuela”.

      He only has to convince 10% who don’t pay attention anyway, the rest will vote for him anyway, then the ones turned off by it all won’t vote or vote 3rd party and he has a punchers chance.

      Not what I want to hear either but on the bright side in 2 years you’ll have even more youth who hear how the right disregards them on gun control, and 2 years less of the elderly entrenched conservatives left, no offense to any…

  5. Trump is actually in reasonable position for 2020 especially given all the negative events–as Tom Perez aptly put it, “underestimate Trump at your own peril”.

    There are two major strategic risks for Dems right now:

    1) How far left is too far left? The party and the leading contenders are lurching inexorably to the socialist left. Ever politically savvy, Trump encapsulated this extremely well in his SOTU address, “the US will never be a socialist country”.

    Bottom line, if the party goes too far to the socialist left, it will stand to lose a fair amount of moderate Dems and Independents. I suspect the end game for Dem leadership is around a Biden/Beto type ticket, a centrist but with a young “progressive” as VP, but can leadership coalesce the party around that platform when there’s so much energy imbued in the socialist left faction?

    2) Trump Overreach. If the long awaited Mueller report essentially exonerates Trump that will mean there will have been a House investigation, a Senate investigation and a Special Counsel investigation all turning up…nothing. In that context, Dems seriously risk overreaching–ie, how does this not begin to look like Trump’s infamous “witch hunt” mantra with Schiff, Nadler, Warner and Pelosi seemingly summoning the ghost of ex-Soviet secret police head, Lavrentiy Beria (“show me the man and I’ll find you the crime”) in order to politically delegitimize Trump going into 2020? The clear risk is that Dems will look like politicians in the worst possible way which is exactly one of the key sentiments that put Trump in the WH in the first place.

    Let’s just say the next 20 months won’t be dull….

    1. M: SHHHHHH!

      Stop stating the obvious. Let them keep on going in this direction.

    2. Please, if you can, explain what “socialist” things the “left” is promoting? Do you even know? Another fact: most Americans did not vote for Trump, do not support him, and will not vote for him ever again. Are they all “Dems” or “the left”? The fact is, you Trumpsters are the outliers. Being opposed to Trump is mainstream.

      Trump is not “savvy” about anything except garnering attention to himself and pretending to be fabulously wealthy. Did you catch the fact that Cohen produced Trump’s 2 sets of books for 2011 to 2014–one for Forbes, produced so he could qualify be listed as one of the wealthiest people in the world, and another set for the IRS? Has Trump denied the accuracy of these records?

      I know you are a Faux News disciple as your writing proves, but have you kept count of the number of felony pleas and convictions involving Trump and his inner circle? Is it some wild coincidence that Trump is surrounded by crooks? Trump will never be “exonerated”. Even if he avoids prison, that is still not “exoneration”. Did you see him lying again on Sunday, whereby he tried to claim he was “joking” when he called on Russia to hack HRC’s e-mails? Katie Tur interviewed him immediately thereafter, and he said he hoped the Russians would get the e-mails and release them. Notably he did not say he was “joking”, because he wasn’t. Not coincidentally, the next day was the first DNC document dump of hacked e-mails.

        1. Is this kind of response from you to be expected all the time? Maybe you could just stick your fingers in your ears and yell na,na,na I don’t hear you.

      1. It’s not a matter of anyone disagreeing with the accurate Anonymous. It’s quite simple: disagreeing with facts is the action of a fool.. Or in this neighborhood, a Trump Troll.

      2. Glad to help–things I consider basically socialist: Green New Deal, universal basic income, medicare for all, free college tuition for all. History is remarkably clear on the results of socialism so caveat emptor. if the Dem nominee is too far left, moderate, centrist Dems and Independents will be faced with a choice of socialism or Trump and yes, a fair number of those voters will opt for Trump in that scenario. Recent polling shows support for socialism at around 18%. Enough said.

        Re fake news, yes I believe there is fake news–on both the left and right. This is because the media is more interested in promoting narratives rather than news and have consequently thrown journalistic standards to the wayside. If you have a barely verified anonymous source, it’s enough to go to print.

  6. Went in dumb come out dumb too. Hustlin round Atlanta in their allgiator shoes…
    BUTT: And its a big butt. Trump is doing a good job. Nuff said.
    Oh. I predicted that he would resign today. Hmmn

    1. Oh. There is this Nadler guy calling for all these documents from Trump.
      Do you folks know about Nadler’s history in the Red Light District in Amsterdam? He was called Nadler The Tadler and Porked Hookers Who Were Not Lookers.

      1. In other words Nadler would screw ugly women because the price was much cheaper.

    2. How is Trump doing a good job?

      1. On the economy – he has not maintained the job increases under Obama, including even his last 2 years, and he heated up the economy for the short term through deficit spending and cuts, but has still not – and won’t – achieve the promised 4% GDP growth, let alone 3%, and our kids and grand kids will pay for this spree.

      2. Foreign affairs – he’s made zippo of the promised deals – “it will be so easy” – with anybody and ended one that was hard won by the previous administration which achieved a nuclear weapons free Iran. Little Hands can’t get a similar deal with Lil’ Kim. Meanwhile he’s carrying Putin water on NATO – the agreements by our European allies to boost their defense spending were accomplished under Obama, Trump had nothing to do with it – the EU, – and ended our participation in the TPP, which is now going on without us as a counterbalance to China in the region. He doesn’t know wtf he’s doing but ignores those who do – no Donald, NK won’t give up their

      3. Immigration – Trump has neither a coherent policy or an effective short term strategy. The only “crisis” is the numbers of families trying to enter legally under asylum rules, and that does not threaten the US or our citizens. It is a humanitarian crisis which he is making worse by forcing them to try to cross illegally. A wall, which would take months to years to build will not address this crisis. His government shutdown further impacted our ability to handle this crisis.

      4. Domestic – besides for people adjusting to having a president who is a unprincipled lying a.shole, we have a compliant GOP which is now a personality cult without any principles.

      I could go on, but tell us what you think he’s doing hat constitutes a good job.

      1. And Democrats are there every step of the way reaching accross the aisle helping him and working for the welfare and safety of American Citizens right?

  7. Whatever you do, vote with the party….or else
    Do not dissent, do not think for yourself and make sure to nod, scream and take a dump when they tell you to do so
    Otherwise you are done!

    So lovely being a Democrat.


    “Ou Est Robespierre?”

    House Democratic Caucus members were instructed to either vote as they were told, or find themselves on THE LIST. Robespierre would be proud.


    1. ideological conformity makes for a more efficient team. teamwork is what politics is all about. don’t be so sure they will screw their own pooch. the zerohedge article is “charmant” but incorrect analysis.

    1. Bring Hlllary to the rumble and they would disperse as quickly as throwing a few cans of stink bombs

        1. Did you see where Hillary was in the news again just this past weekend?
          She received yet another award, and this time she was introduced as the “duly elected president of the United States,” who had it “stolen from her by the FBI and the Russians.”

          Remember when Hillary said it was a threat to our democracy to refuse to accept the results of our elections?

          1. You said it yourself, she was introduced that way. But in your mind, she said it? Oh, I know HRC controls everything, what people say, do, act……I know it was to hard to pass up when someone says Hillary. Ya start drooling and barking at the moon.

  8. No, I don’t think the numbers tell the story. GOP voters may still be with him, but the party leaders are paralyzed. The “Emergency” was his worst mistake since “zero tolerance”. Now, if McConnell can’t prevent a Senate rejection of it, Trump will be forced to veto. Even if not overridden, it could turn the tide. Impeachment will only happen if Republicans start it, but now, for the first time, it seems possible.

    1. Immigration and dealing with the border has been the elephant in the room for decades. Neither side wants to deal with it. He is forcing the issue since our duly elected representatives are too spineless to actually do so.

      1. That is false.

        The senate passed a major bi-partisan immigration bill in 2013. Boehner would not let it get a vote on the floor, even though it would have passed because of the Hastert Rule.

        1. You are incorrect but then we are repeating ourselves when citing you for lying like Hillary

          1. Tell me how my statement is “incorrect”? Here it is again:

            The senate passed a major bi-partisan immigration bill in 2013. Boehner would not let it get a vote on the floor, even though it would have passed, because of the Hastert Rule.

            1. Sorry Anon, they don’t believe in anything that is not alternative facts. Truth is not truth.

              1. You still believe Obama had a ‘scandal-free’ presidency, doncha Fishy?

                1. All except for refusing to investigate and indict the financial bankster criminals in 1968, supporting the abject stupidity of Eric Holder and destroying Africa’s most successful country, best economy and 92% literacy rate and turning it over to the jihadis. People who think of “Saint Obama” are deluded. Nevertheless, he wasn’t a degenerate and disgusting person unlike present POTUS…

          1. That is false.

            The senate passed a major bi-partisan immigration bill in 2013. Boehner would not let it get a vote on the floor, even though it would have passed because of the Hastert Rule.

        2. Anon,
          Thank you for the update. My memory did not serve me well. I had forgotten those attempts.

          While there does seem to be some compromise for those two bills within the Senate, it appears the House disagreed with the inadequate provisions for border security. They wanted the border to be secured first and then citizenship to be addressed. This sounds reasonable to me.

          Why did they not then renegotiate? Reversing the order would have been better than kicking the can down the road.

          Spineless was inaccurate. Stiff-necked, then. A pox on both houses.

          1. in the case of a national emergency,. like one where any fool can see we need a better fence and wall and doors, but the cheapskate budgeteers would rather keep on spending on whatever other pork comes to their backyard than the national common good, thankfully wise laws emplaced long ago allow for executive action to resolve the logjam.

            1. Mr. Kurtz,
              I am in favor of Trump’s actions, so long as after the wall is built the rest of the reforms are negotiated. Illegal immigration is, among other things, not fair to those who bothered to follow the rules.

              P.S. Should I follow your handle with ‘–he dead’? Eliot fan?

              1. I like Eliot.
                I like Conrad more.
                I especially like the movie based on Heart of Darkness, Apocalypse Now.

                Prof Turley wrote this article after I started commenting on his blog. I am sure he did not write this to please nor honor me. He is smarter than me. but at the risk of claiming some of his glory, I will say, he explains what I was thinking when I adopted this nom de plume here some time ago, which became clear to him and all, during the confirmations.


                “Horror has a face … and you must make a friend of horror.”

                When the character Colonel Walter Kurtz spoke those words in the film “Apocalypse Now,” he described the secret to his success, his epiphany that decency and humanity no longer have a place in war. His words could well describe the aftermath of the Supreme Court confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh. As Kurtz explained, the key is to transcend morality and allow people “to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling, without passion, without judgment, because it is judgment that defeats us.”

                Once the “most deliberative body in the world,” the Senate has finally reached its apocalyptic moment of total political war without judgment…………………….

                The greatest loser, of course, is clearly our confirmation process, which was reduced to the level of decorum and deliberation one would see in an episode of “Keeping Up with the Kardashians.” Both sides decided to unleash our primordial instincts, and it will be hard to get people to accept prior standards of order or fairness in the process.

                Confirmations have now become politics by other means and, as Kurtz said, “perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure” in their savagery. Of course, most partisans in this controversy saw it as a political opportunity. It is now up to the majority of Americans whether this is what we will accept in the future. We can either demand reform of the confirmation process, or we can live with the horrors of primordial politics.”

                Now I also quote Eliot:

                We are the hollow men
                We are the stuffed men
                Leaning together
                Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
                Our dried voices, when
                We whisper together
                Are quiet and meaningless
                As wind in dry grass
                or rats’ feet over broken glass
                In our dry cellar

                Shape without form, shade without colour,
                Paralysed force, gesture without motion;

                Those who have crossed
                With direct eyes, to death’s other kingdom
                Remember us – if at all – not as lost
                Violent souls, but only
                As the hollow men
                The stuffed men.

                1. Mr. Kurtz,
                  Thank you for sharing that. I had not read that piece, and, I have not yet seen Apocalypse Now. I enjoy Eliot, especially The Hollow Men, but have not read Joseph Conrad. I will have to rectify that.

              2. and it is certainly not fair. not fair to the generations of immigrants who preceded us. and not fair to the current immigrants who are tarred by association with the migration influx from central america.

                the abuse of the asylum system for people coming here for money reasons only, has made an over-reaction take place in which the fool Jeff Sessions targeted asylum applicants for deportation too, a policy which had a disparate impact on a group the Republicans can actually draw into their base of support long term if they are smart: Asians

                Thankfully the fool Sessions is gone, and, freshman Democrat Rep AOC is up there making a lot of crazy communist sounding ideas. The more she sounds like a crazy communist, the more people who ran away from the communists, may decide they should vote Republican.

          2. I appreciate your recognition of the facts though I don’t agree with your characterization of the Senate bill as being inadequate on border security. It committed $46 billion to that purpose. The bill would have passed the House if Boehner hadn’t used the Hastert Rule. This was the 2nd time that a GOP led House failed to take up a Senate passed immigration bill

          3. Prairie, in 1986 Reagan signed a bill granting amnesty that was supposed to stop further illegal immigration. Here we are over thirty years later trying to solve the same problem again. Some suggest that we do something similar to what we did before so that in a decade or three we face the same problem and then face it again and again. There is a bit of disingenuinous in those that are so willing to pass reform but not see to it that the border is sealed so that the problem doesn’t recur. The House was right and you are right.

            1. The 2013 bill included $46 billion for border security, including fences and technological barriers, If Trump and the GOP was serious, they would have offered a similarly coherent and comprehensive plan and negotiated – they call it making a deal – to get 60 votes in the Senate. They do not have a plan and are not serious, but prefer demagoging the issue, a tactic which did not work in 2018. Like health care, they don’t have a plan for immigration.

              1. First end the question of any further illegals entering the country with a change in immigration laws so that to be a citizen one had to be born from a citizen. Without that we are back to 1986 over and over again. Then figure out what to do with those that are here illegally and have the guts to protect the American people. One could end the political problems immediately by making it so that none of the people here illegally today could ever vote in any election federal or state. Would the Democrats support that? Of course not. Illegals to them are future Democratic voters.

                1. Allan pretending to have a plan, since there isn’t a Trump/GOP plan he can point to, and his is do “everything our way or nothing”. The latter is what he and Trump got.

                  1. I wouldn’t say Trump is supposed to have a plan. The senators and representatives are supposed to figure out a plan and he gets to sign their decision into law or not.

                    He is forcing them to have to figure it out. The wall needs to be built. They have to figure out the rest. If they do not figure it out, it is on the Democrats and Republicans. People have had enough of their partisanship, refusal to negotiate and work things out for the good of America as a whole.

                    1. That’s some weak excuse. Not only did Trump personally scuttle compromises brought to him by Lindsay Graham on immigration in his first 2 years, If he’s half the deal maker he claims to be why isn’t he bringing the parties together to accomplish something? He’s the deal killer and even GOP senators have given up trying to construct something he’ll sign.

                      Here’s a clue: he doesn’t GAF about any of this. He likes the poses, not the work, and has no interest in any serious issues, Maybe you’ve heard about the frustration WH staff has with trying to get him to read or be educated on anything serious.

                    2. “Not only did Trump personally scuttle compromises ”

                      What are you talking a their cards right they would have been able to deal on other things because he doesn’t really have an ideology. But he is pushing the economy along strengthening our military and resetting trade policy along with a lot of other things so right now as an American and proud to be an American I stand behind him. Likely he will win in 2020 so learn to get along with him until 2024. Also learn to get along with a Republican resurgence in both houses.

                    3. PS The wall doesn’t have to be built. Smart and expert opinion is that some wall – not his monument to himself – mixed with technological barriers is needed, so let’s get it going. The wall will not resolve any “crisis”, as it will take years to build.

                  2. Anon, if you try to remember social studies in school you will remember that the President is part of the executive branch that enforces law. Congress is responsible for passing a law.

                    Trump has been very clear on what he wants. Congress has been very clear that they have been dodging the issue of illegal immigration for decades. The President has shown flexibility and continues to be flexible but he will NOT desert American citizens for the interests of a few.

                    If you wish to blame both parties I won’t disagree. Controlled immigration is fine. Illegal immigration is not. Do you disagree?

                    1. Please refer us to Trump’s “clear” plan, and how he has been so effective working with Congress on achieving it. All we’ve seen so far is his breaking up plans and calling for the “wall” – does he think we all look like Mexicans? Why is he asking us to pay for it?

                      BTW, I understand that your knowledge of how government works ended in Social Studies classes – that is obvious – but now adays Presidents are the leaders of their parties and usually submit their agendas to Congress through their party leaders who try to achieve it.

                      I suggest you read a newspaper, or maybe some of the better public affairs centered magazines like The Atlantic or The Economist to catch up on what adults do.

                    2. “Please refer us to Trump’s “clear” plan, and how he has been so effective working with Congress on achieving it.”

                      You still don’t seem to understand basic social studies we learned a long time ago. Trump is President and Congress passes the laws. To date I don’t think Trump has vetoed any legislation. He has stated what is needed and done his part of the deal and we have see economic growth along with a lot of positive things happening in the nation. That is tremendous. Blame Congress. Blame the Republicans that didn’t carry out his mandate.

                      “BTW, I understand that your knowledge of how government works ended in Social Studies classes – that is obvious”

                      You want to play nasty again. We learned how government worked in grade school and now you want to insult me by stating my knowledge ended with grade school social studies. Anyone who is attentive knows better but since you wish to play games I will respond by saying your knowledge stopped before social studies in grade school. You don’t have the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

                      “Presidents are the leaders of their parties and usually submit their agendas to Congress through their party leaders who try to achieve it.”

                      This is something Trump has done and not only has he informed his leaders but he informed the American people. I blame the Republicans for a lot of this mess as under Obama they said when they regained power they would rid the country of Obamacare. They didn’t. They also said they wanted a wall just like Charles Schumer said but we have a lot of liars in Congress whose offices are dependent on people that do NOT represent the American citizen and its working families.

                      “I suggest you read a newspaper, or maybe some of the better public affairs centered magazines like The Atlantic or The Economist to catch up on what adults do.”

                      More insults. But what have you said that is correct? Very little. Apparently your sources are poor and your reading skills are worse. Stick with construction and skip the brain stuff that appears too taxing for you.

                    3. Allan has earned his insults by his condescending attitude – “social studies – and empty posts. Trump has no plan beyond selling suckers like him. He was presented plans worked out between GOP and Dem leaders back when he had a GOP House and he shot them down without making any overtures on a deal, the very thing he said was “easy” for him and which he brags about, like everything else.

                      Come back when you have a plan. PS A wall is not a response to a “crisis”, since it will take years to accomplish, and I’m not Mexican. If you are, you can pay for it.

                    4. “Allan has earned his insults by his condescending attitude – “social studies ”

                      Anon, we went through this before where I quoted our first conversation on a specific blog where this question came up. The sarcasm was in your words that I quoted in my response. I can’t help it if you keep repeating the same thing that demonstrate you don’t recognize the division of powers in our government. I can’t help it if you are disingenuous. I can’t help it if you state things you could not possibly know. I can’t force you to learn what you are talking about or even how to read a newspaper.

                      You will not take one issue at a time and then deal with facts. You have turned out to be just another hack that doesn’t know what he is talking about and can’t seem to accept the fact that his candidate lost and the other candidate is doing a great job.

      1. Let’s hope the Democrats try. For now they’re only trying to drag him down and slice at his power like a salami. If they try and hack off a big piece however they will see how much his popular support really is. I frankly look forward to this showdown, enough of the petty show trials and monstrations like Cohen’s weepy confessional .

    2. What does GOP have to do with Trumps base?

      Did you subtract the right wing of the left known as RINOs? No? Your mistake.

      Did you add the largest voting block of 2016 that provided 40% of the entire legitimate legal valid vote? No? Your mistake.

      Did you add the unaffiliated Constitutionalist Centrists many of whom have actively joined the political raid on the left by signing up to vote in their elections to defeat real candidates with Ocasios? No? Your mistake.

      Going to vote in the national popularity poll again? Your mistake.

      For the rest of us the Constitutional Republic Party and the Constitutional Centrist Coalition for the affiliated and unaffiliated Need You!

      Constitutionalism vs Socialism!!!

    3. the party leaders are weak. that’s why Trump rose in the first place, and that’s why they have to follow him. They got nothing better to do. The oligarchic financiers which often back both parties, have zero imagination and no concern for the country’s outcomes except their own narrow financial interests.

      The Emergency is not a mistake. The wall is a good part of layered security and we need more wall than we have. If Congress is a bunch of malingering anti-American saboteurs, then let the POTUS us his lawful power to redirect security funds to the purpose.

      And let the whiners expose themselves for people who don’t want to lock the doors at nigh, so more crooks can sneak in and plunder.

  9. “highly negative view of the socialist wing of the Democratic party”. They have another wing?

    1. There are five or six leaders with no followers, seven or eight factions with no leaders and …… nope that pretty much sums up the Party with no reason to exist.

      They aren’t democratic and there is no such thing as Our Democracy in the USA

      It’s a cover up for Socialism of one kind or another.

      The choice is

      Constitutionalism vs Sociaism.

  10. and just why should we trust any poll that is in the least bit associated with our media or academia. Projection of their desire to see Trump fail is written all over anything that they produce. What is disappointing is anyone taking this data as worth the time to reprint.

  11. “Polls Show Trump Holding Base And Even Improving Among Voters”

    All this despite a press that has demonized and savaged the President for over 2 years. That has a negative effect on how many view the President The press did the same to Reagan but not as bad. Gradually people are learning not to trust the press and our friends here are going to go ballistic when they see that happening.

    1. I wonder how much better this country would be doing if the Democrats had not declared open warfare on The American People for not following orders to elect Hillary in order to punish them, nullify their choice and make sure they don’t do it again with all their obstructionist tactics.

      1. A lot better, a lot safer and a lot more unified with a lot less racism, tribalism and violence.

        1. People associated with the Democratic Party are responsible for 100% of the tribalism, the bulk of the racism, and the bulk of the violence as well.

          1. I’m into tribalism and I”m a Republican. Probably there are some more like me too. But yeah they’re into milking that stuff.

          2. I suppose the southern strategy was just a myth to you? How about the fact that Trent Lott and Stromm Thurmond convinces the Reagan Administration to reverse course from Carter on having the IRS sue to end subsidies to Bob Jones University with their policy of a ban on interracial dating. You see the GOP has “13” females in the house (about the same as in the 80s), and call it tribalism when the Dems have a 89.

            I’m sorry but old white men can’t accurately represent 90% of this country in the 21st century as the GOP house would have you believe with 180/200 of its members. That’s not tribalism, that’s a progressive party making an effort to bridge the gap with minority communities and the other not giving a hoot. In the election half the GOP candidates denounced trump for his bigoted statements, now you like them want to pretend that never happened

            1. “That’s not tribalism, that’s a progressive party” walking lockstep in jackboots to any crazy idea that appears even if it is to vote defending the right to kill babies.

              1. Sorry if I give a crying infant more deference than a sperm that just touched an egg. You want a policy that encouraged women dying in backalley abortions and locked up mothers who couldn’t afford another child?

                Some of your politicians don’t even want to allow abortion in cases of rape or the mothers life being at stake. I’d prefer to let women choose whether they should have the right to choose than men playing God and instituting a punitive and archaic system that gives more weight to a fetus without a functioning heart or brain in the first or second trimester than the expecting mother. And what will you do when the wealthy leave the country to have abortions? Arrest them when they land? Ban all immigrants from China and India who had?

                1. CK07, you have demonstrated that you aren’t even able to read. I didn’t say one word about abortion but you said a lot without saying much of anything.

                  Maybe you got excited because you are one those walking lockstep in jackboots to preserve the perception of a crazy right. You want to kill infants after they are born and seperated from their mothers at which point they are without question American citizens. Maybe not.

                  Why don’t you clarify the issue. Do you or do you not support a bill that prevents the murder of any reasonably healthy infant already born and seperated from the mother?

                  That is a simple question that requires only a simple answer. After answering that we can line draw and discuss the rest.

                    1. Take note Anon how you haven’t looked at what happened in Illinois and that has happened elsewhere whether or not your wife is an Ob Gyn nurse. Take note that you didn’t check out what I said about Switzerland and France.

                      Yes, it is illegal to murder American citizens and yes the doctor should be charged with murder, but things aren’t that clear and the infant can be left to die on the table. That is why such a law needs to be made and why Illinois debated such a law. Clear lines need to be drawn but the baby killers don’t want clear lines.

                      Don’t act like an idiot so that your aren’t called one.

            2. Well, I see we have the release of the random static running around in your head, including an administrative regulation proposed 37 years ago.

    1. You fancy yourself ‘knowledgeable’ because you subscribe to inane conspiracy theories.

  12. Why is it that Mr Trump can shoot someone in the middle of 5th avenue and nobody cares, and if anyone else does that, they wind up in prison? He must be the second coming of Christ.

    1. “Why is it that Mr Trump can shoot someone in the middle of 5th avenue and nobody cares, and if anyone else does that, they wind up in prison?”

      Samantha, why ask a nonsensical question?

      1. Same reason Pace Picante outsells New York Salsa. It’s good and the other doesn’t exist.

    2. Why is it?
      The two tier justice system in this country is extending Trump a courtesy get out of jail card because he used to he a Democrat.
      He can still claim guilty but not prosecutable by reason of being Democrat.

      1. Easy answer to the question and yours is wrong . It’s the magic six words that only a President has.

        “to the best of my ability”

        No one can convict him of anything unless they convict themselves first. The true meaning of collusion. Suck it up Snowflake Crumbs. That seat is your petard.

    3. Why did Trump say that? Because Trump used to be a Democrat. The Democrat credo: Power, by any means necessary, is always justified.

      Why is it that Hillary Clinton can cheat, lie, break laws, commit crimes, collude, connive, be a Wall St. stooge, but not wind up in prison? Because she’s a Democrat. Why can Obama destroy the Democrat party, leave it in shambles, and ride off into the sunset to live his lifestyles of the rich and famous life, and still be glorified by the party he decimated? Because he’s a Democrat. The ends justifies the means — if you’re a Democrat. Look at what the Dems are doing. Show me one, just one, Democrat in power, who has anything close to what someone in their right mind would call moral or ethical standards? They have none. It’s all about power.

  13. “Moreover, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll,the polls shows people with a highly negative view of the socialist wing of the Democratic party and less than forty percent believe Michael Cohen.”

    The article should also mention distrust in the media. 42% trust the media. With that in mind, it is likely a strong percentage distrust the press on how and what they report about Trump and government.


    Heck, journalists aren’t even trustworthy when it comes to people not even associated with the government. The treatment of Jordan Peterson in the press is a prime example.

    Fair and balanced reporting is crucial to a free society and trust, yet the overwhelmingly Democrat media are choosing misrepresentation, propaganda, and sensationalism over the ideals of their profession.

    1. you need to understand that culture informs what people believe is truth. the Enlightenment era notion that there is an easily observed truth out there which can always be reported by some vaunted objective press is a fantasy. It is, itself, observably untrue.

      Private convictions shape reporting just as much as government censors do. This is obvious. America’s openness to different viewpoints emerges from our wise First Amendment, but let’s not be so foolish as to think that reporters of whom 90% or so are Democrats, are going to fail to phrase their writing in such a way to favor their own.

      That’s why independent media is important and the First amendment in its broadest applications to journalism are critical for our people at this precarious moment.

      The First amendment is not about making obscenity free for public consumption. It is not even about a making an impermeable “wall of separation” to keep private religious observance out of public square. It is most of all about protecting political speech.

  14. Of course, he’s holding his own. When you compare him to the socialist Democrats, he’s positively Lincolnesque. Once you get out of the Beltway Bubble your head clears, objects take on many different colors again and you find the world isn’t obsessed with politics. We do however know a threat when we see one and that threat is real.

    1. Mespo

      After the SDNY brings RICO charges against him, will you call it fake news?

      1. bill:

        No. I’ll call it what it is: a political witch hunt by a vigilante sure to be dismissed by a jury. Then I look for cover from all those pigs flying.

      2. it will be fun to watch as the many trump supporters outside of NYC try and enter the island with their pitchforks. Or maybe just do what truckers sometimes do in France, set up a blockage and stop food shipments for a week. It would be an interesting experiment.

Comments are closed.