New polling shows President Donald Trump rising in battleground states. The polling has frustrated some, particularly at CNN where viewers were told not to put much stake in its own polling. CNN conducted a poll that showed that Trump had a seven-point lead over Joe Biden in some battleground states with 52 percent over 45 percent for Biden. On “CNN Newsroom” John King cautioned viewers not to “overinvest” in CNN’s own polling. The polls do not fit the narrative of a president who is tanking due to his mishandling of the pandemic. Other polls are showing Trump rising and even leading in states like Ohio. I actually agree with King that we should be leery of all polls as demonstrated by 2016. It is just the caution on this poll that seems a tad out of the norm.
King warned viewers “Be careful not to invest too much in any one poll, especially in the middle of a pandemic.” That seems like relying on hope over polling.
There is also an interesting poll out of Rasmussen Reports which has tended to show figures more favorable to President Donald Trump. While Trump appears to be rising in some polls and still holds remarkably high support and enthusiasm numbers among Republicans, roughly one-in-four GOP voters would prefer someone else to be their nominee. The polls contradicts the narrative that the GOP is a cult of personality. Many of these voters would still support Trump on his policies, but 23 percent would like to see someone else. That is still less than the 28 percent of Democratic voters who would like to see someone other than former Vice President Joe Biden.
Notably, 70 percent disagree and only 7 percent are undecided. Those are pretty hardened numbers.
Both Republican women and younger Republicans are more likely to want to see another nominee.
It is equally interesting to see that, while Trump has received low approval numbers for his handling of the pandemic, Biden is not surging and actually failing behind Trump in some battleground states. Some polls show Biden leading by as many as six points but that is a sprint distance for a presidential election, as shown by Hillary Clinton. In other words, this is a very weird election and it is getting weirder.
I would watch Clowns Not News if they had clown suits on and wrestled with horns honking in the background.
Free prizes would be given out to loyal viewers in what the great Bozo called pimentos instead of mementos.
I wonder what their ratings would be without doctor’s office waiting rooms and airport lounges.
I’m sure our external enemies tremble in fear of manly man Brian Stelter. (not really)
Same network that was predicting a landslide victory for Billary right up to the end and then reacted with shock when Trump won. It appears it’s learning nothing from that experience.
Nothing weird here except more of the former left who ARE decent Citizens are walking away from the Socialist scum party and it’s leaders Schumer and Pelosi. Another big batch will stay home and another group get it’s revenge on the left from the far left home of Comrade Sanders. To most it doesn’t matter and one version of a foreign ideology is just as rejectable to real Citizens as the other. Just a build up to 2016 Part II
Trump’s Low Standing In World Community Creates Leadership Vaccuum
The Trump administration has repeatedly claimed that the US is “leading the world” with its response to the pandemic, but it does not seem to be going in any direction the world wants to follow.
Across Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, views of the US handling of the coronavirus crisis are uniformly negative and range from horror through derision to sympathy. Donald Trump’s musings from the White House briefing room, particularly his thoughts on injecting disinfectant, have drawn the attention of the planet.
The US has emerged as a global hotspot for the pandemic, a giant petri dish for the Sars-CoV-2 virus. As the death toll rises, Trump’s claims to global leadership have became more far-fetched. He told Republicans last week that he had had a round of phone calls with Angela Merkel, Shinzo Abe and other unnamed world leaders and insisted “so many of them, almost all of them, I would say all of them” believe the US is leading the way.
None of the leaders he mentioned has said anything to suggest that was true. At each milestone of the crisis, European leaders have been taken aback by Trump’s lack of consultation with them – when he suspended travel to the US from Europe on 12 March without warning Brussels, for example. A week later, politicians in Berlin accused Trump of an “unfriendly act” for offering “large sums of money” to get a German company developing a vaccine to move its research wing to the US.
The president’s abrupt decision to cut funding to the World Health Organization last month also came as a shock. The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, a former Spanish foreign minister, wrote on Twitter: “There is no reason justifying this move at a moment when their efforts are needed more than ever to help contain & mitigate the coronavirus pandemic.”
A poll in France last week found Merkel to be far and away the most trusted world leader. Just 2% had confidence Trump was leading the world in the right direction. Only Boris Johnson and Xi Jinping inspired less faith.
A survey this week by the British Foreign Policy Group found 28% of Britons trusted the US to act responsibly on the world stage, a drop of 13 percentage points since January, with the biggest drop in confidence coming among Conservative voters.
Around the globe, the “America first” response pursued by the Trump administration has alienated close allies. In Canada, it was the White House order in April to halt shipments of critical N95 protective masks to Canadian hospitals that was the breaking point.
The Ontario premier, Doug Ford, who had previously spoken out in support of Trump on several occasions, said the decision was like letting a family member “starve” during a crisis.
In several countries, the local health authorities have felt obliged to put out statements to counter “health advice” coming from the White House, concerning the ingestion of disinfectant and taking hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug found to be ineffective against Covid-19 and potentially lethal.
Trump’s decision not to take part in a global effort to find a vaccine, and his abrupt severance of financial support to the WHO at the height of the pandemic, added outrage and prompted complaints that the US was surrendering its role of global leadership.
Edited from: “World Looks On In Horror As Trump Flails Over Pandemic Despite Claims U.S. Leads Way”
Today’s Guardian
Bullschit, which pretty much sums up both today’s and yesterday’s Guardian as well you who posts it. No one cares what the Guardian thinks and especially not on this side of the pond.
I think Trump will win in November. There are about 35%-40% of voters who will eagerly support Trump no matter what he does. While Biden has more general support, he has a much smaller base of strong supporters, and he can not go out and campaign to get more supporters. I am seeing Trump 2020 signs up already, and not a single Biden one. I saw the same sign gap in 2016.
Yes and poor Mr Biden’s dementia is growing worse, normal progression of illness. But sad to see it in action, and him carrying the burden of this leadership role when so many other candidates had more vigor. Well, it’s how the party wanted it I guess.
It’s not sad. It’s a pathetic example of a desperate calculation by a bankrupt and debauched political party. Biden himself has always been a back bencher, second rate intellect and corrupt, political hack. What’s sad is your apparent delusional interpretation of political reality.
Take it to the bank Molly and with a landslide (unless the bank is giving you negative interest rates) and I’m a yank. I think I know a thing or two about what’s happening in America
After polls showed Herself having a 90%+ chance of wining right up to election day, why would anyone pay attention to polls?
MofoKnow – But, but, but … that was 538, the King of Polling who said that Hillary had over a 90% chance of winning.
And that was the Electoral College, not the stinking popular vote!!!
538 dropped a Hillary win to about 65% in the week before the election.
MollyG – the day of the election Nate gave Trump a 29% chance to win and the flop sweated from there. Others were as low as 2%
Still about at 1/3 chance, which is pretty good. Trump winning with 0.29 odds says nothing bad about the polls.
Listen loser, that’s the constitutional process for over two hundred years, both before and after the election and your stinking popular vote was all in two corrupted states with crooked polls and fraudulent voting.
marty lopez – you really do not get the concept of satire, do you. 😉
The electoral college is how our democracy works numb nuts. It’s part of our constitution and has been for well over 200 years. Your popular vote was corrupt and centered in 2 states (NY & Ca.). You don’t know what you are talking about. You just know what you think you want and that’s all you care about. But then maybe that’s why you are a loser and will be again in Nov when trump wins by a landslide
marty lopez – two things you need to learn. 1) Capitalize proper names 2) Satire.
Listen to the Chechs.
Trump started losing the independents that secretly voted for him in ’16 the minute he put out the travel ban on Muslim countries. And stepped back huge with women. And then he proceded to outdo himself one time after the next on the way to becoming the single worst president in the history of the nation. Done deal.
Of course he’ll always have his fans (well represented on this blog) who’d love to kill a third of this nation’s population and get away with it. They will always be there, no doubt, until taking their oldness and their whiteness to the grave with them.
It’ll be a pleasure to check back in on this room in November to see what true derangement syndrom looks like.
They and your ilk will be alive when you return in November, save an act of God. SARS-CoV-2 is inconsequential. The fatality rate, as I have stated for months, is below 1%. New data from Germany reports it is actually lower… 0.36%
Use another strategy to paralyze Americans. Most are itching to get back into the gym, work and do what they do best: live large.
https://www.ukbonn.de/C12582D3002FD21D/vwLookupDownloads/Streeck_et_al_Infection_fatality_rate_of_SARS_CoV_2_infection2.pdf/$FILE/Streeck_et_al_Infection_fatality_rate_of_SARS_CoV_2_infection2.pdf
Infection fatality rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a German community with a super-spreading event
One key parameter to assessing the potential impact that SARS-CoV-2 infection poses on societies is the fatality rate. However, the fatality rate of ‘cases’ (case fatality rate, CFR) widely varies between countries. ‘Cases’ do not cover the whole spectrum of SARS-CoV-2 infections reaching from asymptomatic to lethal. Therefore, we set out to determine the infection fatality rate (IFR) based on the total number of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. We chose the German community Gangelt which had been exposed to a super-spreading event. A random population sample revealed that an estimated 15.53% of the population in this community is or was infected with the virus, which is 5-fold higher than the officially reported number of PCR- positives. Based on the estimated percentage of infected people in this population, the IFR was estimated to be 0.36% [0.29%; 0.45%].
Love how the right has taken to using that expression “your ilk”!! Ha!
As far as those wanting to get back to the gym, theater, etc…
Well, burpees and HIIT in the park is a better workout. Let’s you lean out and not get blown up like a big bag of dysfunctional dog crap.
And streaming entertainment is the future. Theaters are on the down side of their existence anyway. Their occupancy rates were attrocius before all this. They’ve had to shift into being more of a sort of destination location to survive anyway. Covid 19 just sped it up by 5 years. The one to infinity theaters will be warehouses by the end of the ’20’s. More likely they’ll be bulldozed and sold off for space to put solar panels to tap into the energy grid.
World’s changed inside of a couple of months, Estovir. Trump could shoot someone on 5th Ave and get away with it, but shooting grandpa in the nursing home doesn’t vibe as well.
Of course, the death rate argument is just the first step to positive vote for a holocaust. Let’s not mistake what that’s about.
Party on.
We get it: science is not your thing. Try this instead:
Of course there will always be idiots like yourself. We think Trump the best American President since we kicked the British King out of the colonies he didn’t know how to rule. We neither need nor desire your approval.
Please do check in and see what an idiot you have been. I’m betting you don’t approve of Brexit either?
Dear, Heckish L Vis
How much more deranged can you possibly get than the statement you just made:
“Of course he’ll always have his fans (well represented on this blog) who’d love to kill a third of this nation’s population and get away with it.”
That is true derangement and then your sickening invoking of the “Holocaust” only certain to win him more votes from people including independents who see just how far the left has left their minds.
CNN, Fox News, NYTimes, WSJ, they’re all the same.
Americans turn to themselves for light and truth, which is how our country sank to the depths we presently wallow. Americans call it freedom. Of course they do. Watch them gloat in their frivolity.
Even a non-believing ex-Communist saw the Light.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/pope-john-paul-iis-soviet-spy-11589498606
Pope John Paul II’s Soviet Spy: Even to a hardened nonbeliever, the Polish pontiff could be ‘a source of light.’
By George Weigel
Students of the Cold War’s dark arts know that Communist intelligence services deeply penetrated the Vatican in the 1970s. Yet few know that Pope John Paul II, whose centenary will be marked on May 18, had his own secret agent in the Soviet Union during the 1980s. That relationship led to a remarkable personal encounter that helps explain what made the pope the man he was.
John Paul’s unlikely 007 was Irina Ilovayskaya Alberti, the Russian-born widow of an Italian diplomat. A former personal assistant to Alexander Solzhenitsyn in Vermont, she met the pope quite by accident during a papal audience in the early 1980s. A friendship quickly developed between them. As the Gorbachev thaw made access to the U.S.S.R. easier, Alberti traveled to the country several times a year. “If I learned anything interesting,” she told me years later, “I’d call the pope, we’d meet, and I’d tell him.” Vatican diplomats, who liked to keep such matters on close hold, didn’t appreciate that kind of back channel. But John Paul had a habit of going around his mandarins when he thought doing so might yield useful information. He ignored the traditional managers and kept in touch with his clandestine operative.
As it happened, Alberti was also a friend of Yelena Bonner, the tough-minded wife of Soviet nuclear physicist and human-rights campaigner Andrei Sakharov. Under house arrest in 1985, Sakharov went on a hunger strike and demanded Soviet officials let his wife leave the country for critical medical care. The authorities finally agreed, but Sakharov was hostage to Bonner’s good behavior abroad. That meant no meetings with world leaders or the press.
Alberti still thought Bonner should meet the pope. When she came to Rome after her medical treatment, Alberti organized a subterfuge that had the Roman press corps chasing Bonner’s children as she drove the recovering dissident into Vatican City, incognito. Emotionally hardened by decades of battling the KGB, Bonner wasn’t given to sentimentality. Nor was she religious. Yet a two-hour, one-on-one meeting with Pope John Paul II left her sobbing. She told Alberti afterward, “He’s the most incredible man I’ve ever met. He’s all light. He is a source of light.”
The Bonner-John Paul II relationship continued for years and eventually led to a lengthy private meeting between the pope and Sakharov, who sought advice about playing a political role in the endgame of the U.S.S.R. It was that first meeting with Bonner—and her reaction to this Pole, a man she had never met before and the leader of a faith she didn’t share—that is worth pondering on John Paul’s centenary, though.
How did Pope John Paul II touch hearts and minds, even those of unbelievers, the way he did? He was a man of probing intelligence, an experienced pastor, a polyglot and a shrewd operator on the world stage. His commitment to basic human rights, irrespective of religious conviction or the lack thereof, had been demonstrated time and again during his years as archbishop of Krakow and as pope. He had paid the price of that advocacy with his own blood, surviving an assassination attempt that he certainly suspected had been initiated in Moscow.
But that curriculum vitae and that credibility do not explain why a tearful nonbeliever should say, “He is all light. He is a source of light.” Or why, in his last years, wracked by Parkinson’s disease, he could still draw vast crowds and lift the spirits of the suffering.
Pope John Paul II cannot be explained or understood unless he is taken for what he said he was: a radically converted Christian disciple. He believed that God had revealed himself in history, first to the Jewish people and ultimately in Jesus of Nazareth. He believed that the resurrection of the crucified Nazarene was the axial point of the human saga: an event in and beyond what we know as “history,” which disclosed that God’s passionate love for humanity was stronger than death itself.
Believing that, he lived without fear. And living without fear, he inspired fearlessness in others. He was “a source of light” because he spent his life allowing what he had experienced as divine light to shine through him.
Mr. Weigel is a distinguished senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a biographer of John Paul II.
Thank god we have superior beings like yourself to lead us around. Not.
Trump Rates Highest In Rasmussen Poll
But Even There He Is Only 49%
In Most Polls Trump Has Deficit Of 5 – 7%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
Just to be clear: national polls aren’t particularly useful in determining who will win the Electoral College. Voters in different states have a different “vote power” (which gets defined in different ways, but most often as the ratio of the number of electors for that state to the population in that state or to the voting-eligible population in that state), and Republicans have an EC advantage because they are the majority in many of the states with large ratios. This is why people with expertise, like 538, focus on aggregating state polls over national polls. Also, job approval ratings aren’t a good substitute for voting polls, especially polls of likely voters. If someone doesn’t vote, it doesn’t matter if they think Trump’s good or bad at his job. (For a discussion of a second kind “swing voter,” those who don’t vote regularly: https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/01/14/swing-voters-us-politics ).
If a CrappyNotNews poll says 52-45 for President Trump, that means it is closer to 60-40 in favor of Trump. All polls are bs.
Bingo. Polls are used to form public opinion not to predict it.
The most amazing part to this story is that CNN actually reported the poll at all.
As a rule, anything that can be construed as favorable to Trump is verboten.
Curious…
Polls this early are iffy, so CNN is right to be cautious. However, it is their poll and they do over sample Democrats, so the results are worse than they look. CA-25 is a good idea of what may happen in November.
The vote harvesters in California will have the 12% in the box before election day.
Absurd, you’re stupid LIE pretends that no Republicans in California are watching the vote. Like McCarthy and Nunes are totally disengaged?? Like the millions of Republicans in California have no idea where this alleged ‘harvesting’ is taking place??
Your premise is so stupid, that only the stupidest people could possibly buy into it. It’s like saying a night invasion of Normandy would have worked out better because the Germans wouldn’t have seen us coming.
Your remarks shows who is stupid. Vote harvesting isn’t susceptible to vote watching by Republicans moron. Do you even know what vote harvesting is and how it is done? Obviously not.
Thanks for the venture into unhinged hallucination. Been an education.
Gee, really important stuff there JT.
Hey!
You!
There’s a GD crisis of biblical proportions in which hundreds of thousands are dying worldwide and tens of millions of Americans are losing their jobs, and you spend your day obsessing over MSNBC and CNN.
You’re not a serious person.
BtB:
Then go away.
Typical Democrat; you insult the author if he doesn’t write something that pleases you.
You are a prime example of why an opinion channel like CNN survives.
“Waaaah! Me not like it when Bad Turley tell troof about Maim Stream Media! Him is only supposed to tease FOXNews! Waaaah!” (Foot stomp. Holds breath until turns blue. Gets on floor and kicks feet.)
There! Translated it for you!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Agreed that this isn’t important. But as big a problem is that Turley is a law professor, and instead of focusing on analysis of the legal issues where he has some expertise, he’s choosing to focus on an issue that he doesn’t have any expertise in.
King’s advice “Be careful not to invest too much in any one poll, especially in the middle of a pandemic” is correct advice, not “angst.” Leave the polling analysis to people who have expertise in it, like the folks at 538, who understand about the need to draw on multiple polls and that things can change over time (for two examples: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo , https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/ ). The polls about Biden and Trump right now really don’t matter much. With respect to presidential election polling, the polls close to the election will be much more relevant.
“as big a problem is that Turley is a law professor, and instead of focusing on analysis of the legal issues where he has some expertise, he’s choosing to focus on an issue that he doesn’t have any expertise in.”
How is this a “problem”?
He lacks the knowledge to discuss polling in an informed way. My opinion is that it’s unproductive for him to write articles where he lacks an appropriate knowledge base, especially when there are more important issues to discuss, some of which he does have a knowledge base. You’re certainly free to have a different opinion about it.
Well stated, I commend you.
CNN POLLS, are well known for over sampling DEM’s and are designed to be negative to Trump, so when CNN comes out with a poll about Trump leading in Battleground states, with al their effort to paint another picture, you know its BAD for Biden and the Trump haters.
This lockdown by the Blue State DEM GOVERNOS and MAYORS is going to backfire. They fail to realize that they are killing businesses, jobs, and people’s spirt and there is going to be a price to be paid for those who keep things lockdown while TRUMP continues to say open and project Positive spirt and upbeat.
Of course they warn viewers. Pollsters haven’t been able to figure out how to produce a sampling frame from which they generate reliable results. At the same time, they produce reams of polls. Forty years ago, you had just a few pollsters (Gallup, Harris, Roper, Yankelovich), they had a landline network and some history with face to face surveys, and produced fewer polls. The pollsters in question weren’t push pollers, either. The situation in the survey research used by journalists is another example of decadence in this country.
OTOH, if the polls showed Biden way ahead, then there would have been crickets from CNN about possible error.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
It is astounding to watch the level of obfuscation and hypocrisy oozing out of the MSM. Forget Covid-19, TDS is far more lethal to the life of this nation as we know it.
What makes CNN a leftist media? They don’t always fully support Dear Orange Leader.
What makes bill a TDS idiot….why CNN does
You have it backward: Trump supporters have TDS.
Absolutely.
After the results of the 2016 election, how can anybody put stock into polls. Small sample sizes are a joke in any analytical analysis.
The polls are pretty accurate, but they tell the mood now, not what it will be in November. A properly worded and sampled poll of 1000 people asking a binary questions will produce about a 3% error rate.