Trump would lose the 3 state’s that got him the Presidency today….Poll…

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote last November….

That was one contest…

But not THE CONTEST…..

You get the job as American President by winning the Electoral vote….

THAT Donald Trump won….

But 7 months after he managed to do something we ALL thought he couldn’t?

Trump has lost the faith of those who enabled him to beat the odds and pundits….(He STILL HAS strong Republican support in those states though, not OVERALL )

In the 2016 presidential election, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin accounted for a combined 46 electoral votes which helped propel Donald Trump into the White House.  But, how do residents of these Rust Belt states think President Trump is doing now?

In each of these states, majorities disapprove of the president’s job performance.  His approval rating hovers in only the mid-thirties.  In Michigan, 36% of residents statewide approve of his job performance, and 55% disapprove.  In Pennsylvania, 33% approve of how President Trump is doing in his post, and 52% disapprove.  Among Wisconsin residents, the president’s score is similarly upside down, 33% to 56%.

“For residents of these three critical electoral states, the reaction to the first round of the Trump presidency is decidedly negative,” says Dr. Lee M. Miringoff, Director of The Marist College Institute for Public Opinion.  “Residents are clearly dissatisfied in how candidate Trump transitioned into President Trump.”

Many Republicans and Tea Party supporters are in the president’s camp.  Still, notable proportions of Tea Party supporters in Michigan, 24%, and Pennsylvania, 24%, have doubts about how the president is executing his job.

Trump still has the support of most of those who backed him in the 2016 election.  Most Trump supporters in Michigan, 84%, Pennsylvania, 81%, and Wisconsin, 77%, approve of the president’s job performance.

Among white residents without a college education, President Trump outperforms his overall job performance rating in each of these states.  However, he fails to achieve 50% among this group, many of whom were his most ardent supporters in the 2016 election.  In fact, in Michigan and Wisconsin, the plurality of these residents now disapprove of how the president is doing his job.

By at least two to one, more residents in Michigan, 38%, Pennsylvania, 39%, and Wisconsin, 42%, strongly disapprove than strongly approve of how the president is doing his job…..



Remember Trump won the above states by SMALL margins….Those margins in the OVERALL vote are gone according the Marist poll…..

And Barack Obama IS STILL strongly favored in the above states and would easily beat Trump in a had to race if was possible…

Share on Facebook

30 thoughts on “Trump would lose the 3 state’s that got him the Presidency today….Poll…”

  1. The National Popular Vote bill is 61% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

    All voters would be valued equally in presidential elections, no matter where they live.
    Candidates, as in other elections, would allocate their time, money, polling, organizing, and ad buys roughly in proportion to the population

    Every vote, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
    No more distorting, crude, and divisive and red and blue state maps of predictable outcomes, that don’t represent any minority party voters within each state.
    No more handful of ‘battleground’ states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable states that have just been ‘spectators’ and ignored after the conventions.

    The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.
    All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes among all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.

    In 2017, the bill has passed the New Mexico Senate and Oregon House.
    The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).
    Since 2006, the bill has passed 35 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 261 electoral votes.
    The bill has been enacted by 11 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the way to guaranteeing the presidency to the candidate with the most popular votes in the country


  2. Various times I have had supporters of the National Popular vote campaign drop in here at the Pdog….

    I agree that the issue of the electoral college, as the second BUT MORE important contest for President, presents an issue….

    But I simply do NOT see how Republicans would allow this…

    Democratic voter strength is in the major cities around the country….

    The popular vote, which should be the only criterial for the job of President would , in my mind, would be owned by Democrats….

  3. Of course the Republicans are never going to agree with that.

    They haven’t won the popular vote for the Presidency once since 1988.

    Sure the Electoral College is an anachronism , but one that works to their advantage.

    I have mentioned several times that in 2004 a switch of just 60 000 votes in Ohio and John Kerry would have been elected President although he would have lost the popular vote to Bush by roughly the same margin as Trump did to Hillary.

    Had such happened, there may have been a bipartisan push to get rid of the EC.

  4. Yeah but by that time you Republicans and your leaderTrump will have made America “great” again.

    What?Me worry?

  5. From 1932-2008 the combined popular vote for Presidential candidates added up to Democrats: 745,407,082 and Republican: 745,297,123 — a virtual tie.

    Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

    The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

    In 2016 the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill 40-16-4.
    Two-thirds of the Republicans and two-thirds of the Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives sponsored the bill.
    In January 2016, two-thirds of the Arizona Senate sponsored the bill.

    In 2014, the Oklahoma Senate passed the bill by a 28–18 margin.

    On March 25, 2014 in the New York Senate, Republicans supported the bill 27-2; Republicans endorsed by the Conservative Party by 26-2; The Conservative Party of New York endorsed the bill.
    In the New York Assembly, Republicans supported the bill 21–18; Republicans endorsed by the Conservative party supported the bill 18–16.

    The National Advisory Board of National Popular Vote includes former Congressmen John Anderson (R–Illinois and later independent presidential candidate), John Buchanan (R–Alabama), and former Senators David Durenberger (R–Minnesota), and Jake Garn (R–Utah).

    Supporters of the National Popular Vote bill include former Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN), Governor Jim Edgar (R–IL), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA)

    Saul Anuzis, former Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party for five years and a former candidate for chairman of the Republican National Committee, supports the National Popular Vote plan as the fairest way to make sure every vote matters, and also as a way to help Conservative Republican candidates. This is not a partisan issue and the National Popular Vote plan would not help either party over the other.

    The Nebraska GOP State Chairman, Mark Fahleson.

    Michael Long, chairman of the Conservative Party of New York State

    Rich Bolen, a Constitutional scholar, attorney at law, and Republican Party Chairman for Lexington County, South Carolina, wrote:”A Conservative Case for National Popular Vote: Why I support a state-based plan to reform the Electoral College.”

    Some other supporters who wrote forewords to “Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote include:

    Laura Brod who served in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 2003 to 2010 and was the ranking Republican member of the Tax Committee. She was the Minnesota Public Sector Chair for ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) and active in the Council of State Governments.

    James Brulte the California Republican Party chairman, who served as Republican Leader of the California State Assembly from 1992 to 1996, California State Senator from 1996 to 2004, and Senate Republican leader from 2000 to 2004.

    Ray Haynes who served as the National Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in 2000. He served in the California State Senate from 1994 to 2002 and was elected to the Assembly in 1992 and 2002

    Dean Murray was a member of the New York State Assembly. He was a Tea Party organizer before being elected to the Assembly as a Republican, Conservative Party member in February 2010. He was described by Fox News as the first Tea Party candidate elected to office in the United States.

    Thomas L. Pearce who served as a Michigan State Representative from 2005–2010 and was appointed Dean of the Republican Caucus. He has led several faith-based initiatives in Lansing.

    Support for a national popular vote has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in polls

  6. The precariousness of the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes is highlighted by the fact that a difference of a few thousand voters in one, two, or three states would have elected the second-place candidate in 5 of the 16 presidential elections since World War II.

    Near misses are now frequently common. There have been 8 consecutive non-landslide presidential elections since 1988.

    After the 2012 election, Nate Silver calculated that “Mitt Romney may have had to win the national popular vote by three percentage points on Tuesday to be assured of winning the Electoral College.”

  7. Voters in the biggest cities in the US are almost exactly balanced out by rural areas in terms of population and partisan composition.

    16% of the U.S. population lives outside the nation’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Rural America has voted 60% Republican. None of the 10 most rural states matter now.

    16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.
    The population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States.

    The rest of the U.S., in suburbs, divide almost exactly equally between Republicans and Democrats.

  8. Otto?

    Your numbers quoted shows a roughly 100,000 vote advantage for Democrats…

    Just what I pointed out…
    Republicans can count….

  9. I agree with you that the system sucks….

    And REALLY gives us TWO concurrent contests running every four years…With one a DIRECT one for one vote and the other weighted to favor small population states…

  10. otto is that damned chat-bot again; you can’t talk to him/it because it just churns out the same unvarying boilerplate when reading the same key words on line.

    And Jack is wrong; George W. Bush won an absolute majority of the popular vote in 2004 (more than 50% though less than 51%; but then only four Democrats have ever won more than 51% of the popular presidential vote: Jackson, FDR, LBJ and Obama, and only four others have won over 50%: Van Buren, Pierce, Samuel Tilden and Carter.)

    But in seven elections since 1988, G.W. Bush’s re-election was the only one where the Democrats failed to win more popular votes than the G.O.P. (The others were Bill Clinton 1992 & 1996, Gore 2000, Obama 2008 & 2012 and Hillary Clinton 2016).

    Democratic presidential candidates winning more than 48.0% of the national popular vote:

    Year — Dem % — D candidate

    1964 — 61.05% — LBJ
    1936 — 60.80% — FDR 2

    1932 — 57.41% — FDR 1
    1828 — 55.97% — Jackson 2
    1940 — 54.74% — FDR 3
    1832 — 54.23% — Jackson 3
    1944 — 53.39% — FDR 4
    2008 — 52.92% — Obama 1

    2012 — 50.97% — Obama 2
    1876 — 50.92% — Tilden
    1852 — 50.84% — Pierce
    1836 — 50.83% — Van Buren 1
    1976 — 50.08% — Carter 1

    1960 — 49.72% — JFK
    1948 — 49.55% — Truman
    1844 — 49.54% — Polk
    1916 — 49.24% — Wilson 2
    1996 — 49.23% — Clinton 2

    1884 — 48.85% — Cleveland 1
    1888 — 48.63% — Cleveland 2
    2000 — 48.38% — Gore
    2004 — 48.27% — Kerry
    1880 — 48.22% — Hancock

    Republican & Whig presidential candidates winning more than 48.0% of the national popular vote:

    1972 — 60.67% — Nixon 3
    1920 — 60.32% — Harding

    1984 — 58.77% — Reagan 2
    1928 — 58.21% — Hoover 1
    1956 — 57.37% — Ike 2
    1904 — 56.42% — TR 1
    1872 — 55.58% — Grant 2
    1952 — 55.18% — Ike 1
    1864 — 55.03% — Lincoln 2
    1924 — 54.04% — Coolidge
    1988 — 53.37% — GHW Bush 1
    1840 — 52.88% — Wm H. Harrison 2
    1868 — 52.66% — Grant 1

    1900 — 51.64% — McKinley 2
    1908 — 51.57% — Taft 1
    1896 — 51.02% — McKinley 1

    1980 — 50.75% — Reagan 1
    2004 — 50.73% — GW Bush 2

    1960 — 49.55% — Nixon 1

    1880 — 48.31% — Garfield
    1884 — 48.28% — Blaine
    1844 — 48.08% — Clay 3
    1976 — 48.02% — Ford

  11. Otto?

    Ya gotta tell the truth on the big cities….

    They DO vote Democratic….
    Republicans can also read…

    …from Pew in early 2016 that proved prophetic ….

    ….One caveat is in order about Democrats’ big-county advantage: Even as their grip on these counties has tightened, they carry less electoral heft than they used to. The 100 largest counties in 1976 together cast almost 44% of the total vote in that year’s presidential election; in 2012, the top-100 vote share had slipped to 39.4%….

    More @

    ….Trump WON solely on the electoral vote….WTF would Republicans go popular vote?

  12. But the fundamental point remains;

    The Republicans won three presidential elections to the Democrats’ four in the Electoral College, but lost the popular vote six times to only one popular victory. (Only 14% of the popular election pluralities, but 43% of the presidential terms, spanning 28 years, from 1993 to 2021.)

    Similarly the (racist and reactionary) Democrats won more votes than the Republicans in half (five) of the the ten presidential elections from 1856 to 1892, but sent only three of their candidates to the White House (Buchanan 1856 plus Cleveland 1884 & 1892), compared to the Republicans’ seven (Lincoln 1860 & 1864, Grant 1868 & 1872 and Garfield 1880 plus the popular vote losers Rutherford Hayes in 1876 and Benjamin Harrison in 1888).

    From Grover Cleveland’s return in 1892 to Bill Clinton’s re-election in 1996 (27 consecutive elections), the candidate who became President had also won more national popular votes than any other single candidate in that election. So it was not totally unreasonable then to think that the possibility of a popular-vote loser beating the winner to the White House was an awkward but theoretical problem.

  13. I stand by Jack and I’s ( and others I suspect) view that GOPer’s are NOT gonna let the popular vote thing go ANYWHERE…


    Ya gotta do better…

  14. DSD was right to correct me .

    I did know that .I left out the word “but” before the word “once” in my post of yesterday’s @12:05 .

    And he is correct that there is no “Otto.”It is just an automated responder.You are arguing with a machine James.

  15. Jack, you were also in the totality of the eclipse yesterday correct?
    Did the weather there cooperate? We had mostly clear skies, though it was incredibly hot. The zone of totality started just a few blocks south of my house. It was incredible to see!

  16. I said

    “From 1932-2008 the combined popular vote for Presidential candidates added up to Democrats: 745,407,082 and Republican: 745,297,123 — a virtual tie.”

    Over 76 years, a 100,000 vote difference IS a “virtual tie,” as I said.

  17. The auto bot has probably never faced a debate competitor like James – so it is faced with repeating itself – just like the rest of us who engage James. The only difference is that Otto likely repeats with the exact same words that it said two years ago.

    Otto might rank in the top twelve contributors of pdog. And Of course he is just one of James’ millions of followers.

  18. Welcome back Z…..

    Good to hear from ya….

    He, he, he….

    I’m waiting for million’s to show up….

  19. If Democrats “own the large cities,” then Republicans almost equally “own” the rural states.

    16% of the U.S. population lives outside the nation’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Rural America has voted 60% Republican.

    16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.
    The population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the U.S.

  20. I think you aren’t REALLY a ‘bot’ otto are you?

    The Democratic vote, of which we agree are MORE…

    Come mostly from large cities….

    Those large cities even in Red states vote Democratic…


    I man/woman…One vote with NO electoral college WOULD be advantageous to Democrats at the expense of rural Republicans….


    Why in the world would Republicans allow themselves to be shut out of the Presidency?

  21. Because of state-by-state winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution. . .

    Policies important to the citizens of the 38 non-battleground states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.

    “Battleground” states receive 7% more presidentially controlled grants than “spectator” states, twice as many presidential disaster declarations, more Superfund enforcement exemptions, and more No Child Left Behind law exemptions.

    Compare the response to hurricane Katrina (in Louisiana, a “safe” state) to the federal response to hurricanes in Florida (a “swing” state) under Presidents of both parties. President Obama took more interest in the BP oil spill, once it reached Florida’s shores, after it had first reached Louisiana. Some pandering policy examples include ethanol subsidies, steel tariffs, and Medicare Part D. Policies not given priority, include those most important to non-battleground states – like water issues in the west.

    The interests of battleground states shape innumerable government policies, including, for example, steel quotas imposed by the free-trade president, George W. Bush, from the free-trade party.

    Parochial local considerations of battleground states preoccupy presidential candidates as well as sitting Presidents (contemplating their own reelection or the ascension of their preferred successor).

    Even travel by sitting Presidents and Cabinet members in non-election years has been skewed to battleground states

  22. The response to natural disasters is complex…
    President’s deal with the immediate response,…
    but CONGRESS handles the long term money part….
    That involves the political parties…
    Natural disasters tend to happen in rural and Red state’s …
    Area’s so it IS in their interests to keep
    The electoral system which I repeat FAVORS THE REPUBLICANS..

    You are not doing well on this Otto….

Comments are closed.