Latest news with #independents
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
What polls show about a very confusing political landscape
The political landscape right now is more confusing than a corn maze. For every data point that suggests Republicans face headwinds, there seems to be another that suggests Democrats should hold their britches. It all leaves this political analyst wondering just what the heck is going on out there, to paraphrase the great Vince Lombardi. Trump's popularity Let's start with President Donald Trump's approval rating. Gallup released a poll last week putting Trump's approval rating (37%), way down from the beginning of his second term (47%). The poll made a lot of press. Then you have the Wall Street Journal survey, which got a lot less play and showed something very different. Trump's net approval ratings among registered voters (approval - disapproval), while still negative at -6 percentage points, have barely declined from earlier this year. His approval rating of 46% looks a lot like it did at the start of the year. There are even surveys that have Trump's approval rating basically equal to his disapproval rating. Diving deeper into the data can leave one more befuddled, even when looking at the averages. Trump's approval rating with independents is lower than any president at this point in office. Yet he's lost very little ground with Republicans since the beginning of the year. This is important because there are a lot of them (e.g. see the section below this one). The average overall, regardless of how you compute the average, still does have Trump's net approval negative. That's where I think it is. Yet, I can't guarantee it. We've seen too many times in the last decade that the range of the results gave us a better understanding of the potential outcomes than the average did at pinpointing where things would end up. Party identification Pollsters will almost always ask how people identify themselves: Democrat, Republican or independent. Then they'll follow that up by asking independents whether they lean toward the Democratic or Republican side of the aisle. Party identification is one of the fundamental variables to understand how people will vote. Most Democrats will vote for Democratic candidates, while most Republicans will vote for Republican candidates. No wonder a lot of people took note of the Pew Research Center's annual benchmark poll that was released last week that showed 46% of the country were Republican or leaned Republican to 45% who were Democratic or leaned Democratic. That margin is no different from last year's version of the poll, before Trump won the presidency again. Pew's data, however, isn't the only data. I asked Quinnipiac University for their polls conducted during roughly the same period. Quinnipiac shows a pretty clear swing to the Democrats over the course of the year. During the January-to-February period, Republicans (including leaners) held a 1- to 3-point advantage on party affiliation. Democrats, however, were ahead by 2 to 4 points in the April and June polls. This included two 4-point edges in both June surveys they put into the field. I don't know who is right. The truth probably lies somewhere in between. Democrats may be slightly ahead, though that's not great on a metric where they have usually been ahead over the years. The generic congressional ballot This question is one of my favorites. It asks respondents some form of 'would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate from your district?' The polling does seem to have the Democrats up. The Journal has them up narrowly among registered voters by 3 points. A Reuters/Ipsos poll from June finds the parties about evenly matched, with Democrats at 40% to Republicans' 38%. This is well behind the pace of where Democrats were in either 2005 or 2017 — the years before they won wave elections in the midterms. The Democratic lead in those cycles was closer to 7 points. Confused? You haven't seen anything yet. Ipsos' poll actually looks no different from their final poll on the subject in 2024, the year Republicans held on to the House. The Journal poll, which is one of Trump's better ones, shows the Democrats gaining significantly from its final survey in 2024, when Republicans were up by 4 points. But the seat-by-seat landscape in the House isn't the most appealing for Democrats. Both the Cook Political Report and Inside Elections show more potential pickup opportunities for the Republicans than Democrats. This is without any pro-Republican redistricting that might occur in Texas — or potential pro-Democratic redistricting in other states as retaliation for whatever Texas does. Democrats had more pickup chances than Republicans by this point in both 2005 and especially 2017, according to Cook. I should point out, however, that Democrats don't need a wave to take back the House. They need a small gain given the GOP's razor-thin majority. But with a smaller-than-usual lead on the generic ballot for Democrats and potential redistricting, that may not happen. The bottom line All of this leaves me a little befuddled. I believe Trump is more unpopular than not. Given that fact, I believe Republicans are in clear trouble for 2026. I'd probably have said the same thing during the 2022 cycle, when Joe Biden's approval rating was awful heading into those midterms. And while Democrats lost the House that fall, Republicans barely pulled it off. This cycle strikes me as even more confusing. And who can forget the most important variable? It's still 2025. It was only months before the 2022 midterms that Roe v. Wade got overturned and gave Democrats a political shot in the arm. We have a long way to go.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
What polls show about a very confusing political landscape
The political landscape right now is more confusing than a corn maze. For every data point that suggests Republicans face headwinds, there seems to be another that suggests Democrats should hold their britches. It all leaves this political analyst wondering just what the heck is going on out there, to paraphrase the great Vince Lombardi. Trump's popularity Let's start with President Donald Trump's approval rating. Gallup released a poll last week putting Trump's approval rating (37%), way down from the beginning of his second term (47%). The poll made a lot of press. Then you have the Wall Street Journal survey, which got a lot less play and showed something very different. Trump's net approval ratings among registered voters (approval - disapproval), while still negative at -6 percentage points, have barely declined from earlier this year. His approval rating of 46% looks a lot like it did at the start of the year. There are even surveys that have Trump's approval rating basically equal to his disapproval rating. Diving deeper into the data can leave one more befuddled, even when looking at the averages. Trump's approval rating with independents is lower than any president at this point in office. Yet he's lost very little ground with Republicans since the beginning of the year. This is important because there are a lot of them (e.g. see the section below this one). The average overall, regardless of how you compute the average, still does have Trump's net approval negative. That's where I think it is. Yet, I can't guarantee it. We've seen too many times in the last decade that the range of the results gave us a better understanding of the potential outcomes than the average did at pinpointing where things would end up. Party identification Pollsters will almost always ask how people identify themselves: Democrat, Republican or independent. Then they'll follow that up by asking independents whether they lean toward the Democratic or Republican side of the aisle. Party identification is one of the fundamental variables to understand how people will vote. Most Democrats will vote for Democratic candidates, while most Republicans will vote for Republican candidates. No wonder a lot of people took note of the Pew Research Center's annual benchmark poll that was released last week that showed 46% of the country were Republican or leaned Republican to 45% who were Democratic or leaned Democratic. That margin is no different from last year's version of the poll, before Trump won the presidency again. Pew's data, however, isn't the only data. I asked Quinnipiac University for their polls conducted during roughly the same period. Quinnipiac shows a pretty clear swing to the Democrats over the course of the year. During the January-to-February period, Republicans (including leaners) held a 1- to 3-point advantage on party affiliation. Democrats, however, were ahead by 2 to 4 points in the April and June polls. This included two 4-point edges in both June surveys they put into the field. I don't know who is right. The truth probably lies somewhere in between. Democrats may be slightly ahead, though that's not great on a metric where they have usually been ahead over the years. The generic congressional ballot This question is one of my favorites. It asks respondents some form of 'would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate from your district?' The polling does seem to have the Democrats up. The Journal has them up narrowly among registered voters by 3 points. A Reuters/Ipsos poll from June finds the parties about evenly matched, with Democrats at 40% to Republicans' 38%. This is well behind the pace of where Democrats were in either 2005 or 2017 — the years before they won wave elections in the midterms. The Democratic lead in those cycles was closer to 7 points. Confused? You haven't seen anything yet. Ipsos' poll actually looks no different from their final poll on the subject in 2024, the year Republicans held on to the House. The Journal poll, which is one of Trump's better ones, shows the Democrats gaining significantly from its final survey in 2024, when Republicans were up by 4 points. But the seat-by-seat landscape in the House isn't the most appealing for Democrats. Both the Cook Political Report and Inside Elections show more potential pickup opportunities for the Republicans than Democrats. This is without any pro-Republican redistricting that might occur in Texas — or potential pro-Democratic redistricting in other states as retaliation for whatever Texas does. Democrats had more pickup chances than Republicans by this point in both 2005 and especially 2017, according to Cook. I should point out, however, that Democrats don't need a wave to take back the House. They need a small gain given the GOP's razor-thin majority. But with a smaller-than-usual lead on the generic ballot for Democrats and potential redistricting, that may not happen. The bottom line All of this leaves me a little befuddled. I believe Trump is more unpopular than not. Given that fact, I believe Republicans are in clear trouble for 2026. I'd probably have said the same thing during the 2022 cycle, when Joe Biden's approval rating was awful heading into those midterms. And while Democrats lost the House that fall, Republicans barely pulled it off. This cycle strikes me as even more confusing. And who can forget the most important variable? It's still 2025. It was only months before the 2022 midterms that Roe v. Wade got overturned and gave Democrats a political shot in the arm. We have a long way to go.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump loses favor with independents; overall approval hits 37 percent: Gallup
President Trump's approval rating dropped to its lowest level of his second term, a shift fueled by a decline in support among independents, according to a new survey. The latest Gallup poll found 37 percent of U.S. adults say they approve of the president's performance in office — down from 40 percent in June, 43 percent in May and 44 percent in April. Trump's overall approval rating is also down 10 points since taking office in January. The decline in job approval rating is most acute among independents — 29 percent of whom say they approve of Trump's handling of the job in the latest survey. That's down 7 points since June and down 17 points since January, the survey revealed. Trump began his term with 46 percent approval among independents, but that dropped to the mid-30s for the past several months, before dipping into the high-20s in the July poll. Among Republicans, 89 percent approve of the president's handling of the presidency, a level that has remained largely consistent since his return to the Oval Office. Similarly, Democrats' approval of Trump's presidency so far has hovered in the low-single digits since January, with just 2 percent approving in the latest survey. Trump's favorability mirrors trends seen in his approval ratings. Among adults, 41 percent hold a favorable view of the president — down from 48 percent in January, the poll shows. Independents view Trump far less favorably than they did six months ago — with 34 percent holding a favorable view today, down from 47 percent in January, according to Gallup. The latest survey began shortly after the president signed into law his massive tax and spending bill, which contains a slew of the president's domestic policy priorities. The survey also overlapped with the growing frustration among Republicans over the government's handling of files related to disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The Justice Department released a memo on July 7 — the same day the poll launched — concluding there was no evidence Epstein kept a client list and that officials would not pursue additional charges or disclose additional documents in the case. The Gallup survey was conducted July 7-21 featuring 1,002 adults and has a margin of error of 4 percentage points. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Just Broke A New Record — And He Won't Be Happy About It
When it comes to disapproval ratings, President Donald Trump is WINNING. A survey conducted over the weekend by Economist/YouGov reports that it asked 1,680 U.S. adults how they felt about the way Trump is handling the presidency, and his disapproval rating hit a record high in his second term, reaching a big, beautiful 55%. This is compared to 41% who approve of Trump. It's a spike from the prior week's numbers, in which 53% of respondents disapproved while 42% approved. Trump started his second term with 43% disapproval and 49% approval. It appears that the decline in Trump's favorability since he took office in January is largely due to Democrats and independents. According to Economist/YouGov's polls, the approval rating among Democrats was at 12% when Trump 2.0 began earlier this year. Today, only 3% approve of him. As for independents, 41% approved of him in January, while 29% approve now. Considering last week's kerfuffle surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein case being closed — which has some of Trump's base turning against him — the most recent survey also asked respondents whether or not they felt the government is covering up evidence it has about Epstein. In response, 59% of people who said they voted for Trump in the 2024 election responded with 'yes.' Related... Republican Senator Says One Trump Move Made Him 'Done With This Bulls**t' Why Is Trump Constantly S**tting On Cities? Political Scientists Have A Theory Trump Melts Down Over 'Jeffrey Epstein Hoax' — And The Internet Explodes


New York Times
11-07-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
CFB's smallest independents list since 1869, plus Texas Tech pressure
Until Saturday Newsletter 🏈 | This is The Athletic's college football newsletter. Sign up here to receive Until Saturday directly in your inbox. Today in college football news, happy Clipse day to all who are celebrating. About halfway through this newsletter's conference previews countdown, it feels natural to lump the Pac-12 and the independents together, if for no reason other than these few stray bodies need to bundle up together for the coming autumn. Though the independent ranks have been slowly dwindling for over a century as conferences have sprouted and bloated, FBS had seven as recently as 2022 (the current two, plus Army, BYU, Liberty, New Mexico State and UMass, which is now back in the MAC). In case you'd like to see how many major indies there were in each previous decade, even though 'major indies' would be a music-industry oxymoron, here's a chart that starts around the time the proto-Big Ten began as the first major conference in 1896: Maybe you also want to know which season had the most independents playing at whatever level was equivalent to FBS at the time? In 1905, there were 73 indies among the 82 teams recognized by CFB historian James Howell as majors. Everyone who wasn't in the proto-Big Ten, basically. Anyway, back to 2025. I had one question each for four people who know a lot about these four teams — one objective beat writer and three knowledgeable fans. First, on the two conference-less holdouts: Last season, a lot of neutral fans fell (begrudgingly) in love with Notre Dame's blunt-force offense. With Riley Leonard gone — and yet to officially be replaced — how do you see the offense changing this season? Pete Sampson, The Athletic's Notre Dame beat writer: In an ideal world for Marcus Freeman, the offense should be able to beat teams without beating them over the head with the run game. Sophomore CJ Carr likely takes over for Leonard, and his skill set is more pro-style passer than battering ram. Running back Jeremiyah Love is back, but the pass game could be a lot better with Carr and the incoming receivers. At UConn, Jim Mora just had a 9-4 season that called to mind Randy Edsall's 2000s glory years, and various computers are projecting another winning record. Seems like independence is actually working fine? No Escalators, a longtime UConn social media presence: It's great. They've been able to set schedules that have a much more attractive mix than what they had in the AAC. Mora has done a great job steadying the ship, and NIL has helped a lot too. UConn doesn't have P5 TV money (yet), but it has as many resources as anyone else in the G5, and it is using them. Those two teams are not scheduled to meet in any upcoming season. The Huskies remain 1-0 against the Irish, having won in 2009 — Charlie Weis' final South Bend game. As for the Pac-12's remnant: Halfway through the Pac-12's two-year limbo era, what does this … feel like? Ashtyn Butuso, Oregon State alum and editor-in-chief of Flagrant, a hoops magazine: I worked at the Pac-12 Network (RIP), and I see the same mismanagement in the conference today. I'm still mourning the loss of the best conference. CFB used to bring me so much joy, and now I'm almost dreading September. I hope the Big Ten and the SEC enjoy buying 10,000 more championships. They will mean nothing. The magic is gone, and money ruins everything. Go Beavs forever. Brian Floyd, director of strategy for USA Today Sports Media Group and former CougCenter writer: Sadness has mostly replaced anger. Starting over can be exciting, but that feeling is offset by seeing the cuts to the athletic department, departure of athletes and coaches, and worries about how Pullman may change without big home-game weekends. Wazzu's athletic department has long pushed the boulder up the hill, but this time, the rock took out all the people pushing it and flattened a village, too. Absolutely, it sucks to feel like the most pressing things to ask OSU and WSU knowers are questions about tribulations instead of actual ball. (The Beavers might have stopped the roster bleeding! Washington State is FBS South Dakota State now!) And now I'm mad all over again at Pac-12 leadership and Big Ten greed for the feeding frenzy that gutted the old conference. This year, the Pac-2 meet in Corvallis on Nov. 1, then in Pullman on Nov. 29. Last year, 5-7 OSU took the theoretical league crown over 8-5 Wazzu. 🎮 Is College Football 26 worth the upgrade, for those who already have last year's game? Chris Vannini's detailed review lands on the same grade as Until Saturday's mini-review. Consensus. 🏆 Why the Big 12 would rather get one automatic bid than two, explained by commissioner Brett Yormark. 💰 Deion Sanders called for a salary cap in college sports. The 'revenue-sharing' thing is as close as it's ever gonna get, but in a world where coaches (like Deion) make $10M while top QBs make less than half that, maybe there are some salaries that should be capped. 🥶 ICYMI, second-time UCF coach Scott Frost said he regrets leaving the Knights in 2017 for his alma mater, Nebraska. There's a lot going on there. 🧢 Texas Tech's recruiting weekend was an even bigger success than just that one headline, as Grace Raynor explains in this national recruiting catch-up from earlier this week. 💰 'A new college sports enforcement arm charged with regulating name, image and likeness payments to athletes issued guidance Thursday that could make it extremely difficult for school-affiliated collectives to get their deals with athletes approved.' Speaking of Texas Tech's acquisitions (a common thing to speak about, these days), here are just a few of the quotes in this story on what Big 12 coaches think about the billionaire-boosted Red Raiders' roster: Actually, that last one was by Joey McGuire, Tech's own head coach. Guess we're all on the same page. The Big 12 isn't releasing official media predictions this year (after last year's were just about the most upside-down predictions I've ever seen, led by Arizona State going from No. 16 to No. 1), but Tech is in a five-way tie for the conference lead in BetMGM's odds (while also being No. 3 in SP+ and No. 7 in FPI). How fascinating is Texas Tech right now? Here's one of the two Red Raider questions Stewart Mandel fielded in his mailbag this week: Seeing a non-blue blood program like Texas Tech make splash after splash in recruiting is wild. Am I wrong in thinking the powers-that-be are going to do everything they can to stamp this out? — Houston As I wrote a few weeks ago, people in college athletics have earnestly convinced themselves that the House settlement is going to 'level the playing field.' In fact, it's the exact opposite. If the CSC/Deloitte succeeds in eliminating pay-for-play booster deals and the only thing schools can offer is that $20.5 million in rev-share, good luck to the Texas Techs of the world ever beating the likes of Texas or Ohio State again. Sure, you might beat one of them out for a specific prospect, if you're willing to devote more of your rev-share budget than they are. But that's just going to leave you with less for guys further down your roster, who, if the dollars are comparable, are probably going to pick the blue blood over the upstart nine times out of 10. Again, this is why Texas Tech fascinates me. I think it's safe to say no billionaire booster has ever spent more on talent acquisition than Cody Campbell. Indeed, Phil Knight (Oregon) and Boone Pickens (Oklahoma State) helped their programs gain relevance before him, but most of their money was spent on buildings. So far in the NIL era, football has not been a strictly 'rich get richer' proposition. In some cases, like Texas Tech, it's been the rich lifting their favorite school out of poverty. But I realize many of you find the whole thing icky. If the new model holds up, we can all go back to the more innocent days of recruits picking their schools based on coaching relationships, academics, development, secretly paid-for unofficial visits, McDonald's bags and a hush-hush job and/or apartment for mom or dad. More Mandel mailbag. That's a wrap for this week. Email me at untilsaturday@ with your recommendation on which school should buck the trend and go independent. 📫 Love Until Saturday? Check out The Athletic's other newsletters, too.