Trump is barely over 50% nationally and he's barely above 40% in Iowa & NH. Considered as a incumbent president, those are horrendous numbers. In any other year, anyone looking at the numbers would call Trump likely to bomb even if he scrapes through the primary. An incumbent with numbers this bad would be considered dead in the water.
Trump is barely over 50% nationally and he's barely above 40% in Iowa & NH. Considered as a incumbent president, those are horrendous numbers. In any other year, anyone looking at the numbers would call Trump likely to bomb even if he scrapes through the primary. An incumbent with numbers this bad would be considered dead in the water.
Your post is fairy dust. He’s beating the mannequin known as “Joe Biden”, who’s also the “President”. Trump is ahead by 35-40 points over the RNC Keebler elves running against him to please their donor masters. All of them are on a bobsled to anonymity. Any pollster worth his salt will tell you that all these numbers are very bad news for the people running against at Trump, regardless of the party. If Kennedy runs as an independent, the Marxists will have to cheat twice as hard. If you are a never Trumper, you’re basically a Democrat. Do you have a John Kasich bobble head on your dashboard? You stand for Trump or you’re against America et this point. Not complicated. Everybody else is a status quo prostitute.,
AMES, IA — Donald Trump far outpaces other Republican presidential nominees in an Iowa State University/Civiqs poll, which surveyed 1,128 registered voters from Sept. 2-7. The results are the first in a five-part, monthly poll intended to track shifting voter perspectives before the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 15, 2024.
Among the participants, 434 said they “definitely” or “probably” will attend the Iowa Republican Caucuses and identified themselves as Republican or independent. Just over half (51%) of these likely Republican caucus-goers picked former President Trump as their top choice. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis trailed in second place with 14%, followed by former U.N. Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (10%) and entrepreneur and political commentator Vivek Ramaswamy (9%).
Furthermore, your statement is not accurate. If 49% of voters like someone other than Trump in a primary, you’re telling me that none of them are going to vote for Trump in the general election versus a Marxist Democrat puppet? “C’mon man”...as your “President” likes to say...
Why do you particularly believe this poll over others? In any case an incumbent Republican president getting just 51% support among likely Iowa caucusgoers would be considered terrible, terrible news for him in any other year. You are literally refusing to face the facts you yourself are posting.
Your returns seem to have diminished considerably more than mine. I'm trying to get you to say whether you think 51% among Iowa caucusgoers is good or bad for an incumbent and you're glaringly avoiding the question.
Simple fact is that an incumbent doing 43% in Iowa would be considered toast in the general. Admit it or don't. Trump's not quite an incumbent but it's not unreasonable to consider him as one.
If support for Trump was as broad and deep as you imply, then he'd have to be doing better than 43%, wouldn't he? How do you square that? A literal majority of Republicans want someone else. Just depends on if support coalesces around one alternative fast enough.
Trump is barely over 50% nationally and he's barely above 40% in Iowa & NH. Considered as a incumbent president, those are horrendous numbers. In any other year, anyone looking at the numbers would call Trump likely to bomb even if he scrapes through the primary. An incumbent with numbers this bad would be considered dead in the water.
Your post is fairy dust. He’s beating the mannequin known as “Joe Biden”, who’s also the “President”. Trump is ahead by 35-40 points over the RNC Keebler elves running against him to please their donor masters. All of them are on a bobsled to anonymity. Any pollster worth his salt will tell you that all these numbers are very bad news for the people running against at Trump, regardless of the party. If Kennedy runs as an independent, the Marxists will have to cheat twice as hard. If you are a never Trumper, you’re basically a Democrat. Do you have a John Kasich bobble head on your dashboard? You stand for Trump or you’re against America et this point. Not complicated. Everybody else is a status quo prostitute.,
Be serious. Every mainstream poll is a suppression poll. Here’s a poll from yesterday.
Your numbers are incorrect. https://www.news.iastate.edu/news/2023/09/08/24caucus-poll1
AMES, IA — Donald Trump far outpaces other Republican presidential nominees in an Iowa State University/Civiqs poll, which surveyed 1,128 registered voters from Sept. 2-7. The results are the first in a five-part, monthly poll intended to track shifting voter perspectives before the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 15, 2024.
Among the participants, 434 said they “definitely” or “probably” will attend the Iowa Republican Caucuses and identified themselves as Republican or independent. Just over half (51%) of these likely Republican caucus-goers picked former President Trump as their top choice. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis trailed in second place with 14%, followed by former U.N. Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (10%) and entrepreneur and political commentator Vivek Ramaswamy (9%).
Furthermore, your statement is not accurate. If 49% of voters like someone other than Trump in a primary, you’re telling me that none of them are going to vote for Trump in the general election versus a Marxist Democrat puppet? “C’mon man”...as your “President” likes to say...
Why do you particularly believe this poll over others? In any case an incumbent Republican president getting just 51% support among likely Iowa caucusgoers would be considered terrible, terrible news for him in any other year. You are literally refusing to face the facts you yourself are posting.
Yeah, ok. The Keebler Elves will win. You got me. Genius argument. Jaw dropping logic. Next.
Thanks for admitting that Trump's numbers are terrible for an incumbent, I think?
No. We’ve just reached the point of diminishing returns on this conversation.
Your returns seem to have diminished considerably more than mine. I'm trying to get you to say whether you think 51% among Iowa caucusgoers is good or bad for an incumbent and you're glaringly avoiding the question.
You’re SOL, ma’am.
Oh so now we're at the fingers-in-my-eers, neener-neener stage. It's fine if you don't want to listen - you can leave.
Simple fact is that an incumbent doing 43% in Iowa would be considered toast in the general. Admit it or don't. Trump's not quite an incumbent but it's not unreasonable to consider him as one.
If support for Trump was as broad and deep as you imply, then he'd have to be doing better than 43%, wouldn't he? How do you square that? A literal majority of Republicans want someone else. Just depends on if support coalesces around one alternative fast enough.