In fairness, that's only if we select the polls that show his approval rating as being low while ignoring the higher ones. His aggregated approval rating is probably closer to 40.1%. While not the lowest it has been, it's still quite low and apparently falling.
Well, these are the most recent polls, coming from A rated pollsters. Of course an aggregate is always going to look better, but it's also going to include lower-rated pollsters.
Yeah I suppose. I don't think there's anything Trump could do to lose his 33% base, they're master mental gymnasts. If he dies while choking on a Big Mac it'll somehow be Hillary's fault.
The difference being that a good chunk of that 47% would have definitely abandoned Obama if he was tied to a federal crime. Let alone election tampering. Trump's 33% isn't going anywhere despite proof of both. They support criminal activity as long as it's their side in charge.
Anonymous said:
True, and a lot of people are blasting the author for what can be seen as posturing for a better position if/when Trump is removed. Some people are even theorizing that the author might be Mike Pence himself. I don't think we'll have to wait much to find out, there's no way they're going to be able to stay anonymous for long.
Yup, easy to forget that this is hot on the heels of Bob Woodward's new book, which describes Trump as unhinged and ill-informed (with a lot of sources).
Vanity Fair said:
Damn right
! I already put it on my CV: "I was the mole in the Trump administration that prevented things like mass Mexican AIDS infection, outlawing democrats and world war 3". I can already envision future job sollicitations:
If I recall correctly, that statistic is due to the fact that we have the lowest number of people who qualify for unemployment benefits in that amount of time, not that we necessarily have the lowest number of people that would benefit from having unemployment benefits
Haven't read it yet, so I can't exactly have an opinion on it. I do know, though, that that's a term that has been thrown around a bunch in the last year to refer to Obama-era administration officials intentionally trying to do dirty secret liberal things in Trump's administration
You realize that would mean it's a sabotage operation hired on entirely by Trump, right? I'm sure these people pledged their loyalty to him, that seems to be the only requirement to work in the white house, but actually seeing the reality of how stupid Trump is forces them into handler/babysitter mode. If Trump truly had free reign, we would've already ceased all trade with China and the economy would've crashed hard. That's the reason Trump has needed to have these types of handlers around him his entire life, to save him from his own bad ideas and decisions.
Ok, now having read it, have YOU read it? Because it's, like, the opposite of what you just said
@
SylverReZ:
@
SylverReZ:
