The historic low was 32% the week of De. 9. Yet 'historic low' articles keep being churned out.

I think that's what they meant.

You're right he was at 29 and the tracking polls are being warped by outliers like Rasmussen and an Economist poll in the 40's.

Trump's approval rating at 32%
Dec 7, 2017
http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/07/politics/donald-trump-approval-rating/index.html

I guess they do this to get people to read or garner ratings

underpants is correct. CNN is speaking for its own polls.

If you google 32%, you will see an entire page of the same poll results for that time, and CNN knows this, whether it was their poll or not. They are after all in the news business. Claiming it as a new low is deceptive.

Their methodology is completely different. That would mean you could just as easily pick the highest poll in the pack, compare it to a lower one previously, and say his polling is improving.

The only way you can establish a trend is with the same poll over time, or average a group of them together and look at that group over time.

You know what they mean; it's a new low for that one poll.

Hardly historic

but hardly insignificant. The fact that every poll has been going down relative to itself is significant. The fact that one is currently at 46% and another is at 32% isn't.

They are all htting new lows. That is the significant part.

I see these historic new low articles as click bait and next week we'll see another 'historic' new low. I consider it disingenuous to say the least.

What some may see as disingenuous, others may see as merely a relative measurement lacking any indication or evidence of click-bait (as 'historic' in this context validly fits well within the parameters of correct usage: noting or pertaining to analysis based on a comparison among several periods of development of a phenomenon...&quot .

I think you're not admitting that you were confused. You are switching arguments. You refuted the argument of someone who pointed out that CNN was referring to CNN trends.

The article was misleading about where things stand with this president's approval. They're not ignorant of what's going on outside of themselves and assuredly know, that more than a number of polls reported a NEW LOw at 32% the week of the 7th and while they got a different % with their poll nearly two weeks later, it is not, under any circumstances a new low.

At the end of this thread, you will have trashed a lot of pollsters.
Gallup did what CNN did (the right thing). Compare apples to apples. Your "apples vs. oranges" technique is a one-man thing.
http://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/216125/trump-job-approval-rating-new-low.aspx

My thoughts exactly. I'm tired of these "new historic low approval rating articles" that have wandered between 32 and 36 percent the past 6 months.

I can only hope they are published to annoy the Trumpster himself.

Why should they trust other pollsters over their own pollster and methodology?

The die hard Nazis who still support Trump, those voters who still believe they are going to be in high cotton with all the winning Trump is going to do.

Almost a year into his first term, Barack Obama was near 60% job approval rating. Several pieces of Legislation was voted on and signed into law that included the Stimulus that stopped the bleeding of job losses and began the 7 year job growth that continues to this day. Thanks Obama!

and they are 28% of the electorate. Give or take a few points. The rest is made up of red independent voters or tea party types who don't identify as R.

But that 75% is who will pick candidates in the primaries, so they still have a loud bark when it comes to congress critters.

America. We are being held hostage by the Mercer and the Koch Bros, their brethren in Russia and their hired gun clowns in DC.

The 21% is just what they can manipulate easily. There is another 20+% they have to work a little harder to get, but they can still get them.