Poll of the Day > 64% of REPUBLICANS say Trump has done a FANTASTIC Job with the CAPITOL RIOTS!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

A new poll since the Capitol Riots show that 64% of Republicans say Trump gave a FANTASTIC JOB of how he handled it!!

The new poll from Ipsos/Axios shows that Trump urging his supporters to "fight" and raid the capitol that caused 5 people to lose their lives was APPROVED by the majority of Republicans but both parties says the country is tearing itself apart!!
43% of Republicans strongly approve of his actions and another 20 "approve" as it coincides with a nationwide manhunt for trump supporters who breached the capitol and those responsible for the death of one officer as more threaten FURTHER VIOLENCE leading up to Biden's inauguration

34% disapprove of his behaviour

VP Mike Pence gets higher approval with a third strongly approve of him and 41% somewhat approving. What makes up the difference though is 33% approval from DEMOCRATS and how he handled his ceremonial role in the electoral college certification

Trump's overall approval though took a nasty hit with 29% support and 69% disapproval

A Stunning 70% of those surveyed said America is falling apart with large majorities in all 3 groups.

His strength puts him in strong position for the 2024 Republican nomination should he not be impeached in the Senate which would strip away his ability to run as 57% of Republicans want him to RUN AGAIN even though a MAJORITY of voters want him IMPEACHED.

This also comes as Trump's behaviour in the last months when he demanded Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp to "find 11780" votes to overturn the results so that he would win Georgia

Republicans also approve TED CRUZ by 61 to 36 while DISAPPROVE of MITT ROMNEY with 62 to 34 claiming he is not "loyal"

Pollsters say when Trump said during his 2016 campaign that he could shoot someone in a crowd and wouldn't lose any votes shows he may have been right about Republican voters..

Do you think Republicans will vote for Trump no matter how many laws he violated, even MURDER?

https://i.imgur.com/ozTGCjD.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/HBYSfed.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/qTnLoc2.jpg
---

He could kill someone in times square and his cult would justify it. He said it himself

---

Stockholm is real

---

Wow, only 20% of Republicans have basic decency and actually want to live in a Democracy/Republic.
B/c anything warmer than "strongly disapprove" is unacceptable.

Also, I guess this will be the final presidential approval rating of Trump's failed term? Is 29% approval (can't believe it's still that high!) upon exit a record low? It's usually in the 40-55% range, isn't it?

Far left poll much geez

What exactly do they think he has done? As I understand it he hasn't done anything and isn't even attending meetings.

Do you guys think Trumpers will write in Trump in 2024 and every election in the future until he dies, ensuring the complete irrelevance of the Republican party?

---

---

Zareth posted...

Do you guys think Trumpers will write in Trump in 2024 and every election in the future until he dies, ensuring the complete irrelevance of the Republican party?

They represent a disproportionate amount of the republican base so they could ruin every primary.

zebatov posted...

Trump is a fringe political group? Weird flex but okay.

---

Zareth posted...

Trump is a fringe political group? Weird flex but okay.

Except he didnt. Unless you have proof.

And not Twitters proof. Thats just embarrassing.

Cant refute anything in the picture, so tries to pick apart one fragment of it. Lol!

---

Condeming something after you literally told your supporters to do it doesn't count.

---

Zareth posted...

Condeming something after you literally told your supporters to do it doesn't count.

Again, provide proof or stop talking.

Again, not what Twitter considered proof.

---

Did you not see the video of Trump's rally my dude

---

Zareth posted...

Did you not see the video of Trump's rally my dude

Provide proof my guy.

Twitters proof of Trump inciting violence:


You have to read these out of context for that to be true, they said.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OXFmnTtO6s

---

Condemning something after you encourage it provides you with 'plausible' deniability. At least these days, it seems. Just ask Stephen Miller!

---

Zareth posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OXFmnTtO6s

I literally cant do that on data but Ill watch it when I get back on Wi-Fi. I edited my last post to include what Twitter said was Trump inciting violence.

---

zebatov posted...

Provide proof my guy.

Twitters proof of Trump inciting violence:

I'll try to stay impartial - the video that Zareth posted is very important. I'll also add that he tweeted from another account after his suspension too.

After his account was suspended, Trump tweeted from the @POTUS Twitter account -
"As I have been saying for a long time, Twitter has gone further and further in banning free speech, and tonight, Twitter employees have coordinated with the Democrats and the Radical Left in removing my account from their platform, to silence me and YOU, the 75,000,000 great patriots who voted for me," he wrote.

---

but let me just have a little chuckle at

"80 million computer votes" -Trump on Biden >_>

---

ReturnOfFa posted...

I'll try to stay impartial - the video that Zareth posted is very important. I'll also add that he tweeted from another account after his suspension too.

After his account was suspended, Trump tweeted from the @POTUS Twitter account -
"As I have been saying for a long time, Twitter has gone further and further in banning free speech, and tonight, Twitter employees have coordinated with the Democrats and the Radical Left in removing my account from their platform, to silence me and YOU, the 75,000,000 great patriots who voted for me," he wrote.

None of any of this is inciting violence, however.

---

The cultists finally got their orders on what to shit post it seems.

zebatov posted...

Yes a nationwide riot that started over black people being kneeled on that was largely peaceful is comparable to armed extremists storming the state capitol to overthrow democracy over lies that the president came up with.

It may be that BLM did more damage because BLM existed in every single state. Because police brutality is real. Trumpism is not.

These rebels and their trickle-down economics though. Your outrage is so manufactured it might as well be in a corporate training video.

---

And btw we're going right back to the BLM protests as soon as Covid is under control, so look forward to that. Us real anti-authoritarians. Because the government has conceded nothing.

---

zebatov posted...

Where is this notion coming from that the right is the only one condemning BLM-associated violence? Or that those encouraging the protests are encouraging violence? That's obviously nonsense to anyone with any modicum of awareness of the world around them, and yet it's been parroted almost non-stop since May.

To say nothing of the utter absurdity of equivocating protests against police brutality and systemic racism with an unambiguous terrorist attack seeking to undermine the democratic process. The notion that anything is remotely comparable between the two beyond "there's a protest and also there's violence" shouldn't be something anyone with one or more frontal lobes entertains.

---

adjl posted...

Where is this notion coming from that the right is the only one condemning BLM-associated violence? Or that those encouraging the protests are encouraging violence? That's obviously nonsense to anyone with any modicum of awareness of the world around them, and yet it's been parroted almost non-stop since May.

It's their narrative. They basically argue all the protests are riots, any calls for peaceful demonstrations are support of riots, and they refuse to believe us when we say we hate the rioters because they cover up the message they are so eager to ignore.

On the other hand they so desperately want to link these terrorists to the protests they only see as riots to defend the terrorists. The terrorists went there with a plan to kill our elected officials, that was the end goal.

BlackScythe0 posted...

The terrorists went there with a plan to kill our elected officials, that was the end goal.

One does have to love how blatantly they ignore that this was an open-faced assassination attempt by citing death statistics out of context. Like, that "one person shot dead"? She was shot dead while trying to murder Pence. Even if the attack had succeeded in killing Pelosi and Pence, they'd probably still just say "that's only three people shot dead, BLM was way worse."

---

Full Throttle posted...

A new poll since the Capitol Riots show that 64% of Republicans say Trump gave a FANTASTIC JOB of how he handled it!!

Well, there was very limited property destruction and all but one of the casualties were rioters themselves, so... all things considered, the riot was dispersed very well because it could have been much, much worse as we've seen in other cities. Clearly his approach to asking people to go home was effective since many of the perpetrators were peacefully taken into custody, as opposed to playing the situation extremely hard like the far-left zealots wanted which would have done tremendous damage to the historic capitol building, resulted in mass casualties on both sides, and was being pushed not because it was a good resolution but because it drove their bullshit agenda.


---

Zeus, for God's sake, just shut the fuck up. Holy shit.

---

Zeus posted...

Well, there was very limited property destruction and all but one of the casualties were rioters themselves, so... all things considered, the riot was dispersed very well because it could have been much, much worse as we've seen in other cities. Clearly his approach to asking people to go home was effective since many of the perpetrators were peacefully taken into custody, as opposed to playing the situation extremely hard like the far-left zealots wanted which would have done tremendous damage to the historic capitol building, resulted in mass casualties on both sides, and was being pushed not because it was a good resolution but because it drove their bullshit agenda.

adjl posted...

One does have to love how blatantly they ignore that this was an open-faced assassination attempt

---

Zeus posted...

Well, there was very limited property destruction and all but one of the casualties were rioters themselves, so... all things considered, the riot was dispersed very well because it could have been much, much worse as we've seen in other cities. Clearly his approach to asking people to go home was effective since many of the perpetrators were peacefully taken into custody, as opposed to playing the situation extremely hard like the far-left zealots wanted which would have done tremendous damage to the historic capitol building, resulted in mass casualties on both sides, and was being pushed not because it was a good resolution but because it drove their bullshit agenda.

Attacking the nations Capitol and planning to harm politicians isn't even in the same ball park as BLM so please stop the BS. Most of the crap that happened during the BLM protests was done so by people who infiltrated and/or people who just wanted to be jerks.

The only other time the nations Capitol was attacked was by the British!

---

"64% of REPUBLICANS say Trump has done a FANTASTIC Job with the CAPITOL RIOTS!!!"

Ok but what has he really done!

Trump Administration accomplishments:

- 390,000 Dead Americans from Covid-19

- Insurrection

- Two impeachments

- Pandemic running rampant

- Worst jobs record of any Pres ever

- Torture of immigrant babies

- Teargassing protesters

- Climate protections reversed

- Environmental protections reversed

- Anything and everything with Obama's name attached to it reversed

- Obscene trillion dollar tax cut to the 1%

- Massive national debt

- Kidnapping kids then deporting their parents

- Fueling White racists to storm the Capitol

- Rampant corruption

Now it's your turn!</b>

---

100% of current trump supporters believe lies.

---

Zareth posted...

Trump is a fringe political group? Weird flex but okay.

Did you see his twitter post about him saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of encouraging it? Oh wait that's right twitter deleted that for him. Everything he said goes against exactly what the people did. Yet the MSM and left went hard to forget and ignore what he said. If the left didn't have double standards, they'd have none at all.

---

Decoy77 posted...

Did you see his twitter post about him saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of encouraging it? Oh wait that's right twitter deleted that for him. Everything he said goes against exactly what the people did. Yet the MSM and left went hard to forget and ignore what he said. If the left didn't have double standards, they'd have none at all.

@Decoy77
In post #15 I shared both tweets that Twitter said were the ones that incited violence and got his account closed. Twitter also stated they need to be taken out of context to be able to see how that makes sense. Of course, taking words out of context is the best way to understand them.

---

Decoy77 posted...

Did you see his twitter post about him saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of encouraging it?

And then subsequent ones where he became increasingly sympathetic to the violence and continued to double down on the lies that were motivating it? Yeah, yeah I did. "This is what happens when an election is stolen" is not exactly open condemnation, especially when the violence has been purely motivated by the election allegedly being stolen. Did Trump explicitly say "go assassinate Pence and Pelosi"? No. But anyone that doesn't think he has been the primary contributor to this outcome understands very little about subtext and human behaviour.

Now, for what it's worth, I don't actually believe that Trump wanted this outcome. He probably actually didn't want it, since it makes him look really bad (and preserving and promoting his image is pretty much the only thing motivating him because he's an insane narcissist) and very clearly wasn't actually going to work. But repeating "the election was stolen and brave patriots need to correct this injustice" was inevitably going to result in some people that consider themselves "brave patriots" taking radical action to right the perceived wrong, and he continues to refuse to back down on those lies even after seeing what they have led to. He is as guilty of this act of insurrection as Charles Manson is guilty of being a serial killer: he didn't do it personally, but nobody with even the remotest understanding of the situation thinks he doesn't bear any responsibility.

---

https://twitter.com/i/status/1347259323316105221

---

To help the right wingers here, think of incitement as a GameFAQs moderation. If I said the Trump posters here were treasonous, inbred chode sucking pieces of shit, I'm not immune to moderation if I say the opposite in a later post.

---

"1,019 general population adults age 18 or older"

Nah it's fine Trump apparently only had 1,019 supporters.
---

How does poll work

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

How does poll work

Every Trump supporter would have an opinion about it. Therefore the sample size is shit.
---

How poll werk I no understanding

---

Revelation34 posted...

Every Trump supporter would have an opinion about it. Therefore the sample size is shit.

1019 is a pretty solid sample size, if selected at random. Of course it's not going to be as perfect and comprehensive a representation as they'd see if they polled every single American, but that's a big enough sample to reasonably infer that the real stats will be pretty close to what this poll finds, which is all that's meant by the phrase "representative sample." Samples never actually try to approach the size of the population of interest. They just aim to be large enough to avoid statistically significant random variation.

Now, was this sample properly selected at random, and polled using questions that led to accurate answers? We don't know that. But that doesn't mean there's any reason to categorically say "there are more than 1019 trump supporters this poll means nothing."

---

adjl posted...

"there are more than 1019 trump supporters this poll means nothing."

This happens everytime there's a poll on something and it's so cringe

Like it's fine to not understand statistics, most people don't, but please don't pretend you do

---

adjl posted...

1019 is a pretty solid sample size, if selected at random. Of course it's not going to be as perfect and comprehensive a representation as they'd see if they polled every single American, but that's a big enough sample to reasonably infer that the real stats will be pretty close to what this poll finds, which is all that's meant by the phrase "representative sample." Samples never actually try to approach the size of the population of interest. They just aim to be large enough to avoid statistically significant random variation.

Now, was this sample properly selected at random, and polled using questions that led to accurate answers? We don't know that. But that doesn't mean there's any reason to categorically say "there are more than 1019 trump supporters this poll means nothing."

It doesn't matter if they are picked at random or not. Most polls would have some people with no opinion on the subject such as if it was about a genre of TV/movies. This is a political poll where literally every Trump supporter would have an opinion on the attack.
---

Revelation34 posted...

It doesn't matter if they are picked at random or not. Most polls would have some people with no opinion on the subject such as if it was about a genre of TV/movies. This is a political poll where literally every Trump supporter would have an opinion on the attack.

This would actually make the poll more effective with a smaller sample size than it would be otherwise

---

Revelation34 posted...

It doesn't matter if they are picked at random or not.

Said nobody who understands statistics or science ever.

Revelation34 posted...

Most polls would have some people with no opinion on the subject such as if it was about a genre of TV/movies.

Usually reflected with a "no opinion" option in a poll, though if you're polling something where most people have no opinion, you should generally try to be more selective in your sampling to cut down on those people (or just omit them from the results).

Revelation34 posted...

This is a political poll where literally every Trump supporter would have an opinion on the attack.

The vast majority of which are going to fall into one of several broad categories. These categories comprise the options on a poll. This is how polls work.

Polls never try to capture the input from literally everyone with an opinion on a subject. That's obviously and hilariously impossible. Instead, they try to capture enough information to be able to reasonably generalize those results to everyone with an opinion.

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

To help the right wingers here, think of incitement as a GameFAQs moderation. If I said the Trump posters here were treasonous, inbred chode sucking pieces of shit, I'm not immune to moderation if I say the opposite in a later post.

fantastic point, ok?

---