785
Donald Trump demands investigations into negative approval rating polls
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
785 points (98.2% liked)
politics
31286 readers
2166 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I understand that Trump might be confused about this. He isn't doing anything that he didn't specifically say he would do when he was asking for people's votes. They loved him before the election. They loved voting for him. I can understand why he might not believe that suddenly they don't like him. Somewhat the same for Musk except he started crashing back with the purchase of Twitter so he should have had time to understand that he was driving his fans away the further right-psycho he got.
This is what happens when you steal an election
The data behind that conclusion is compelling to those who understand both statistics and technology. Most of the US Congress has repeatedly shown that they have neither the capacity nor the inclination to understand either.
One of the rhetorically effective things about his campaign messaging was how broad and vague it was. Pundits, podcasters, influencers, and those manipulating the algorithms of social media, took that messaging, isolated parts of it and recontextualized those parts for specific audiences.
So while he may have assumed he was being very clear about what he was going to do, the messaging many of his voters got was totally detached from his intentions.
A good example of this is people who thought that the tariffs would somehow be a tax levied on foreign countries, not a sales tax on imported goods. Or those who thought the tariffs would be targeted at specific goods categories to benefit their particular industry, not a blanket tariff that impacts their upstream supply chain.
He told his subordinate on the campaign to get voters to vote for him, he assumed that meant convince them he was right, but that was impossible, the only ones that could get him the numbers he liked were the ones who just twisted what he said till people agreed with it.