Percentage of People Who Voted for Trump That Still Admit They Voted for Trump?

[ONW]

I bet 50% or less.

 

[Deacon92]

What's done is done.

I'll admit I voted for him, Any one that in a past thread said should stay with it

 

[wakelaw13]

I think you're wayyyyy too optimistic. I'm saying 75%. Ask a Trump voter what he has to do to lose his/her support. I've asked that question a lot and haven't gotten a good answer. He can lose 50% of the republican senate, and it won't matter. As long as he has Fox News and the right wing media, it doesn't matter what he does or says.

Good news is, a 25% loss in his base support means a landslide win for the Dems in 2018 and 2020. Best case scenario right now is he makes it 4 years and gets the nomination in 2020. Republicans know this, and are worried.

 

[Deacfreak07]

 

[WakeandBake]

Deplorables indeed. Hilldog right again. Just like Obama was with the clinging and the guns and the religion. Snowflakes will clinch their sphincters and jhmd will applaud winning by suckling rubes.

 

[PhDeac]

Trump is simply building on what Republicans and conservative media set up for him.

That's a good article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...4bddd4-81d4-11e7-ab27-1a21a8e006ab_story.html

 

[06deacon]

Deplorables indeed. Hilldog right again. Just like Obama was with the clinging and the guns and the religion. Snowflakes will clinch their sphincters and jhmd will applaud winning by suckling rubes.

Doesn't seem like Hilldawg was right, if anything she underestimated.

 

[buckets]

It's hilldawg's fault he won in the first place

 

[PhDeac]

Doesn't seem like Hilldawg was right, if anything she underestimated.

Yes. She was being kind by saying half. And way more than half adopted the "deplorables" moniker in response to the comments.

 

[birdman]

Nm

 

[RJKarl]

Less than 25%, much less than 25%.

He still has close to 80% approval among Republicans. That would likely translate to 65-75% not only admitting they voted for him but support him.

 

[birdman]

He still has close to 80% approval among Republicans. That would likely translate to 65-75% not only admitting they voted for him but support him.

Duh, I read the question wrong.

 

[WFcatamount22]

I bet 50% or less.

IT has to be higher than that because 60% of his voters say there is nothing he can do to lose there vote

 

[PhDeac]

From NYT article today:

"Sixty-seven percent of Republicans said they approved of the president’s response to the violence in Charlottesville last weekend, compared with just 10 percent of Democrats, according to a CBS News survey conducted over the past week."

This is 67% approval of what establishment Republicans think is his lowest moment.

 

[ONW]

IT has to be higher than that because 60% of his voters say there is nothing he can do to lose there vote

In an anonymous poll maybe, but in public, I doubt it.

 

[DeaconSig]

What's the point? So you can continue to try to beittle and call them out for being racist, dumb dumb toothless ditbags, spicniiger, sand nigger whit septeacisrs, immoral, Sand nigger, feminist, vagina, lgbtqabcdefghikjlmnop, haters?

What the fuck?

 

[avalon]

Over 90%. It may be that in 10 years time or so there will be an unusually large segment of the population claiming they voted third party, but I don't think we're there yet.

As to the constant polling, it seems like we're in a place that is too tribal for it to mean much. Start a question with "Do you approve of Trump's handling of [ ]" and most will respond based on their already established opinion on Trump.

 

[vadimivich]

What's the point? So you can continue to try to beittle and call them out for being racist, dumb dumb toothless ditbags, backs, brown, sand nigger terrorists white supremeacisits, immoral, Pro rape, feminist, vagina, lgbtqabcdefghikjlmnop, haters?

What.the.fuck. even my crazy racist aunt doesn't say shit like that.

 

[DeacHead]

When I saw this message was edited, I really had to wonder what it was originally. It’s interesting to compare/contrast

Original

What's the point? So you can continue to try to beittle and call them out for being racist, dumb dumb toothless ditbags, spicniiger, sand nigger whit septeacisrs, immoral, Sand nigger, feminist, vagina, lgbtqabcdefghikjlmnop, haters?

Edited

What's the point? So you can continue to try to beittle and call them out for being racist, dumb dumb toothless ditbags, backs, brown, sand nigger terrorists white supremeacisits, immoral, Pro rape, feminist, vagina, lgbtqabcdefghikjlmnop, haters?

I guess using the term “spicniiger” went too far and “whit septeacisrs” needed some clarity and sand (not gonna say it) didn't need duplication.

 

[DeacHead]

IS IT THE LANGUAGE THAT OFFENDS YOU, THE FACT THAT RACIST AMERICA USES THIS LANGUAGE, THAT IT WAS WRITTEN HERE ON TH "G" RATED BOARDS, OR STEPTEACISERS WAS LEFT OUT? THAT IS BY FAR, THE MOST OFFENSIVE IN MY OPINION.

You are incorrect in coming to some conclusion that I am offended. It's simply amusing that incoherent rambling was edited not to become coherent, but somewhat different incoherent rambling.

Serious question about your current state - are you off meds you should be on or are you on meds you should not be on?