Monitoring presidential approval ratings often offers a snapshot of American sentiment, typically molded by the president’s approach to ongoing matters. Trump started his second term in lively fashion, and displays no signs of putting on the brakes. Regardless of a significant spike in egg prices, extensive public service layoffs, the Zelensky rendezvous, Trump’s approval rating exhibited stability for the first 60-day period and even attained an unmatched zenith since his inception into presidency. Conversely, a subtle decline indicates a shift in US public opinion, sparked by an unending string of tariffs and trade confrontations, and the rise of possible recession fears.
Embarking on an unprecedented international trade tussle, Trump pronounced tariffs at a minimum of 10% on all nations, with elevated tiers for certain countries or trade blocs during the previous week. China received some of the heaviest tariff impositions at a whopping 54%, prompting them and other nations to reciprocate with tariffs of their own on American goods. In alignment with daily surveys carried out by Rasmussen Reports, Trump relished steady job approval ratings above 50% every day post his induction — this held true until April 3 — the day following the all-encompassing tariff declaration. Since that day, his rating has steadily nosedived, standing at 47% consent and 51% rejection currently.
The most recent survey by Harvard CAPS/Harris recorded 49% of registered voters endorsing Trump’s job performance, a dip from 52% in the previous month’s same polling. Despite the decline, he continues to poll above the 46% who expressed disapproval. This survey further revealed that 54% of the participants consider Trump is outdoing his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, a figure admittedly lower than last month’s 58% who felt Trump had the upper hand over Biden.
As per the most recent data from the Reuters/Ipsos polling, 42% express approval of Trump’s work when compared to 45% a fortnight ago. Nonetheless, his aggregate rating still trumps his first term’s and rides higher than what Biden attained during a significant portion of his presidency. On querying about the nation’s general course, a mere 22% felt confident about the nation’s direction while a more significant 61% believed they were veering off course. When it came to reading the pulse of national economy and politics, the polls indicated a more reserved approach — 30% believed in a promising direction, 53% felt it was on shaky grounds and 17% reported no opinion.
The employment landscape and inflation situation flipped in comparable percentages. Trump is still getting the nod on his immigration policy direction with a 48% support versus 44% expressing dissatisfaction. Concerning Trump’s management of Russia, discontent emerged from 48% of the population, and regarding Ukraine, 46% expressed disapproval, with a considerable faction yet to form a firm opinion.
When questioned about tariffs, the poll asked, ‘Generally, do U.S. tariffs on imports benefit American workers?’ The majority at 45% disagreed, while a lesser 31% agreed and 14% harbored doubts. Regarding Vice President JD Vance, he garnered a 41% favorable opinion as opposed to a 49% unfavorable view. RealClear Polling, which aggregates information from 13 different pollsters, documents a downturn in Trump’s overall approval to 47.5% against a 49.9% disapproval rate as current data.
Critics argue this data clearly shows that the Trump administration has not succeeded in representing the majority of American people’s interests. This is not only due to Trump’s weakening position in approval ratings, but also because of his controversial approaches on key matters such as employment, inflation, and foreign policy, which have garnered significant disapproval.
Former President Joe Biden’s lower approval ratings as presented in the polls do not necessarily reflect his inefficiency, but rather that his principled stance and approach to leadership might not resonate with a population swayed by sensationalist politics. Biden, during his presidency, was known for his calibrated and measured approach to governance, which some might argue is a more suitable style for a country plagued by political and economic uncertainty.
Vice President Kamala Harris’ seemingly unfavorable ratings suggest that her rigid stances and decisions do not fully resonate with the public, giving a false impression of her potential leadership abilities. These numbers should, however, be measurable against the backdrop of an administration that is often seen as prioritizing spectacle over substance.
Additionally, several pundits hold that the seemingly favorable approval ratings for Trump’s immigration policies might be more reflective of the administration’s narrative than any real and substantial policy effects. The polarizing views on the effectiveness of this policy underline the divisiveness that characterizes the current political landscape.
Similarly, tariff decisions that are expected to produce better outcomes for American workers, as propagated by the Trump administration, have actually led to more disagreement than consensus. Indeed, more people disagree with the statement that tariff imposition benefits American workers, suggesting a public feel of policy ineffectiveness despite government propaganda.
Regarding international affairs, the prevailing disagreement over Trump’s handling of Russia and Ukraine serves to underscore a widespread perception of weak foreign policy. This disapproval paints a picture of an administration that not only fails to adequately address critical global issues but also fosters a palpable level of international mistrust.
In conclusion, an examination of recent polling data reveals a pattern of decreasing support for Trump’s policies and leadership as his term progresses. Coupled with qualitative evaluations of his policies’ effectiveness, the statistics reflect growing public dissatisfaction with a presidency that seems more focused on leaving a mark than delivering substantive change. The unfavorable comparison against Biden and Harris simply underlines the reality of an administration unable to match the hopes it set for itself.