I wonder what’ll happen to Trump’s approval rate if Americans soon have to "taste" European gas prices?
In France four days ago the price was $8.14 per gallon, in Germany $8.80, in Norway $9.20, and in The Netherlands the price had climbed above $9.50 per gallon.
It was interesting in the poll Simon shared that more Republicans opposed the war when it was put in the context of gas prices. Looking right now at a Valero gas station showing $5.79 a gallon here in Central CA.
This might sound harsh, but if prices creep up that high, perhaps it's a good thing. Our reliance on fossil fuels might finally put maga people over the edge and open their eyes to the need for clean energy. Easy for me to say, as I don't drive much, but something's gotta give. People need to be faced with harsh realities or they will continue supporting that corrupt, lying fascist party.
Very interesting polling data, but I would like to see more details about gender differences from G. Elliott Morris. This was my question to him during a recent live video interview with David Nir (Editor, The DownBallot).
well, unfortunately, the polling shows that the repub voters are definitely sticking with satan. even when he funds russia while russia is helping iran against us and freeing up iranian oil to fund iran while we are waging war with iran! which in my simple mind would be treason. imagine if obama or joe even suggested such a stupid wartime betrayal!
they just cant get enuf abuse, lying, violence, incompetence, grifting, illegality. shocking. their lust for one party power is so unamerican.
Actually, there are increasing indicators that evermore Americans from the MAGA-verse are abandoning Trump – like flies abandoning dung that’s rolling downhill.
In Hopium after Hopium, Simon keeps documenting those indicators.
This just isn't true. Republicans are not sticking with Trump. Trump's approval above is 38%. That means a quarter of Trump's 2024 vote now disapproves of him, and even less, only 32% agree the war is a good use of tax payer dollars. I think this idea out there that Trump can and needs to go below 35% or even into the 20s for us to do what we need to do is unrealistic. 65% of the country is available to us. We need to keep working to talk to them, bring them along, and keep them with us. Need to be precise with our language and not turn wins into losses.
I’m actually inclined to believe his approval rating is far less than 38%. With all the skewed polling these days, it wouldn’t shock me to know his numbers are more underwater than meets the mainstream media eye. Certainly, one can hope that’s the case anyway.
Yes, remember the 'shy Trump supporter" who wouldn't tell pollsters they were supporting Trump, but in the privacy of the voting booth pulled the lever for him? Leaving aside the fact that there's a very convincing case to be made that this demographic never actually existed,¹ I wonder if the reverse isn't happening now, resulting in exaggerations of his level of de facto support.
Meaning, there are people telling pollsters they support Trump out of tribalism--or even fear (I think some of the distortions that occur when polling populations who are living under authoritarian regimes probably already exist here), but in the privacy of that polling booth won't actually be able to bring themselves to vote for him (may indeed already have decided they won't) or won't show up at all.
In light of this, Simon, I wonder if it isn't time for a new metric‐‐call it "effective support' or "electoral support"--that combines/merges approval ratings with enthusiasm (using polls where the latter includes both party members and leaners on either side). I'm guessing to some extent that's what "likely voter" polls are supposed to do, but while those might be more accurate (or not) than "registered" or "all," i feel they normalize unconstitutional voter suppression by baking it into the results.
By contrast, it seems to me that combining preference with enthusiasm would allow us to identify cases of particularly egregious voter suppression (unconstitutional in *all* its many forms) and more effectively challenge the legitimacy of elections won in this way. The 14th, as you know, not only defines suppression with sweeping breadth and forecloses basically all forms of weaselry used to claim there was no actual suppression when there was, but also prescribes pretty Old Testament penalties for states that engage in or indulge it.
I feel a foundational principle of any pro-democracy movement should be to demand it be enforced as written, especially given the fact that we make registration harder than every country in the world except Belize, Burundi, and the Bahamas (according to Harvard), and this accounts for virtually all the difference between turnout in our country and the rest of the world.
¹ There are a number of (more) compelling explanations for polling disconnects that don't require hypothesizing the existence of an electoral god or sub-atomic particle no one has ever actually seen ;)
What would happen if the poll showing the divorce in the Republican Party broke it down even further? (TY to Rick Wilson for calling it a divorce.) Add in current and former military. Because at this point, my sympathy and empathy only extend so far if those who voted for this ish are killed in Iran.
To add to this keep in mind our candidates in places like AK, IA, OH, TX are in competitive races in states Trump won by more than 10 points. He has lost an incredible amount of ground since 2024.
I'd like to endorse that especially for AK. AK during covid had a Trump wannabe Governor (Dunleavy) who tripled the cost of nursing home care, cut back the income generated by the research university system, and quite a bit more. At that time, even with lockdown, AK residents began a pushback that appears to be sustained and or growing. (My connection is through the Friends of Arctic Wildlife National Wildlife Refuge, and at the time, via some Indivisible connections.)
People forget that on the day Nixon resigned, he still had an approval rating of 24%, and he didn't have Fox or a right-wing media machine behind him, let alone unlimited Russian and Chinese interference on his behalf. Getting him down to 38% (or 35-36% in some good polls) is pretty darned good--it's a loss of 8x+ his margin of victory.
While I agree with most of your post, I think your point about polling showing Rs sticking with Trump is not quite an accurate read. Morris explained this more fully in his post today--the graphs of which Simon re-posted. And he explained it in a post from several days ago. His point in both posts was that MAGA voters have not yet split with Trump over Iran (though some of what Morris terms the "MAGA elite," like Bannon, Kelly, Carlson) have. BUT the non-MAGA Rs and soft Rs have turned and are turning away from Trump--with Iran and rising gas prices being just the most recent events to accelerate this trend. I like his terminology--that voters Trump "rented" in 2024 have now said, "no thanks. We're not buying."
What we’re seeing are the perspectives of those ever-decreasing republicans who are still sticking with trump, so I’m not surprised to see those sentiments from that group. Whoever is left in the party is only going to get more extreme in these surveys. Everyone else has moved on to not supporting trump.
jumping in again, i guess all i was saying is that i was personally shocked that 68% repubs support the war and 61% repubs support it even if gas goes up $1. after 10 yrs of this crazy, just thought now that its hitting their pocketbook and he is losing the war, that it might be much lower. not a pollster, just a human!! and dont know where maga rift is in the 68% & 61%. just says repubs.
I feel that'scan important point, Faith. Do we know whether the Republicans included in these surveys are based on their historical identification (I'm assuming most pollsters are using lists of registered Democrats, Republicans, and Independents) or current identification (ie the pollster includes a question about party ID in the poll and categorizes respondents based on how they answer that question, not what they're registered as)? Because if *current* identification is what's used, I feel what you're describing is definitely happening.
I'm tracking in particular the positive youth, independent and Latino changes.
A couple years ago there was a remarkable study of how the GOP used (to the extent that it can be used - apparently it functions a little differently) Spanish language talk radio. As far as I could tell, at the time, we were not using that capacity as much, though I do see bilingual outreach from a couple of our organizing groups out here now, especially in areas of Oregon targeted by ICE.
I think as time has gone by the implications of what is actually happening is creating some of that shift.
Interestingly to me, in our quite red rural county (being targeted by Claremont Institute disinformation, by the way), we have reached the 3.5% participation level in No Kings and similar activities, and a LOT of folks who show up are ol' white folks, some who were active in the Viet Nam protests.
I love to see poll shifts and I also love to see nuance... I think there's more than just either or happening and I like being here for it.
Viva la high gas prices, and viva other countries giving us the cold shoulder. It's gonna help. It's gonna hurt, pro Trump or not, but I'm willing to see it through (and since I can, I participate in activities to help ensure my neighbors have food and support to get through it. I'm not happy for folks to suffer. I am happy to carry some of that load).
Calls are in to all WI elected members regarding our agenda items. I continue to write postcards for WI Supreme Court. Thank you message was sent to WI AG.
Yesterday during face-time my 10-year-old English grandson and I talked about Iran. He thought that the United States was concerned about Iran because it could build a bomb.
I asked him if he knew about Barack Obama. He did not. I explained to him about the deal to monitor nuclear development. I also had to explain that Obama was the President between 2009 and 2017. I told him that Trump broke that agreement because Obama made it (jealousy and racism) and now Trump claims that one reason for the ‘war’ has to do with Iran and nuclear material.
I am sharing this because I think that it is important to have these discussions with the children in our lives.
Simon, I agree with you and Rep. Smith: Dems should be calling for a tax on billionaires to pay down the debt that Trump has exploded. Call it the "Billionaires Are Bankrupting Us" Act.
I called Congressman Raskin and Senators Alsobrooks and Van Hollen about ICE and this war and about the need to regularly discuss Trump's madness, his lack of touch with reality. I'm writing postcards to Virginia voters.
Believing that all wars need to be paid for, and the sooner the better, I have a modest proposal. Let’s add the "Billionaires and Corporations Help Finance Trump’s War" Act.
Maybe someone in New Jersey can come up with a name for a billionaire tax bill to match their beautiful "Fight Unlawful Conduct and Keep Individuals and Communities Empowered Act"
Any Washington State folk here? I just read the state legislature passed a bill taxing higher income earners. Waiting to see the status of that. (Wa State in the past has relied on sales tax pretty extensively (hence Oregon folks move to WA to retire but come back to shop where we've a history of being pretty virulently against sales taxes). Anyway, would love to know how that's being received. (Looks like positively to me, but that may be confirmation bias.)
Dear Simon, being in very unfamiliar with CA primary politics, I’d genuinely like to ask your opinion on the following. I’ve seen a lot of chatter and frustration concerning the upcoming CA Democratic Primary Election and how its system could backfire on the Dems, nearly ensuring Republican victory for say, Candidate Steve Hilton. Now, we’ve seen Republican Governors of CA before so it’s not too far fetched. However, given the current landscape, it would also seem surprising to see a CA Governor ‘too aligned with Trump.’ A number of CA Dem voters seem to desire most their primary candidates to drop out leaving both Porter and Swalwell. Personally, my vote would go to Swalwell if I lived there. I feel he’s the sharpest candidate of the bunch. Anyway, what say you concerning this whole situation? I don’t fully understand how their system works and I would be disappointed especially today, to see Newsom’ leadership handed off to even a semi sycophant.
Californian here. Of course I don’t know how it will go, but everyone is aware of the danger (which we face every so often) and an R governor is possible but unlikely. Despite that, I am very worried about it.
It is certainly giving my local Dem group fits. I am on the field team and we aren’t allowed to endorse anyone until one candidate reaches a certain threshold.
Also Californian here and Swalwell has moved up in polling since this news came out that 2 Republicans can end up at the top of the ticket. I think you'll see that It will end up being between Swalwell and Hilton, but it is a concern. Democrats need to get out and vote in this primary especially in LA county where I'm living.
We have judge elections on our June ballot that are final, and for our County supervisors in Orange County, if they get 50%, they are in. This is not really a primary and GOTV is crucial. Also, Betsy, I'm banging the drums for Katie Porter and hope you will consider her. I posted about her above.
My two cents as a Californian. Many or even most voters in polls are Undecided, which will not be a choice on the ballot. I believe that one of the Democrats will come out in the top two.
Also, please consider Katie Porter. I saw her speak in person last night and she was incredibly impressive on the issues. When you talk about sharp she has a grasp of economics, a focus on cost of living, and a way of communicating it like no other. I found her very convincing and hope others will consider her. We need more women in high office, there are not enough, and they are very effective. I'm not ruling out Swalwell, but god forbid we get Steyer, he has irritated my last nerve.
I've discontinued donating to those orgs because the fundraising communications are deceptive. Let's stick with what our process is for working with vetted options. Spamming the organization is not welcome, blocking this guy. Again.
Consider the $200 billion being requested by Trump, which Republicans are going along with to further fund the Iran War. The R's want no accountability on how the $200 B will be spent citing that it should be at the discretion of the president.
This reeks of potential corruption. This opens the door to R's granting overpriced contracts(no open bidding) to their defense industry buddies. Would it be surprising to find out R's getting kickbacks from defense contractors? Not to me it wouldn't.
How about Kristi Noehm granting fat questionable (no bid)contracts for DHS to her friends. Does anyone really think she isn't profiting from that? Her buddy Cory Lewandoski has been exposed for not awarding contracts unless he gets a kickback.
Don't ever forget, with Trump and the R's, we are dealing with grifting, fear mongering snake oil salesmen.
At this point, I have prepared myself for Trump and his White House to simply assess any given situation, regardless of what part of American life it has jurisdiction over, and find the worst possible decision for all parties involved, and then implement it. He’s holding true to this metric with Iran.
What he needs is something to "show" for this. He won't get anything easily but that's what he will need to get out. He has to believe he can justify this with some kind of gain, and not look weak when we leave. I don't see how that happens.
I think he sticks to this and escalates, but probably tries to change the subject a bit with Cuba, and maybe some other domestic fuckery. Maybe more intense attacks on the media.
Steve--I feel what you and Kodaz are describing is the *real* reason why Simon is right when he says that no matter what Trump does or says he's going to do, 55% of Americans are automatically against it. And he, his supporters, and enablers in the corporate media don't get it, and therefore don't realize how thin the ice he's on really is.
*They* think his policies are unpopular because he and those policies are "tough" and "mean" and people just don't like him for that, but in the end, the American people are always looking for "Daddy," not "Mommy" to lead them, and if they just keep playing strong vs weak, they'll ultimately carry the day once again.
They don't seem to realize (at all) that the real reason landslide (these days) numbers of Americans are opposed to everything he says is because after a decade's worth of experience, what *we* knew all along has finally sunk in all over the country, that he's a completely corrupt fuckup and whatever he proposes is *always* a bad idea (and usually designed to enrich himself and the rest of the Epstein class).
I really think Dems should start polling on this, ie ask questions like: "You hear Trump has a new idea about issue x. Without knowing what the idea is, how likely do you think it is that it's a good idea (1-7 scale)? A bad idea (1-7 scale)? Designed to enrich people like him (1-7 scale)? Designed to help people like you (1-7 scale)? (1-7 to allow *definitelys" or "absolutelys" on either end)'
I've not heard a single credible attempt to justify $200 billion for the war. I still don't know what the objectives are and what the plan is. The number $200 billion appears to me to be just a made up number. Now, a certain amount of money is going to need to be budgeted to replace weapons we've used that are critical deterrents in S. Korea, Taiwan, and elsewhere. But if they are just going to fire these things off in Iran, then what the fuck? To put "boots on the ground" must increase the cost, but by how much and what kind of a deployment are they looking at? If it is to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, that is open ended, and $200 billion might be enough at the present burn rate to keep us there until November. In all likelihood they will burn through it faster than that, and either way they will be back for more maybe sometime this summer.
"Limited" ground wars tend to spiral when people start getting killed. This is a major disaster. I just wonder at what point he starts threatening to drop a nuke on Iran if they don't do what he wants. And after this, I think there is no question the Iranians will do whatever it takes to get a nuke. So how do we get out now?
Having no clear plan about what this money is for is really, really disconcerting to me. It's a lot of steak and lobster, and everyone gets a Steinway I guess.
If they can't articulate a plan to get out of there, it should be a hard "no". Vote to replenish our weapons and stop firing them into the desert.
Mostly done with the 25 IA 1st district postcards. Looking forward to No Kings next week.
Simon, We have to stop this war now. We can't allow boots on the ground. Also has to answer why are military are pushing Trump's war and aren't standing up for Americans. I thought it was the law they had to stand up for an illegal. Not one seems to pay attention to this.
In some places on the Seattle area gas is up to $6.00 a gallon!!!!!!
Thanks Simon, good to see the strong opposition to the war continuing in polling, including a good number of Republicans (especially when the question ties the war to gas prices!).
I can’t make the DC event with Anderson Cooper (long flight, my arms would get tired, I’m here all week) but I just donated the ticket price to Roy Cooper through the Hopium link and will be there in spirit.
Adam Smith is fast becoming one of my favorite Congressionals. He’s right - they want a war then raise taxes to pay for it. Sell the American people on how the war is in their interest.
Cleaning up this mess for the long term will take much scrubbing at grassroots level. That includes diving into culture wars to deal with fear and convincing the short-sighted to populate the bucket brigades before there is a five alarm fire.
Simon, can the Women Democrats of Montgomery County help with the Raskin resolution for the Montgomery County Commission to condemn the executive branch? We already have four Hopium members working on it: Leslie Katz, Joan Phillips, Digital Democracy, Jo Shifrin.
I'm from Montgomery County MD, so this event always gets my attention.
I wonder what’ll happen to Trump’s approval rate if Americans soon have to "taste" European gas prices?
In France four days ago the price was $8.14 per gallon, in Germany $8.80, in Norway $9.20, and in The Netherlands the price had climbed above $9.50 per gallon.
https://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/Europe/
Make EVs and Trains Great Again!
It was interesting in the poll Simon shared that more Republicans opposed the war when it was put in the context of gas prices. Looking right now at a Valero gas station showing $5.79 a gallon here in Central CA.
Not that it’ll win hearts and minds, but you could think of it as a $3 discount on German gas prices.
This might sound harsh, but if prices creep up that high, perhaps it's a good thing. Our reliance on fossil fuels might finally put maga people over the edge and open their eyes to the need for clean energy. Easy for me to say, as I don't drive much, but something's gotta give. People need to be faced with harsh realities or they will continue supporting that corrupt, lying fascist party.
Very interesting polling data, but I would like to see more details about gender differences from G. Elliott Morris. This was my question to him during a recent live video interview with David Nir (Editor, The DownBallot).
well, unfortunately, the polling shows that the repub voters are definitely sticking with satan. even when he funds russia while russia is helping iran against us and freeing up iranian oil to fund iran while we are waging war with iran! which in my simple mind would be treason. imagine if obama or joe even suggested such a stupid wartime betrayal!
they just cant get enuf abuse, lying, violence, incompetence, grifting, illegality. shocking. their lust for one party power is so unamerican.
Actually, there are increasing indicators that evermore Americans from the MAGA-verse are abandoning Trump – like flies abandoning dung that’s rolling downhill.
In Hopium after Hopium, Simon keeps documenting those indicators.
This just isn't true. Republicans are not sticking with Trump. Trump's approval above is 38%. That means a quarter of Trump's 2024 vote now disapproves of him, and even less, only 32% agree the war is a good use of tax payer dollars. I think this idea out there that Trump can and needs to go below 35% or even into the 20s for us to do what we need to do is unrealistic. 65% of the country is available to us. We need to keep working to talk to them, bring them along, and keep them with us. Need to be precise with our language and not turn wins into losses.
I’m actually inclined to believe his approval rating is far less than 38%. With all the skewed polling these days, it wouldn’t shock me to know his numbers are more underwater than meets the mainstream media eye. Certainly, one can hope that’s the case anyway.
Blake, it depends on the poll size. Has anyone EVER been polled for any of these?
It's tribal and a lot of people will never admit how bad things are when they supported it.
Yes, remember the 'shy Trump supporter" who wouldn't tell pollsters they were supporting Trump, but in the privacy of the voting booth pulled the lever for him? Leaving aside the fact that there's a very convincing case to be made that this demographic never actually existed,¹ I wonder if the reverse isn't happening now, resulting in exaggerations of his level of de facto support.
Meaning, there are people telling pollsters they support Trump out of tribalism--or even fear (I think some of the distortions that occur when polling populations who are living under authoritarian regimes probably already exist here), but in the privacy of that polling booth won't actually be able to bring themselves to vote for him (may indeed already have decided they won't) or won't show up at all.
In light of this, Simon, I wonder if it isn't time for a new metric‐‐call it "effective support' or "electoral support"--that combines/merges approval ratings with enthusiasm (using polls where the latter includes both party members and leaners on either side). I'm guessing to some extent that's what "likely voter" polls are supposed to do, but while those might be more accurate (or not) than "registered" or "all," i feel they normalize unconstitutional voter suppression by baking it into the results.
By contrast, it seems to me that combining preference with enthusiasm would allow us to identify cases of particularly egregious voter suppression (unconstitutional in *all* its many forms) and more effectively challenge the legitimacy of elections won in this way. The 14th, as you know, not only defines suppression with sweeping breadth and forecloses basically all forms of weaselry used to claim there was no actual suppression when there was, but also prescribes pretty Old Testament penalties for states that engage in or indulge it.
I feel a foundational principle of any pro-democracy movement should be to demand it be enforced as written, especially given the fact that we make registration harder than every country in the world except Belize, Burundi, and the Bahamas (according to Harvard), and this accounts for virtually all the difference between turnout in our country and the rest of the world.
¹ There are a number of (more) compelling explanations for polling disconnects that don't require hypothesizing the existence of an electoral god or sub-atomic particle no one has ever actually seen ;)
What would happen if the poll showing the divorce in the Republican Party broke it down even further? (TY to Rick Wilson for calling it a divorce.) Add in current and former military. Because at this point, my sympathy and empathy only extend so far if those who voted for this ish are killed in Iran.
To add to this keep in mind our candidates in places like AK, IA, OH, TX are in competitive races in states Trump won by more than 10 points. He has lost an incredible amount of ground since 2024.
I'd like to endorse that especially for AK. AK during covid had a Trump wannabe Governor (Dunleavy) who tripled the cost of nursing home care, cut back the income generated by the research university system, and quite a bit more. At that time, even with lockdown, AK residents began a pushback that appears to be sustained and or growing. (My connection is through the Friends of Arctic Wildlife National Wildlife Refuge, and at the time, via some Indivisible connections.)
People forget that on the day Nixon resigned, he still had an approval rating of 24%, and he didn't have Fox or a right-wing media machine behind him, let alone unlimited Russian and Chinese interference on his behalf. Getting him down to 38% (or 35-36% in some good polls) is pretty darned good--it's a loss of 8x+ his margin of victory.
While I agree with most of your post, I think your point about polling showing Rs sticking with Trump is not quite an accurate read. Morris explained this more fully in his post today--the graphs of which Simon re-posted. And he explained it in a post from several days ago. His point in both posts was that MAGA voters have not yet split with Trump over Iran (though some of what Morris terms the "MAGA elite," like Bannon, Kelly, Carlson) have. BUT the non-MAGA Rs and soft Rs have turned and are turning away from Trump--with Iran and rising gas prices being just the most recent events to accelerate this trend. I like his terminology--that voters Trump "rented" in 2024 have now said, "no thanks. We're not buying."
What we’re seeing are the perspectives of those ever-decreasing republicans who are still sticking with trump, so I’m not surprised to see those sentiments from that group. Whoever is left in the party is only going to get more extreme in these surveys. Everyone else has moved on to not supporting trump.
jumping in again, i guess all i was saying is that i was personally shocked that 68% repubs support the war and 61% repubs support it even if gas goes up $1. after 10 yrs of this crazy, just thought now that its hitting their pocketbook and he is losing the war, that it might be much lower. not a pollster, just a human!! and dont know where maga rift is in the 68% & 61%. just says repubs.
I feel that'scan important point, Faith. Do we know whether the Republicans included in these surveys are based on their historical identification (I'm assuming most pollsters are using lists of registered Democrats, Republicans, and Independents) or current identification (ie the pollster includes a question about party ID in the poll and categorizes respondents based on how they answer that question, not what they're registered as)? Because if *current* identification is what's used, I feel what you're describing is definitely happening.
I'm tracking in particular the positive youth, independent and Latino changes.
A couple years ago there was a remarkable study of how the GOP used (to the extent that it can be used - apparently it functions a little differently) Spanish language talk radio. As far as I could tell, at the time, we were not using that capacity as much, though I do see bilingual outreach from a couple of our organizing groups out here now, especially in areas of Oregon targeted by ICE.
I think as time has gone by the implications of what is actually happening is creating some of that shift.
Interestingly to me, in our quite red rural county (being targeted by Claremont Institute disinformation, by the way), we have reached the 3.5% participation level in No Kings and similar activities, and a LOT of folks who show up are ol' white folks, some who were active in the Viet Nam protests.
I love to see poll shifts and I also love to see nuance... I think there's more than just either or happening and I like being here for it.
Viva la high gas prices, and viva other countries giving us the cold shoulder. It's gonna help. It's gonna hurt, pro Trump or not, but I'm willing to see it through (and since I can, I participate in activities to help ensure my neighbors have food and support to get through it. I'm not happy for folks to suffer. I am happy to carry some of that load).
Calls are in to all WI elected members regarding our agenda items. I continue to write postcards for WI Supreme Court. Thank you message was sent to WI AG.
Yesterday during face-time my 10-year-old English grandson and I talked about Iran. He thought that the United States was concerned about Iran because it could build a bomb.
I asked him if he knew about Barack Obama. He did not. I explained to him about the deal to monitor nuclear development. I also had to explain that Obama was the President between 2009 and 2017. I told him that Trump broke that agreement because Obama made it (jealousy and racism) and now Trump claims that one reason for the ‘war’ has to do with Iran and nuclear material.
I am sharing this because I think that it is important to have these discussions with the children in our lives.
great job - so important. Children learn and absorb so much, we have such an obligation to make sure they get credible info.
I have ordered a book for my grandson about Barack Obama. It should arrive in a few days.
Simon, I agree with you and Rep. Smith: Dems should be calling for a tax on billionaires to pay down the debt that Trump has exploded. Call it the "Billionaires Are Bankrupting Us" Act.
I called Congressman Raskin and Senators Alsobrooks and Van Hollen about ICE and this war and about the need to regularly discuss Trump's madness, his lack of touch with reality. I'm writing postcards to Virginia voters.
Believing that all wars need to be paid for, and the sooner the better, I have a modest proposal. Let’s add the "Billionaires and Corporations Help Finance Trump’s War" Act.
Maybe someone in New Jersey can come up with a name for a billionaire tax bill to match their beautiful "Fight Unlawful Conduct and Keep Individuals and Communities Empowered Act"
Any Washington State folk here? I just read the state legislature passed a bill taxing higher income earners. Waiting to see the status of that. (Wa State in the past has relied on sales tax pretty extensively (hence Oregon folks move to WA to retire but come back to shop where we've a history of being pretty virulently against sales taxes). Anyway, would love to know how that's being received. (Looks like positively to me, but that may be confirmation bias.)
Dear Simon, being in very unfamiliar with CA primary politics, I’d genuinely like to ask your opinion on the following. I’ve seen a lot of chatter and frustration concerning the upcoming CA Democratic Primary Election and how its system could backfire on the Dems, nearly ensuring Republican victory for say, Candidate Steve Hilton. Now, we’ve seen Republican Governors of CA before so it’s not too far fetched. However, given the current landscape, it would also seem surprising to see a CA Governor ‘too aligned with Trump.’ A number of CA Dem voters seem to desire most their primary candidates to drop out leaving both Porter and Swalwell. Personally, my vote would go to Swalwell if I lived there. I feel he’s the sharpest candidate of the bunch. Anyway, what say you concerning this whole situation? I don’t fully understand how their system works and I would be disappointed especially today, to see Newsom’ leadership handed off to even a semi sycophant.
Californian here. Of course I don’t know how it will go, but everyone is aware of the danger (which we face every so often) and an R governor is possible but unlikely. Despite that, I am very worried about it.
It is certainly giving my local Dem group fits. I am on the field team and we aren’t allowed to endorse anyone until one candidate reaches a certain threshold.
Also Californian here and Swalwell has moved up in polling since this news came out that 2 Republicans can end up at the top of the ticket. I think you'll see that It will end up being between Swalwell and Hilton, but it is a concern. Democrats need to get out and vote in this primary especially in LA county where I'm living.
We have judge elections on our June ballot that are final, and for our County supervisors in Orange County, if they get 50%, they are in. This is not really a primary and GOTV is crucial. Also, Betsy, I'm banging the drums for Katie Porter and hope you will consider her. I posted about her above.
My two cents as a Californian. Many or even most voters in polls are Undecided, which will not be a choice on the ballot. I believe that one of the Democrats will come out in the top two.
Also, please consider Katie Porter. I saw her speak in person last night and she was incredibly impressive on the issues. When you talk about sharp she has a grasp of economics, a focus on cost of living, and a way of communicating it like no other. I found her very convincing and hope others will consider her. We need more women in high office, there are not enough, and they are very effective. I'm not ruling out Swalwell, but god forbid we get Steyer, he has irritated my last nerve.
Trump's war of choice won't end until Democrats gain complete control of congress.
Contribute to: THEHOUSEMAJORITYPAC.comhttps://dccc.org
www.SenateMajority.comhttps://www.dscc.org
I've discontinued donating to those orgs because the fundraising communications are deceptive. Let's stick with what our process is for working with vetted options. Spamming the organization is not welcome, blocking this guy. Again.
Consider the $200 billion being requested by Trump, which Republicans are going along with to further fund the Iran War. The R's want no accountability on how the $200 B will be spent citing that it should be at the discretion of the president.
This reeks of potential corruption. This opens the door to R's granting overpriced contracts(no open bidding) to their defense industry buddies. Would it be surprising to find out R's getting kickbacks from defense contractors? Not to me it wouldn't.
How about Kristi Noehm granting fat questionable (no bid)contracts for DHS to her friends. Does anyone really think she isn't profiting from that? Her buddy Cory Lewandoski has been exposed for not awarding contracts unless he gets a kickback.
Don't ever forget, with Trump and the R's, we are dealing with grifting, fear mongering snake oil salesmen.
At this point, I have prepared myself for Trump and his White House to simply assess any given situation, regardless of what part of American life it has jurisdiction over, and find the worst possible decision for all parties involved, and then implement it. He’s holding true to this metric with Iran.
The first filter I look through when Trump announces anything is; Who's he fucking over this time?
What he needs is something to "show" for this. He won't get anything easily but that's what he will need to get out. He has to believe he can justify this with some kind of gain, and not look weak when we leave. I don't see how that happens.
I think he sticks to this and escalates, but probably tries to change the subject a bit with Cuba, and maybe some other domestic fuckery. Maybe more intense attacks on the media.
Steve--I feel what you and Kodaz are describing is the *real* reason why Simon is right when he says that no matter what Trump does or says he's going to do, 55% of Americans are automatically against it. And he, his supporters, and enablers in the corporate media don't get it, and therefore don't realize how thin the ice he's on really is.
*They* think his policies are unpopular because he and those policies are "tough" and "mean" and people just don't like him for that, but in the end, the American people are always looking for "Daddy," not "Mommy" to lead them, and if they just keep playing strong vs weak, they'll ultimately carry the day once again.
They don't seem to realize (at all) that the real reason landslide (these days) numbers of Americans are opposed to everything he says is because after a decade's worth of experience, what *we* knew all along has finally sunk in all over the country, that he's a completely corrupt fuckup and whatever he proposes is *always* a bad idea (and usually designed to enrich himself and the rest of the Epstein class).
I really think Dems should start polling on this, ie ask questions like: "You hear Trump has a new idea about issue x. Without knowing what the idea is, how likely do you think it is that it's a good idea (1-7 scale)? A bad idea (1-7 scale)? Designed to enrich people like him (1-7 scale)? Designed to help people like you (1-7 scale)? (1-7 to allow *definitelys" or "absolutelys" on either end)'
I've not heard a single credible attempt to justify $200 billion for the war. I still don't know what the objectives are and what the plan is. The number $200 billion appears to me to be just a made up number. Now, a certain amount of money is going to need to be budgeted to replace weapons we've used that are critical deterrents in S. Korea, Taiwan, and elsewhere. But if they are just going to fire these things off in Iran, then what the fuck? To put "boots on the ground" must increase the cost, but by how much and what kind of a deployment are they looking at? If it is to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, that is open ended, and $200 billion might be enough at the present burn rate to keep us there until November. In all likelihood they will burn through it faster than that, and either way they will be back for more maybe sometime this summer.
"Limited" ground wars tend to spiral when people start getting killed. This is a major disaster. I just wonder at what point he starts threatening to drop a nuke on Iran if they don't do what he wants. And after this, I think there is no question the Iranians will do whatever it takes to get a nuke. So how do we get out now?
Having no clear plan about what this money is for is really, really disconcerting to me. It's a lot of steak and lobster, and everyone gets a Steinway I guess.
If they can't articulate a plan to get out of there, it should be a hard "no". Vote to replenish our weapons and stop firing them into the desert.
Mostly done with the 25 IA 1st district postcards. Looking forward to No Kings next week.
Please weigh-in on supporting Michigan candidate Mallory Mc Morrow. Thanks
Hopium doesn't get involved in primaries.
Love her, but Rachel's right. Really just hope she wins her primary!
I hope see the day Mallory serves in a national capacity. I support her on my own. She fills me with hope and pride.
I totally agree!
Simon, We have to stop this war now. We can't allow boots on the ground. Also has to answer why are military are pushing Trump's war and aren't standing up for Americans. I thought it was the law they had to stand up for an illegal. Not one seems to pay attention to this.
In some places on the Seattle area gas is up to $6.00 a gallon!!!!!!
Thanks Simon, good to see the strong opposition to the war continuing in polling, including a good number of Republicans (especially when the question ties the war to gas prices!).
I can’t make the DC event with Anderson Cooper (long flight, my arms would get tired, I’m here all week) but I just donated the ticket price to Roy Cooper through the Hopium link and will be there in spirit.
Adam Smith is fast becoming one of my favorite Congressionals. He’s right - they want a war then raise taxes to pay for it. Sell the American people on how the war is in their interest.
Sharing this nugget on Ukraine continuing to help Gulf nations. May they reap genuine rewards for their ingenuity, courage, and service. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-deploys-units-intercept-targets-middle-east-2026-03-20/
Cleaning up this mess for the long term will take much scrubbing at grassroots level. That includes diving into culture wars to deal with fear and convincing the short-sighted to populate the bucket brigades before there is a five alarm fire.
I am in Europe right now and they are feeling the effects of the Trump war here.
It is embarrassing to be an American abroad right now
UGHHH
Everything he touches dies including pride of your American heritage
I really feel for you. Here in my neck of the woods (So Cal), most people are operating like nothing is happening. But the shock waves will come.
Simon, can the Women Democrats of Montgomery County help with the Raskin resolution for the Montgomery County Commission to condemn the executive branch? We already have four Hopium members working on it: Leslie Katz, Joan Phillips, Digital Democracy, Jo Shifrin.
I'm from Montgomery County MD, so this event always gets my attention.