pacino wrote:interesting poll. how do the parameters of this hold up, jh?

President Donald Trump's job approval rating in the American counties that fueled his 2016 victory stands at 50 percent, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll of these "Trump counties."

In the Trump "surge counties" (for example: Carbon, Pa., where Trump won 65 percent to 31 percent, versus Romney's 53-45 percent margin) — 56 percent of residents approve of the president's job performance.

Trump beat Hillary Clinton in these "surge" areas nationwide by a combined 65 percent-to-29 percent margin in 2016.

jerseyhoya wrote:

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
Most politicians would have gone to a meeting like the one Don jr attended in order to get info on an opponent. That's politics!

pacino wrote:interesting poll. how do the parameters of this hold up, jh?

President Donald Trump's job approval rating in the American counties that fueled his 2016 victory stands at 50 percent, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll of these "Trump counties."

In the Trump "surge counties" (for example: Carbon, Pa., where Trump won 65 percent to 31 percent, versus Romney's 53-45 percent margin) — 56 percent of residents approve of the president's job performance.

Trump beat Hillary Clinton in these "surge" areas nationwide by a combined 65 percent-to-29 percent margin in 2016.

CalvinBall wrote:went to a swing left meeting last night. the 3 candidates who are running for the dem nom for PA 7 were there. sheehan, mcginty, and perry.

sheehan and perry are by far the most likeable. spoke with perry for a good bit. he knows his stuff. crazy life story. dont think anyone beat meehan, but would love if perry did. dude is bright and seems like someone who the party needs.

pacino wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:went to a swing left meeting last night. the 3 candidates who are running for the dem nom for PA 7 were there. sheehan, mcginty, and perry.

sheehan and perry are by far the most likeable. spoke with perry for a good bit. he knows his stuff. crazy life story. dont think anyone beat meehan, but would love if perry did. dude is bright and seems like someone who the party needs.

surprised Leach wasn't there. There's also Dan Muroff, who has the Rendell wing that I wouldn't vote for (for whatever that's worth at this point). then there's ANOTHER candidate, Elizabeth Moro.

with someone like Sheehan she doesn't live in the district yet; that doesn't bode well. neither does McGinty

i wish someone would run in the 8th! absolutely no one has declared there

pacino wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:went to a swing left meeting last night. the 3 candidates who are running for the dem nom for PA 7 were there. sheehan, mcginty, and perry.

sheehan and perry are by far the most likeable. spoke with perry for a good bit. he knows his stuff. crazy life story. dont think anyone beat meehan, but would love if perry did. dude is bright and seems like someone who the party needs.

surprised Leach wasn't there. There's also Dan Muroff, who has the Rendell wing that I wouldn't vote for (for whatever that's worth at this point). then there's ANOTHER candidate, Elizabeth Moro.

with someone like Sheehan she doesn't live in the district yet; that doesn't bode well. neither does McGinty

i wish someone would run in the 8th! absolutely no one has declared there


edit: side note, the district is garbage and i don't blame someone for not living in it past the idea that it puts you immediately at a disadvantage. i'm looking to win on offense here.

pacino wrote:

thephan wrote:I missed that DJT pumped up his approval rating +4% in his tweet to day that 40% is "not bad". Earth, and simple math to DJT, even if you climbed up 11% to a 40% approval mark, that is bad. 40% would still mean a majority of those polled think you are 'not good'. Of course this is flawed polls based on his improbable win, and fake news.

swishnicholson wrote:

thephan wrote:I missed that DJT pumped up his approval rating +4% in his tweet to day that 40% is "not bad". Earth, and simple math to DJT, even if you climbed up 11% to a 40% approval mark, that is bad. 40% would still mean a majority of those polled think you are 'not good'. Of course this is flawed polls based on his improbable win, and fake news.

That doesn't look right. low approval rating marks for each of these were Carter 28, Reagan 35, Bush 1 29, Clinton 37, Bush 2 25, Obama 38. Granted, undecideds probably meant Obama, Clinton and maybe Reagan never reached 60 disapproval, but the others seem dubious.

Update: Bush 1 hit 60 in July of 1992. Carter somehow reached only 59 despite his 28 percent approval, at least in the Gallup poll. Not sure why so many people had trouble making up their minds. Must have been in some sort of malaise.

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania would lose billions of federal Medicaid dollars in a decade under Republican legislation pending in the U.S. Senate to replace "Obamacare," according to figures released Monday by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf's administration.

Wolf, an opponent of the bill, released an analysis that says Pennsylvania could lose $12.7 billion in 2030 alone under a high-cost growth rate in Medicaid, and $5.5 billion that year under a low-cost growth rate in Medicaid.

Starting in 2020, Pennsylvania could lose nearly $1 billion under a high-cost growth rate.

"The losses in federal funds to protect health care benefits for Pennsylvania's most vulnerable are unacceptable and insurmountable," Wolf said in a statement.

Nearly 2.9 million Pennsylvanians — almost one in four — are covered by the state's $30 billion Medicaid program, a federal-state partnership. Pennsylvania's per capita and per beneficiary Medicaid spending is among the nation's highest.

Opponents say paring back Medicaid payments to the states would force the states to cut reimbursements to many Medicaid enrollees, potentially including the elderly, disabled and children.

The federal government pays slightly more than half the bill for most people on Medicaid. It pays nearly the whole bill for the more than 700,000 primarily childless low-income working adults who joined Medicaid starting Jan. 1, 2015, when Pennsylvania expanded income eligibility guidelines to take advantage of the more generous federal contribution rate under President Barack Obama's law.

Under the Senate bill, the federal government would still commit to funding the Medicaid expansion, albeit at a roughly 52 percent rate in Pennsylvania, compared to the 90 percent long-term rate under Obama's law.

thephan wrote:

swishnicholson wrote:

thephan wrote:I missed that DJT pumped up his approval rating +4% in his tweet to day that 40% is "not bad". Earth, and simple math to DJT, even if you climbed up 11% to a 40% approval mark, that is bad. 40% would still mean a majority of those polled think you are 'not good'. Of course this is flawed polls based on his improbable win, and fake news.


That doesn't look right. low approval rating marks for each of these were Carter 28, Reagan 35, Bush 1 29, Clinton 37, Bush 2 25, Obama 38. Granted, undecideds probably meant Obama, Clinton and maybe Reagan never reached 60 disapproval, but the others seem dubious.

Update: Bush 1 hit 60 in July of 1992. Carter somehow reached only 59 despite his 28 percent approval, at least in the Gallup poll. Not sure why so many people had trouble making up their minds. Must have been in some sort of malaise.

Actually the key word is disapproval. Looks like two separate weeks in late 2015 Obama hit 52% disapproval. I think you are looking at the other side of the apple (approval), so it is a same different.