Bernie now clearly back in 2nd place
It appears that Mayor Pete's rise has come at Warren's expense.
No matter how hard the establishment works against Bernie, they can't put him down.
"The coverage quickly revealed a pattern," wrote journalist Branko Marcetic, the author of the new analysis. "Over the two months, these six programs focused on Biden, often to the exclusion of Warren and Sanders. Sanders received not only the least total coverage (less than one-third of Biden's), but the most negative."The analysis, which is the cover story for In These Times magazine's December issue, found:
64% of the 240 episodes examined discussed Biden, 43% discussed Warren, and 36% discussed Sanders;
25% of the episodes only discussed Biden, while just 5% mentioned only Warren and 1% mentioned only Sanders;
Sanders had the highest percentage of negative mentions (20.7%) and the lowest percentage of positive mentions (12.9%);
87% of Sanders' negative mentions came from Matthews' Hardball and Williams' 11th Hour;
Warren had the lowest percentage of negative mentions (7.9%) and the highest percentage of positive mentions (30.6%);
11.3% percent of Biden's mentions were negative."While pundits get paid to have opinions, MSNBC's seem to dwell in an alternate reality," wrote Marcetic. "As momentum mounts for longstanding liberal goals like single-payer healthcare and bold climate action, MSNBC's coverage seems devoted, instead, to narrowing the liberal imagination."
NATIONAL POLL:
General Election Head to Heads:
Trump 49% | Sanders 50%
Trump 50% | Warren 50%
Trump 51% | Biden 49%
Trump 52% | Buttigieg 48%https://t.co/fo1JIHyQCR pic.twitter.com/gHlUwmiBEI— Emerson Polling (@EmersonPolling) November 21, 2019
Comments
Bernie Rising
Tidy summary. May I repost this to wotb? Better, will you do this?
I like the spotlight on msnbc. "alternate reality" indeed.
NYCVG
Meantime...
MSNBC’s Atlanta Debate Draws 6.5 Million Viewers, the Lowest of Any Debate in 2019 Cycle
While the Joe Rogan podcast with Bernie has had over 10M views.
One equal temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will. To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.--Tennyson
2 comments:
First, this poll is only the most illustrative of a trend other polls are showing, that Trump is benefiting from the impeachment sedition. Told you so!
The greatest failure coming could be because after the 2016 primary theft supposedly something like 3 million people left the Democratic Party. That is about 6% of its membership. Assuming that the polls are honest (which I consider dubious) and assuming that all of them were - are - Bernie supporters (and that they are very reliable primary voters)that is costing him maybe 20 points today. The demexiters just might cost Bernie the presidency in 2020.
On to Biden since 1973
"Sedition"?
An interesting word.
A word with a exclusively authoritarian background.
I kind of doubt the
demexiters will negatively impact Bernie. They will vote for him as independents.
edited to add clarification. As Shahryar said below, independents will re-register as dems to elect Bernie in the primary. It's what happened in 2016. I'm guessing you were not aware of that angle. I did that then and might do it again this time around, depending on where things are in June - which is when our very late primary takes place.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
Bernie was always strong with independents
Bernie is strongest in the groups least likely to be polled: independents, youth, nonvoters, republicans
I think Doh
was implying the demexiters can no longer vote in the Demo primary, where he needs the votes the most to win the nom.
If he wins the nom, he will win votes from independents, democrats, and some Repubs.
Remember that 70% of America support MFA, 52% of Repubs also support it.
Sanders just needs to win the Demo nom. and he will win the White House.
IMHO
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
but, to name two, demexiters are returning only for Bernie
I left a few years ago but have re-registered this year as a Dem so I can vote in the primary, as has shaharazade.
I mean....Bernie's supporters have a certain intelligence and can figure out that the only way to vote for him in the primary is to be a registered Dem.
THANK YOU!
Exactly, Shahryar!
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
Make that three
Registered so I can caucus but sending dues to OR and the greens.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
That 3m figure
is dubious --cite? Last I checked, there was no "Demexit" occurring since 2016. With DJT's approval ratings in the low 40s, why would there be an exodus from the opposition party?
The problem actually is for the GOP -- they tend to skew older, and older people die. The party numbers need to be replenished with fresh blood coming along, but the stats don't show any red wave among the youth. On the contrary, it might be slightly in favor of Dems in registration.
Dunno either about impeachment affecting Trump support or going against Ds. It's just the end of the first quarter in that process. Much more to come. Hopefully the Ds will find time to include some Emoluments articles, of which there would seem to be many.
I don't see any backlash for Donald now nor in the future. But again some GOP members, senators especially, will find their re-election prospects hampered by having to defend Donald.
Is Pete Buttigieg Just a Shill?
Umm yeah I do think he is. Since he started taking money from the donor class he has gone back on all of his policies and is now just another status quo candidate.
Is Pete Buttigieg Just a Shill for Corporations and the Donor Class?
I never bought the Buttigieg as a rising star crap. I think
upper income centrists are sheepishly lead from puppet to puppet as they are coaxed by MSDNC and neoliberal tools. But so far none have gotten enough traction to bump Bernie or Tulsi out of the campaign. Their ABBOT campaign is failing and Buttigieg is the most recent future has-been.
See also Republican primary, 2016
It’s the same deal. One minute it was JEB! Then is was whatshername who tanked HP. Then it was Herman Cain. The money couldn’t decide who it was going to be so they just kept changing partners. And the Dems all laughed and laughed at the clown car.
Well, let’s see: the Dems had Kamala and Biden and O’Rokure and now it’s Mayo Pete’s turn. Strikes me as same deal. Manufacturing consent.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
I have been pondering what name to give to the faux progressive
equivalent of the republican clown car of 2016. So far no luck. But the parade of conservative turds fronting for the DNC deserves a fitting name.
Tulsi on Bolivia
Writing another check
to Tulsi right now.
She may not have a chance at election. And she may not be able to move the Overton Window any further left. But she is definately a "chock block" against it moving an inch back to the right.
The momentum is to the left in America for the first time in decades.
Witness Trump's astounding win in 2016 on a platform of fewer international interventions, better friends with Russia, anti TPP, bringing jobs back to America, draining the swamp. If these aren't leftist goals, then I don't know what is anymore.
We're going in the correct direction.
Lets keep moving that way.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
Sounded good to me then, still sounds good to me now
That’s what I want and think other people also want. People who don’t care what the party label is. Enough other people to win in the electoral college.
Tulsi is again the only one to take down an establishment
Yeah Buttigieg no doubt asked his Harvard buds
how to get all the Important People on board, and they told him to advocate sending troops to Mexico to battle the cartels.
As for meeting with "murderous dictators," once upon a time President Franklin Delano Roosevelt met with one to defeat Hitler. When did this become taboo?
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
The Khive went after Mayo Pete for his black scam
but you would think Harris would have said something about that.
Boy Rachel couldn't interrupt Tulsi fast enough. This is what makes the debates so childish. Ennnt..your time is up! Why just a few seconds? To keep people from saying what the PTB don't want us to hear. How much good would it do to fight Mexico drug cartels when we have the CIA importing drugs from Afghanistan and other countries? I think we should look into just what Pete was doing in Afghanistan.... but yeah let's end this failed war on drugs.
I still want to know why Tulsi doesn't plan to return to congress. Does she have something else lined up?
Can’t speak for Tulsi
but afaik the DNC is pumping a ton of money into that race, for the guy running against her. I haven’t heard anything official but the theory is that she can’t fight two wars at once and she was starting to take a beating there. So maybe she decided this is where she can do the most good now and she’s just going for it. As for the future though, who knows?
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Wait what?
I thought Nancy said that she was going to fight for every person already in congress from the upstarts that want to run them out of office. But now you're telling me that she isn't going to protect Tulsi? Color me shocked. I sure hope that the guy running against Nancy cleans her clock and she finally gets more time to play with her grandkids.
I don't know about Pelosi
but Cheri Bustos, chair of the DCCC (vampire-like congressional fund-raising arm of the DNC) announced a while back that they would not financially support any candidates who were trying to primary Dem candidates.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
Yeah Cheri Bustos definitely said that
But I thought Nancy was also on board with it. Either way it's a big club and we ain't in it. Must be comforting knowing that your fellow congress critters are against you getting reelected. Must make for awkward moments when they run into each other. "Umm excuse me..."
Hawaii only has two congressional districts, so
the trick the Democrats used on Dennis Kucinich — namely making him disappear by allocating parts of his former district to other incumbents after reapportionment redrew the boundaries — isn’t an option.
So the Democrats’ inner-party hierarchy that wants to get rid of Tulsi has to go for the direct approach, frontal attack instead of a stab in the back.
Tulsi isn't Running for Re-election of her seat
It was reported in late October in WaPo:
Tulsi Gabbard won’t run for reelection to Congress as she seeks Democratic presidential nomination.
One equal temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will. To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.--Tennyson
Shocking I know.
*shrug*
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
So is she pro-coup, anti-coup, or neutral
"The United States and other countries should not be interfering in the Bolivian people's pursuit of self-determination and right to choose their own government."
Even if it's a military junta? Well, I suppose so.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
A military junta
backed by OAS and the US. We're already involved.
We need to stop provoking and aiding military juntas and other forms of regime change in foreign countries, and we need to stop acting all innocent when we're caught doing it.
"Who, me?" Yes, us.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
The U.S. moves quickly to *suppress* regime change too,
in cases where a genuine popular uprising develops organically and threatens dictatorships Washington likes.
Example: Bahrain, where Obama gave the Saudis a green light to send in troops and armored vehicles across the causeway and crush the democracy movement there. (Obama had the final say because the U.S. Fifth Fleet is headquartered in Bahrain.)
I thought her statement made it clear that she is
against the Bolivia coup. Seems straight forward to me. Whether it's just words remains to be seen.
So all these candidates that were soundly beating Trump
Several months ago are now tied with him.
That should be the news not that Sanders is back in second place.
You can thank Pelosi and Schiff
Best recruiters for the GOP.
Talk about Biden! Don't you just cringe when Pelosi starts to stammer and get that "Where am I? who am I?" look?
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
I predicted that impeachment was a recipe for disaster
And would backfire big time. But I thought it would take longer than this for Trump to get caught up with the Democratic candidates. This has been lightening fast. Impeachment has been more of a boon for Trump than Clinton emails.
Willfully ignorant or just stupid?
Still hasn't figured out that Comcast owns MSNBC?
" In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry, and is generally considered to have been a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy "
I vote willful ignorance.
Seems to me for too many years we have treated these people as if they're stupid and that they just make dumb mistakes, but they really are anything but truly stupid. Manipulative, ineffectual, willfully ignorant. They know who writes their proverbial paychecks. They really should be given no benefit of the doubt that they are really good people who just don't know, IMHO.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
So the demexiters will come back. But what if it's too late?
it won't be about whether or not Bernie's supporters will or will not come back, it will be about whether they will be believed or the corruptocrat liars. I suspect that Bernie's real number is more like 40% than 18 or 20 like the heavily biased polls are claiming. That number is being believed or at least accepted. Now on primary day the missing Bernie supporters come back. Will the corruptocrats get away with saying that Bernie only got "20% like he was getting all along"? This way claiming Bernie got 30 or 40 points less than he really got would be believed.
On to Biden since 1973
Sorry but I believe the numbers are legit.
We have four contenders, not two like 2016. A lot of people who supported Bernie won't come back. For many of us his ship has sailed. Especially with his older supporters last time.
He is recruiting millenials now.
We have four sucky candidates out in front and several others who might steal a delegate here and there.
There is a good chance that the delegates will be split four or five ways and we could go to the convention without a clear winner unless something breaks. If that happens it will be hard for the ultimate candidate to get a general election contest in full gear. And there is likely to be lots of dissention.
And as I pointed out above thread, Trump is now tied with all of these candidates who were way out in front of him just a couple of months ago, where the meme was that any of the Democratic candidates could trounce Trump. If Trump is tied in the national polls, he will cake walk through the EC.
Way way too much
is made here of these hypo national matchup polls. Big yawn for me.
Wake me up when we starting seeing more meaningful polls -- say when Trump's approval rating consistently ticks up to the mid to high 40s at least. And wake me when we finally have a Dem nominee so these matchup scenarios are a little more meaningful.
Meantime, we are about to enter the period when many more folks will actually start paying a little attention to the horse race and polling numbers therefore will become something to take seriously.
Finally, my early prediction is that Trump is going down next year. Impeachment backlash will not happen. He will be exposed for the crook that he is.
Dream on.
Trump is being impeached for what Biden did. (Golden comment for which I can not take credit). Most people get it except for the MSM and the Democratic looney tunes in the House. Impeachment by 2/3 of the senate just ain't happening as it becomes more and more evident that Biden's kid is a major crook and sleazebag. Takes up with his brother's wife after his brother dies, impregnates a woman and denies it until a paternity test proves he is a liar and then marries someone else. And of course he left his wife and kids. Stand up guy.
And then there is Biden who is so demented now he doesn't know what world he's in.
Impeachment in the senate will be a trial of the Democrats, not Trump.
Here's a possible scenario. What does Trump do if the Ukrainian government wants the US to extradite Hunter Biden during the trial in the senate? Can you imagine those hearings in the senate? Suppose the senate wants to extradite? Does Trump appoint a special prosecutor to handle the extradition request? Fun times.
It will be better for Trump than Clinton's emails.
You often produce quality
posts, but yours above misses the mark on most points. The rationale for impeachment almost certainly did not involve covering for Biden, who is not accused of any illegality nor HB. Party leadership would never put its political fortunes so much at risk to protect someone who, while he might have been a preferred candidate, was never much more than one of several available options. It was political pressure from grassroots and regular members of congress building over time plus some U-gate obsessed nat'l security types with clout in the party and their own agenda which forced Pelosi's hand.
Impeachment, as I've consistently argued here for months, was almost inevitable to happen. U-gate was chosen as the main vehicle for getting it done in the House as it would highlight national security issues, and the entire process consists of achieving overall political victory even as the expected acquittal in the senate occurs.
No one on the D side has bet a nickel that the senate would convict. The victory comes in putting out damaging and irrefutable information against Trump which he now essentially concedes is true and which puts him on the defensive and forces enough senate Rs to make a difficult choice about whether to stay loyal to their fuehrer. Either way these senators choose will be a political loser for them. The political backlash this cycle will be the one against the GOP for acquitting an obviously guilty president.
Finally re Hunter, again he hasn't been accused of any illegality, just taking advantage of the family name and embarrassing himself and his father. I am not aware of any investigative process over there which somehow would put HB in Ukrainian legal crosshairs, so your hypothetical scenario just seems pure fiction.
Think again --
I guess you don't know about this recent update:
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-conference/625831.html
So if Hunter Biden is formally charged with a crime, a demand for extradition is entirely possible. Not only that it would exonerate Trump for any charge of quid pro quo.
Sorry, just not impressed
by a few MPs demanding said investigation. At any time in any legislature anywhere in the world you have members demanding something -- it's usually just background noise that amounts to nothing. And in any case, the investigation as outlined seems to involve a rather large chart involving plenty of arrows and drop-down boxes just to try to ensnare the Dem Party, let alone Hunter or Joe Biden. No sell.
Otoh, in the unlikely event this thing gets any traction, it would work against Biden's political interests here, and that's a good thing. So far, unfortunately for my prediction, he seems to be stubbornly stubborn in maintaining his grip on the ill-advised and poorly-counseled Ds of SC, and still has sway with our beloved MSM.
As with the latest interview, or free campaign infomercial, by one Don "Don't Call Me Meadowlark" Lemon at CNN the other night. 15 free minutes of Don walking around some town in SC with Joe, lobbing him one softball after another, probably including asking Joe about his favorite type of ice cream. I was waiting for Don to finish with: "If you could be a twee, what kind of twee would you be?"
Maybe you missed this part; I omitted it myself
So the head of Burisma has been indicted (at least that is how I read the word implicated because usually you can not have a case without an indictment). Granted there may be something missing in the translation but indictment has been reported elsewhere. We have Biden's name mentioned along with cases (plural and could/should also mean indictments if the head of Burisma has been indicted) and we have the mention of a possible referral to an agency that focuses on financial international terrorism.
Of course we also have the demand of Joe Biden to fire the prosecutor, which did happen.
And then we have this from another report:
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/623992.html
So if we don't know just how much Biden received we do now, $871,000.
But my problem is the lack of proof of any crime by Trump as you claim.
And if you go to this page there are about eight articles about the Trump/Biden case.
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/625076.html
Only two, which are articles about Taylor and Sondland, have accused Trump with quid pro quo, and it was these two Americans accusing him. About four Ukrainians (articles on each one) deny these claims. Not a single Ukrainian agrees with these two Americans, at least there is no report of a single one. If pressure was applied, either the Ukrainians did not understand it that way or at least will not testify that was the case.
So where is the criminal activity you are accusing Trump of since you state that he "will be exposed for the crook that he is"?
Nah, no thanks.
More jumble of words poorly translated and more arrows on a chart pointing to boxes and boxes and alleged connections. Looks like it could be another Hillary's Emails nontroversy, with plenty of alleged smoke, never a fire, only a few wisps of faint smoke at best amounting to a few no-no's by a few people. Big whoop.
I have no interest in spending more than 5 minutes thinking about Hunter Biden. Only about that much, when necessary, on Joe.
But knock yourself out if you want to. I choose to spend my free time differently. If Huntergate ever turns up solid evidence of wrongdoing, get back to me.
(adios for this thread. ... on to other things)
I think the real point
of impeachment is to try to retake the Senate. Have the trial and force Republican Senators (23 running for re-election) to take a series of embarrassing votes. It seems impossible to get 20 Republicans to flip and vote for conviction, and I can't believe that's the plan.
The process continues to tie Trump in knots. Put out more damaging information on him and make a few Trump voters reconsider. Not many, most of them are beyond reach, but a few.
As to Biden, who cares? Biden isn't "the Democrats" unless he wins the nomination. He's just one senile old coot in the race. This process forces the Republicans to move up their time table and dump whatever dirt they have on Biden now before the voting starts. It will have either no effect or drive down Biden's support, and those supporters will drift to better Democratic candidates.
"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Albert Bartlett
"A species that is hurtling toward extinction has no business promoting slow incremental change." -- Caitlin Johnstone
Well yes, the senate
but also the big enchilada, the WH.
On reconsidering for Trump voters, the idea would be to try to influence the soft-R and Indy voters, not the hardcore pod people for Trump. They are by definition beyond reaching, beyond reason.
Re Biden, agree. This is not 2016 where the Party had so much invested in Hillary getting the nom.
To note once
again for the record: Unlike nearly all here, I have generally supported the Impeachment inquiry, but always with the approach of a broad-brush inquiry, not the current one which seems 100% focused on U-gate. I think this is a major mistake in strategy, and it would be the primary cause why more people don't favor impeachment and conviction.
Not sure exactly what all those 4-5 congressional committees were doing for months out of the spotlight investigating Donald's affairs, other than futilely trying to get his tax returns. Shirley they've hit pay dirt once or twice on the Emoluments Clause at the very least. Improper self-enrichment while in office is something voters immediately understand. When they are shown the profit numbers for Donald, they would be even more angry. When they are shown this directly violates a clear provision of the Constitution, they would demand impeachment and conviction.
Embarassing votes?
It's the Dem's that will have embarrassing votes. Vote to convict on an obviously political alternate-fact nothing burger or vote against the party and face the enmity of the DNC?
I'd love to see a sizable chunk vote NO and break openly with the Party possibly former a new party, separate fr5om the corrupt city machines and Wall street bribes. But I fear it's a forlorn hope. It's time for Democracy to die in this new Age of Empires.
(R) Senators will vote for acquittal and please the (R) voters, independents and those few (D)'s that still believe in elections and the Constitution.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Someone asked for data
Republican voter registration: https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-voter-registration-governo... (though it didn't help in LA or KY)
As for post 2016 demexit: lball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/registering-by-party-where-the-democrats-and-republicans-are-ahead/ (hard to find, but there is a chart claiming that Demexit was only 1 million)
Someone asked me to tell them when Trump reached the upper 40s::https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
On to Biden since 1973
Rasmussen --
notoriously pro-GOP in its polling. Get back to me when the more accurate, respected polling firms start showing Donald with 46% and above approval.
As for the first article, it cites only a few states, and of course doesn't have a break down as to whether these additions are primarily from suburban Rs (moderate, mod-conservative, not Trumpistas) or more rural conservative. I suspect more suburban registrations than rural, as the latter population is probably declining. And as noted, in KY and LA party registration meant little, or wasn't enough, as the D won in both of those solidly red states.
I didn't catch any "3 million" decline in D registration nationwide assertion in the cite. And again, common sense would suggest that with a president in the low-40s in approval ratings, the opposition party is not going to be experiencing a major drop in registration.
Re the GE, it's also crucial to consider not only how energized the Ds will be to turn out and remove Donald (likely very highly motivated) but how the True Indies will turn out. I would bet a fair amount they will show up in large numbers to vote against Donald, and won't be overly choosy as to who the D nominee is, within reason.
Within reason
If the dems nominate Biden it's not within reason. Voters won't turn out
Agree. Biden's
cognitive decline would no longer be talked around as it will be Donald and the GOP reminding everyone about it everyday. Low-hanging fruit, the script writes itself.
I would also greatly worry about nominee Pete's ability to engage the AA voters. If they don't show up in very good numbers, Ds are doomed.
Disagree
I don't know anyone who isn't a zombie (D) that thinks Trump is guilty of the specific charges raised. Most people regard the hearings as more political BS. Nixon didn't have dedicated voters, just never-D voters and antiwar voters. He was accused of covering up an actual crime (burglary) not pressuring a foreign leader to open a criminal investigation (not "get dirt" as Schiff and Pelosi and MSNBC say). Not much attention was paid to Clinton's impeachment despite charges of actual bribery until oral sex with a young woman hit the news.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
If you look at my links above
There are four prominent Ukranians who say there was no pressure put on Ukraine by Trump. None. Zip. Nada. All were in positions to know.
The only people saying there was pressure are some Americans who apparently don't like Trump's policy with Ukraine and who appear to have a different agenda.
In a reasonable universe, these diplomats who don't like what the President wants, get fired or resign.
Link to four Ukrainians (articles at bottom of page):
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/625076.html
Don't be so quick to dismiss
it's impolite. FYI Gallup polls him at 43, NPR at 44, but you obviously didn't read that far. And to quote myself, "but there is a chart claiming that Demexit was only 1 million)". Take a victory lap. But the site I referenced also said that Republican percentage of the electorate was 22% in October 2016 and 30% today, and that the Rs were gaining in FL and PA. Since many states do not register people by party there are no conclusive figures.
Incidentally, in 11/21/2011 Gallup had Obama at 43 - 49. https://news.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approv... but be warned, Gallup lists weekly polls for his entire eight years. Cheat sheet: that was not an outlier. Obama spent most of his presidency in the mostly low 40s though he ended in the high 50s and was normally well above water. Everyone has Trump under water.
Addition: the same history for Trump shows him not clearly gaining but has him hovering in the high 30s - low 40s throughout. https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald... His present 43% approval is a personal high, but not unique.
On to Biden since 1973