A new Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll finds 58% of Americans say Trump has made the economy worse — and voters are blaming him, not Biden, for the high cost of living.
I recognize that it might not be fully in line with the Strength in Numbers template, but I'd love to see how particular 2028 hopefuls stack up against the list of complaints you've identified with voters. Reading through this latest analysis, I'm thinking about JB Pritzker who seems to be nailing the big issues in Illinois. His NYT interview made explicit that he thinks the US needs universal healthcare coverage. Would love a "how they stack up" analysis some time, directly comparing to the voters' sympathies SIN identifies.
Generally, the reality of Presidents' control of the economy is way, way less than the public's perception of it.
This inflation now is an exception: it would probably be right about the targeted 2% rate if it were not for the tariffs and the elective war with Iran. Totally Trump's fault
(Not that 2% inflation would satisfy people now, but that's a different story.)
The most significant number in this poll is not the 58%, but the 41-to-16 margin on blame. For most of 2025, Americans were still assigning responsibility for high prices to the previous administration, and that has now closed. When the public settles on who owns an economic condition, that assignment tends to hold through an election cycle. Which is exactly what happened to Biden in 2024, and what the data here suggests is happening again. The question worth putting to your own representative, right now, is not which party they belong to. It is what they have specifically done, or voted for, in the last eighteen months that has affected the price of groceries, utilities, and health insurance in your district.
Listening to poll respondents at the end…very powerful! It is clear we will need an FDR type of response with an A+ team when we are finished with Trump and the appropriate communication skills to connect with the public…modern day fireside chats!
President Biden actually came into office on a message of transformational change. The greater accomplishments were in his first two years, but they were limited by fighting in the House between two major wings of the Democratic party and by the slim Senate majority, made worse by the antics of Manchin and Sinema, as well as the health issue of Feinstein and Lujan. If the Democrats could have held the House, and they came close to doing so, possibly more action might have followed. However, there was also the Russian invasion of Ukraine and then the Hamas attack on Israel and Israel's wholesale destruction of people in Gaza. There was also a lot of mess to clean up from the Trump Administration. Biden's administration had major accomplishments in healthcare, infrastructure, the environment, forgiving some student loans, and re-establishing the U.S. as a reliable NATO partner. Trump, of course, has tried to reverse it all.
It reminds me of Lyndon Johnson, whose Great Society programs and progress with Civil Rights did not accomplish all that it could have because of being drawn more deeply into the Vietnam War.
If Democrats can take control of the House and Senate in 2026, then hold that control if a Democratic president is elected, they will have a heavy lift. There is the mess that Trump has made of domestic, economic, and world affairs. There is the need to reform the structures that did not limit Trump and the Republicans from violating the Constitution, and in the case of the Supreme Court, creating parts of the Constitution that do not even exist. Four years will not be long enough. FDR had many years to re-shape society, due in part to the U.S. entry into WW II. Democrats would need to hold power for at least eight years, and they would need to come in with a clear plan, and an ability to implement it.
I was optimistic coming into the 2024 election. The Biden Administration, had threaded the needle of both bringing inflation down and avoiding an economic collapse. For many reasons (some perhaps valid) they received little credit. When the Republicans went into their “hate the other” bag — pure schoolyard stuff — I saw desperation and retained some optimism.
Ah, well. I guess we are what we are.
As the direct Talarico/Paxton campaign kicks off, it’s rather like getting prepared to toss some stuff into the city compost bin on the day before pickup when it’s been a warm, humid week; the stench is coming, there’s nothing you can do about it, and as bad as you’re expecting, it’s going to be worse.
Joy.
I’m not sure how the politics of being the adults in the room can be made to play in this environment. Can the decades of asset inflation that has caused so many of the real issues we see be made into something that people respond to as much as the price of eggs? (Or, for that matter as much as — egad — the availability of halal food at some HEBs!)
Could a talented “class traitor” beat out the strength of the bigot vote that has too-frequently held sway when there’s an absence of very specific drama (GFC, COVID, for example)?
Or have we just managed to normalize that back-of-mind thing of “will there be a real election at all”?
I, in turn, blame MAGA voters for electing someone who was so obviously incompetent, a liar, and a hate-filled doddering old man. He let everyone know in advance that he was going to full-out on tariffs, and his bluster was obviously going to lead to more conflicts all over the world.
How do you factor in, or rather, do you factor in the fact that for the first time in over 50 years, Texas Democrats have a candidate in every every state house, state senate, congressional, statewide judicial, and SBOE race? Would that suggest higher D turnout than usual because this year, D's will turnout to vote, even in very red areas, because they have a candidate to vote for? Or is this all factored into the analysis?
I recognize that it might not be fully in line with the Strength in Numbers template, but I'd love to see how particular 2028 hopefuls stack up against the list of complaints you've identified with voters. Reading through this latest analysis, I'm thinking about JB Pritzker who seems to be nailing the big issues in Illinois. His NYT interview made explicit that he thinks the US needs universal healthcare coverage. Would love a "how they stack up" analysis some time, directly comparing to the voters' sympathies SIN identifies.
Generally, the reality of Presidents' control of the economy is way, way less than the public's perception of it.
This inflation now is an exception: it would probably be right about the targeted 2% rate if it were not for the tariffs and the elective war with Iran. Totally Trump's fault
(Not that 2% inflation would satisfy people now, but that's a different story.)
The most significant number in this poll is not the 58%, but the 41-to-16 margin on blame. For most of 2025, Americans were still assigning responsibility for high prices to the previous administration, and that has now closed. When the public settles on who owns an economic condition, that assignment tends to hold through an election cycle. Which is exactly what happened to Biden in 2024, and what the data here suggests is happening again. The question worth putting to your own representative, right now, is not which party they belong to. It is what they have specifically done, or voted for, in the last eighteen months that has affected the price of groceries, utilities, and health insurance in your district.
And by the way, for any constituent wanting to make their voice heard to legislators, Civik.us offers that channel, free of charge.
Please give it a try and let us know how we can make it better.
https://civik.us/register
Listening to poll respondents at the end…very powerful! It is clear we will need an FDR type of response with an A+ team when we are finished with Trump and the appropriate communication skills to connect with the public…modern day fireside chats!
President Biden actually came into office on a message of transformational change. The greater accomplishments were in his first two years, but they were limited by fighting in the House between two major wings of the Democratic party and by the slim Senate majority, made worse by the antics of Manchin and Sinema, as well as the health issue of Feinstein and Lujan. If the Democrats could have held the House, and they came close to doing so, possibly more action might have followed. However, there was also the Russian invasion of Ukraine and then the Hamas attack on Israel and Israel's wholesale destruction of people in Gaza. There was also a lot of mess to clean up from the Trump Administration. Biden's administration had major accomplishments in healthcare, infrastructure, the environment, forgiving some student loans, and re-establishing the U.S. as a reliable NATO partner. Trump, of course, has tried to reverse it all.
It reminds me of Lyndon Johnson, whose Great Society programs and progress with Civil Rights did not accomplish all that it could have because of being drawn more deeply into the Vietnam War.
If Democrats can take control of the House and Senate in 2026, then hold that control if a Democratic president is elected, they will have a heavy lift. There is the mess that Trump has made of domestic, economic, and world affairs. There is the need to reform the structures that did not limit Trump and the Republicans from violating the Constitution, and in the case of the Supreme Court, creating parts of the Constitution that do not even exist. Four years will not be long enough. FDR had many years to re-shape society, due in part to the U.S. entry into WW II. Democrats would need to hold power for at least eight years, and they would need to come in with a clear plan, and an ability to implement it.
I was optimistic coming into the 2024 election. The Biden Administration, had threaded the needle of both bringing inflation down and avoiding an economic collapse. For many reasons (some perhaps valid) they received little credit. When the Republicans went into their “hate the other” bag — pure schoolyard stuff — I saw desperation and retained some optimism.
Ah, well. I guess we are what we are.
As the direct Talarico/Paxton campaign kicks off, it’s rather like getting prepared to toss some stuff into the city compost bin on the day before pickup when it’s been a warm, humid week; the stench is coming, there’s nothing you can do about it, and as bad as you’re expecting, it’s going to be worse.
Joy.
I’m not sure how the politics of being the adults in the room can be made to play in this environment. Can the decades of asset inflation that has caused so many of the real issues we see be made into something that people respond to as much as the price of eggs? (Or, for that matter as much as — egad — the availability of halal food at some HEBs!)
Could a talented “class traitor” beat out the strength of the bigot vote that has too-frequently held sway when there’s an absence of very specific drama (GFC, COVID, for example)?
Or have we just managed to normalize that back-of-mind thing of “will there be a real election at all”?
I, in turn, blame MAGA voters for electing someone who was so obviously incompetent, a liar, and a hate-filled doddering old man. He let everyone know in advance that he was going to full-out on tariffs, and his bluster was obviously going to lead to more conflicts all over the world.
I'd like to sue them for damages.
Absolutely spectacular analysis! I want to send this to every Democratic Representative like Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door.
How do you factor in, or rather, do you factor in the fact that for the first time in over 50 years, Texas Democrats have a candidate in every every state house, state senate, congressional, statewide judicial, and SBOE race? Would that suggest higher D turnout than usual because this year, D's will turnout to vote, even in very red areas, because they have a candidate to vote for? Or is this all factored into the analysis?
https://www.texasdemocrats.org/media/texas-democrats-fill-every-seat-on-the-2026-ballot