Donald Trump approval rating falls to record low on economy—Poll
Hugh Cameron
Mon, September 7, 2026
A new poll has revealed growing pessimism about the health of the U.S. economy under Donald Trump, who is falling deeper underwater with voters on key issues amid fears over affordability and the knock-on effects of the Iran war.
In their latest gauge of Americans' views on the administration, published on Sunday, the Financial Times and Focaldata revealed that only 33 percent of registered voters approved of Trump's presidential performance—a three-point drop from a month prior and the lowest level since the series began in May.
In addition to general dissatisfaction, 66 percent of the 2,178 adults polled said they believed the U.S. economy was going in the wrong direction, another high for the poll. Meanwhile, Trump's net approval on "inflation and the cost of living" fell to a record low of 17 percent—with 69 percent disapproving of his job on this front—as support for his approach to "jobs and the economy" slid to its own low of 26 percent.
Newsweek has contacted the White House via email for comment outside of regular working hours.
Economic Approval Waning
Only 18 percent of Americans now say they feel better off financially than when Trump returned to office last January, down from 32 percent when the pollsters first asked this question in May.
The number who feel worse off, meanwhile, reached 57 percent this month, up from 36 percent, as the share selecting the "about the same" or "don't know" options fell to 26 percent from 36 percent.
And declining economic confidence has coincided with an uptick in negative sentiment across both parties. Those who say the economy is headed in the wrong direction has risen to 66 percent from 61 percent in May, as disapproval of Trump's handling of inflation/the cost of living and jobs/the economy climbed to 69 percent from 58 percent, and 58 percent from 51 percent, respectively.
Among Trump voters, 44 percent said that the economy was on the right track—compared to 55 percent in May—with the number holding the opposite view rising to 40 percent from 33 percent. Even among those who identify as "strong" Republicans, only a slim majority of 52 percent said the economy was moving in the right direction—down from 65 percent—compared with 32 percent who disagreed and 15 percent who were unsure.
Midterm Threat
These results have been echoed across a number of polls in recent months, with a clear increase in pessimism since the start of the Iran War in late February, presenting a challenge for the administration and the president's party given the role economic issues and affordability seem set to play in this year's elections.
A Harris Poll conducted for The Guardian in early July found that 95 percent of Americans consider the U.S. to be in an affordability "crisis" driven by the rising cost of groceries, gas and other expenses.
Fuel prices remain elevated amid an ongoing bottleneck in the Strait of Hormuz shipping corridor, with diesel surpassing its all-time high last week and now approaching $6 per gallon.
And mid-August polling from the FT and Focaldata revealed that Democrats were more trusted than their opponents when it came to handling the economy—44 percent to 38 percent.
The latest poll revealed that economic issues are the most important to Americans two months out from the midterms, with 43 percent selecting "inflation and the cost of living" and 31 percent choosing the economy and jobs, followed by war and immigration at 20 percent and 16 percent, respectively.
In response to the latest results, a White House spokesperson told the FT that Trump acknowledged the "temporary disruptions" caused by the war, and that the administration "remains committed to implementing a proven economic agenda of tax cuts, deregulation and energy abundance."
The spokesperson also cited August's employment figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)—in which job gains came in nearly triple analyst expectations—as proof that "that this agenda continues to create private sector jobs and drive America's re-industrialisation."
But Matt Klink, a political consultant and president of Klink Campaigns, told Newsweek back in August that the president "can't bring voters around to his program with rhetoric alone."
"Economic skepticism is dangerous for the party in power, in this case, the Republicans, because it directly affects the coalition that brought Trump back to power: working-class, rural, and independent voters who expected relief on prices," he said. "If voters believe costs are still rising and Washington is making excuses, the midterms become a referendum on affordability, and that is a much tougher battlefield for the GOP."
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Daniel Orton and Cristina Diciu.
These results have been echoed across a number of polls in recent months, with a clear increase in pessimism since the start of the Iran War in late February, presenting a challenge for the administration and the president's party given the role economic issues and affordability seem set to play in this year's elections.
A Harris Poll conducted for The Guardian in early July found that 95 percent of Americans consider the U.S. to be in an affordability "crisis" driven by the rising cost of groceries, gas and other expenses.
Fuel prices remain elevated amid an ongoing bottleneck in the Strait of Hormuz shipping corridor, with diesel surpassing its all-time high last week and now approaching $6 per gallon.
And mid-August polling from the FT and Focaldata revealed that Democrats were more trusted than their opponents when it came to handling the economy—44 percent to 38 percent.
The latest poll revealed that economic issues are the most important to Americans two months out from the midterms, with 43 percent selecting "inflation and the cost of living" and 31 percent choosing the economy and jobs, followed by war and immigration at 20 percent and 16 percent, respectively.
In response to the latest results, a White House spokesperson told the FT that Trump acknowledged the "temporary disruptions" caused by the war, and that the administration "remains committed to implementing a proven economic agenda of tax cuts, deregulation and energy abundance."
The spokesperson also cited August's employment figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)—in which job gains came in nearly triple analyst expectations—as proof that "that this agenda continues to create private sector jobs and drive America's re-industrialisation."
But Matt Klink, a political consultant and president of Klink Campaigns, told Newsweek back in August that the president "can't bring voters around to his program with rhetoric alone."
"Economic skepticism is dangerous for the party in power, in this case, the Republicans, because it directly affects the coalition that brought Trump back to power: working-class, rural, and independent voters who expected relief on prices," he said. "If voters believe costs are still rising and Washington is making excuses, the midterms become a referendum on affordability, and that is a much tougher battlefield for the GOP."
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Daniel Orton and Cristina Diciu.
===========================================
BUT the other good news is that Trump's odorous stain on their shirts is forcing his MAGA moron candidates to distance themselves QUIETLY (cowards as they are) from his putrid fumes.
The MAGA moron candidates are in a Shakespearean dilemma: To ditch Trump or not to Ditch Trump. One of them put it bluntly:
"You're f***ed if you mention him too much, and you're also f***ed if you don't stay in his good graces."
=====================================
Joe Sommerlad
Mon, September 7, 2026
Republican candidates are quietly removing mentions of President Donald Trump from their campaign websites as his approval rating remains low and concerns over the economy and gas prices persist.
A number of Republican candidates facing tight races in November's midterm elections have dropped mentions of President Donald Trump from their campaign websites, according to reports.
The president's approval rating stands at just 33 percent in the latest Financial Times/Focaldata survey, with respondents again expressing concern over the state of the economy and the impact of Trump's ongoing war with Iran on domestic gas prices.
Despite the possibility of a wave of support for Democrats sweeping the opposition to power in the House of Representatives and Senate, Trump has insisted on placing himself front and center of GOP campaigning and is this week hosting a midterms convention for his party in Texas.
At least 45 congressional Republicans – and first lady Melania Trump – have already made their excuses and will not be attending the event and it seems their wariness about being seen associating with such an unpopular commander-in-chief extends to campaigning.
The Washington Examiner reports that Florida state Rep. Mike Beltran, who is battling for Florida's 14th Congressional District, has reworded his website so that it no longer claims he has motivated to enter politics because of Trump's example and now states instead that he "felt called to public service" and that he is running to be a "champion for lower costs, lower taxes, and increased healthcare access."
Mentions of President Donald Trump are reportedly being quietly dropped from Republican candidates' campaign websites, according to reports (Reuters)
Similarly, according to NBC News, Kentucky House contender Ralph Alvarado is now promising "independent leadership," having previously pitched himself as an "American First fighter."
The Washington Post has found another five GOP House candidates in battleground races who had modified their sales patter to downplay allegiance to Trump.
Michigan's Mike Bouchard has reportedly moved a banner prominently displaying the president's endorsement, Iowa's Joe Mitchell no longer mentions Trump on a section of his site explaining why he is running for Congress (but does include pictures of the president elsewhere) while Texas's Eric Flores, Alaska's Nick Begich and Arizona's Elijah Crane have revised references to their supporting Trump's agenda.
Jon Shiner, a spokesperson for Bouchard, told the Post, "Mike is proud of his endorsement by President Trump," and said the updates to his site had been made to reflect the fact that he was now the party's nominee for the seat, not a primary challenger.
Drew Johns, Mitchell's campaign manager, said in a statement: "Websites are updated all the time. I don't think anyone questions where Joe Mitchell stands on President Trump and the America First agenda."
Mike Marinella, a spokesperson for the House Republicans' campaign committee, rubbished the matter as "nothing more than a manufactured storyline all to provide cover for Democrats who kissed the ring of their radical socialist leaders to survive their primaries and are now desperately hoping a phony moderate makeover will fool voters before November".
Offering a counter interpretation, Washington Democratic Rep. Suzan DelBene said: "It's easy to understand why those careening towards defeat are attempting to distance themselves from the President.
"Voters are angry at Republicans for making their lives worse and are ready – if not outright eager – to reject them in November."
It was previously reported that some GOP campaign operatives have frankly told the president's team not to weigh in on their candidates' behalf, fearful of his intervention having an adverse impact.
"We've told them he cannot come," a senior Republican working on a competitive House race told Politico Friday. "Candidly, he would not be helpful here."
One House GOP competitor described the guidance they had received from pollsters and operatives in even blunter terms: "You're f***ed if you mention him too much, and you're also f***ed if you don't stay in his good graces."
The president himself appears not to have got the message, however, and told guests at his Rose Garden barbecue last week that he intends to enter the fray for the final 30 days of campaigning.
In addition to voters seemingly souring on Trump, Republicans have also been unnerved by the president's hesitance in releasing his MAGA Inc. Pac's campaign war chest to support failing candidates.
Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy overtly appealed to him to release funding to help out Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton during an appearance on Fox News last week, saying: "We in the Senate don't have the money budgeted for Texas. We need help from the president.
"The president says he has $850 million in his campaign accounts. That's a lot of jack. I'm hoping that the president's gonna spend $100 or $200 million in Texas. But he hasn't committed to it yet."
Trump has now done so, desperate to avoid the deep red Lone Star State turning blue for Paxton's Democratic challenger James Talarico.
=============================================
When cornered into wanting to steal the midterms, Trump replies:
"I would do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections."
Translation: I would commit any crime necessary, including cheating, posting armed gangs at polling stations to terrorize voters, and deny voters their right to vote by mail, to make sure my minions win the elections.
At the very least, he is positioning his supposed policies such that he can use them as arguments to deny the results of the elections.
None of the criminal schemes he is plotting were in place when he won in 2024. Yet he never complained about fraud then because he won fair and square. Nothing has changed since then, so why is he anticipating hypothetical and false claims of fraud under the same exact conditions that made him win in 2024?
=============================================
CNNWill the Trump administration send federal officers or troops to the polls?
With less than two months to go until this year's midterm elections, Democrats are becoming increasingly unnerved about the possibility of President Donald Trump deploying federal immigration officers or troops to polling places.
Messaging from the Trump administration about that potential has been mixed. While some, like Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, have largely dismissed the notion of a poll deployment, others have left open the possibility of troops or officers being at the polls under specific or exigent circumstances, despite federal laws that prohibit such activity.
Trump himself has been noncommittal. But while he has not explicitly come out to say he would take this step, several of his past actions and comments have worried those who believe he might overstep his authority, or that the implied threat might be enough to keep people away from the polls altogether.
"If there is someone in the administration foolish enough to order them to be there, that will be stopped immediately," said David Becker, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation & Research.
"The states are prepared; they will go to court," he said. "But it may be that there are members of the administration, and perhaps even the president himself, who would like to inspire in some voters the fear that that might occur, and get them to decide themselves not to show up rather than have to go through the trouble of trying to physically suppress their votes."
Here is what top officials within the administration or the military have said about the potential of sending troops or federal officers to polling locations: Mullin says ICE officers could be at polling places in specific circumstances. The law says they can't be.
Concerns about immigration authorities being dispatched to polling places partly stem from Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin's decision earlier this year to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to airports during a government shutdown. While immigration authorities have long had a presence and enforced immigration laws at airports, the large-scale deployment of ICE officers to assist with security and lines was a new development.
It also spurred concern about whether polling places could be next, especially given the administration's broader crusade against what it claims — without evidence — is widespread voter fraud by immigrants in the country illegally.
"These are all tools of how the president is trying to think about a much larger plan, which is, if you cannot hold onto power through democratic elections, then adjust democratic elections," Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, told CNN in March.
Asked by reporters last week whether ICE officers could be sent to polling locations in November, Mullin left open the possibility that they could be under specific circumstances.
"The only reason why we would be at polling places, if there is a threat to that polling place or we're serving a warrant on someone that we have been actively tracking down," Mullin said. He later added: "If we're serving a warrant, we will be where we need to be."
But federal law prohibits "any troops or armed men" being sent to "any place where a general or special election is held." Exceptions are provided for if they are actively voting.
"I hope someone in his office has made him aware of 18 U.S.C. § 592," Becker said. "That is illegal, and anyone who orders anyone to do that is committing a federal crime."
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement Friday that ICE "is not planning operations targeting polling locations." But the spokesperson added certain officers, "if called upon" by local law enforcement, could be poised to "rapidly respond to an incident if necessary."
Mullin's comments this week echo a response he gave to a similar question during his confirmation hearing. "The only reason why my officers would be there is if there was a specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation," he said in March.
Caine has denied any plans for active US military troops to be deployed to polling locations in November.
In a letter responding to Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat who asked military leaders to commit to not sending troops to the polls, Caine wrote the military has "no plans" to send federal military personnel or federalized National Guard troops to voting locations.
"Likewise, the Joint Force has no plans to use such personnel to seize ballots, voting machines, or other election-related material," wrote Caine, who is the nation's highest-ranking military officer.
Trump says he would do 'anything necessary' to secure elections
Trump has not specifically laid out any plans to deploy troops or federal officers to polls this year. But the president has constantly undermined the results of elections he lost or which went poorly for his party, and has made several suggestions or attempts to exert federal control over elections or undermine voters' confidence in their security and reliability.
In January, the FBI raided the election office in Fulton County, Georgia — a state that had been the centerpiece of Trump's false claims of fraud in the 2020 election, and where the president and his allies previously tried to overturn the results. The raid stemmed from an investigation into allegations of voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Tulsi Gabbard, the then-Director of National Intelligence, was at the raid, and her presence generated controversy given that her typical purview is coordinating overseas intelligence operations and not domestic law enforcement.
Days after that raid, Trump called on Republicans to "nationalize" future federal elections. That would run contrary to provisions in the Constitution that give states, and not the federal government, primary control over their own elections.
After he lost the 2020 election, some Trump aides urged him to enlist the military to seize voting machines. Trump told the New York Times in an interview earlier this year that he regretted not doing so.
The president has also signed a pair of executive orders aiming to boost proof of citizenship requirements for voting and seeking to limit mail-in ballots. The former executive order was permanently blocked, while the administration is asking the Supreme Court to review the latter.
The Department of Justice has also attempted to undertake a nationwide campaign to acquire states' voter roll data. Those efforts have been consistently blocked by judges.
Trump refused to rule out sending National Guard troops or federal officers to the polls when asked about it earlier this year. He said he would "do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections."
