Negative Net Approval in the Age of Polarization: How Trump’s Ratings Compare Structurally to Past Presidents

In recent years, headlines highlighting negative “n

In recent years, headlines highlighting negative “net approval” ratings have become a routine feature of American political coverage.

During the presidency of Donald Trump, these numbers were frequently presented as historically alarming, raising questions about whether his ratings represented a unique collapse in public confidence or a broader structural shift in American politics. A closer, data-driven comparison across modern presidencies reveals a more nuanced picture. 

While Trump’s net approval was persistently negative, its depth was not unprecedented when measured against past leaders during periods of crisis. What distinguishes the Trump era is not simply the numbers themselves, but the rigidity of voter alignment in an increasingly polarized electorate.

Understanding this distinction is essential to separating emotional reaction from structural political reality.

1️⃣ What “Net Approval” Actually Means

The graphic you posted shows net approval, not raw approval.

Net approval = Approval % − Disapproval %

Example:

• 42% approve

• 61% disapprove

• Net = −19

Negative net numbers are not new. They simply mean more people disapprove than approve.

{rsform 189}

2️⃣ Negative Net Approval Is Not New

Many presidents have had negative net approval periods:

• George W. Bush during the Iraq War and financial crisis

• Barack Obama during the ACA rollout and midterm backlash

• Joe Biden during inflation spikes

What is different today is how persistent the negatives are.

Earlier presidents often dipped negative during crises but later recovered. Trump’s approval tended to stay tightly within a narrow band (roughly low 40s approval) for most of his presidency.

Political scientists sometimes call this the “calcified electorate” era.

3️⃣ Modern Polarization Is Historically Extreme

The biggest structural change is partisan polarization:

• Republicans overwhelmingly approve of Republican presidents.

• Democrats overwhelmingly disapprove.

• Very few voters move between those camps.

Since about 2008–2012, cross-party approval has collapsed. That makes it very hard for any president to reach broad national approval.

Trump governed during one of the most polarized periods in modern American political history.

4️⃣ Media & Reporting Changes

There are reporting differences compared to earlier decades:

A. More frequent polling

We now see:

• Weekly national tracking polls

• Aggregators

• Constant “net approval” graphics

In the 1980s or 1990s, polling was less constant and less visually amplified.

B. Emphasis on “net approval”

Earlier eras emphasized:

• “Approval rating is 47%”

Modern media emphasizes:

• “Net approval is −12”

That framing makes negativity more visually stark.

5️⃣ Trump-Specific Factors

Whether one thinks he was “that bad” depends on political viewpoint, but objectively speaking, Trump had several attributes that historically depress cross-party approval:

• Highly confrontational rhetoric

• Norm-breaking governing style

• Two impeachments

• Pandemic-era turmoil

• Strong opposition mobilization

He also had very high loyalty within his base, which kept approval from collapsing into the 20s (like Nixon late in Watergate).

6️⃣ Why It Feels Worse Now

Three reasons:

1. Information saturation – you see polls constantly.

2. Net framing – negative numbers look dramatic.

3. Zero-sum politics – fewer persuadable voters.

In the 1990s, a president at 47% approval wasn’t described as being at “−6 net.” Today they are.

Is This A New Trick

It is not a new reporting trick, and it’s not unique to Trump.

What is unique:

• The degree of polarization

• The durability of negative net ratings

• The nonstop visibility of polling

{rsform 189}

Comparative Net Approval Lows (Modern Era) Structural Observations

1️⃣ Trump’s Lows Were Not Historically Extreme

Trump’s worst net ratings (~ −25 range) are:

• Worse than Clinton and Obama

• Similar to Carter

• Less severe than George W. Bush in 2008

• Nowhere near Nixon’s collapse

So structurally, Trump was not an outlier in depth.

2️⃣ What Was Structurally Different

Stability.

Most presidents follow a curve:

• Honeymoon period

• Crisis dip

• Partial recovery

Trump’s approval:

• Started polarized

• Stayed polarized

• Rarely moved outside a narrow 38–45% approval band

Political scientists often describe this as the “frozen electorate” era.

3️⃣ Polarization Over Time

Average cross-party approval gap:

That collapse in cross-party approval makes sustained negative net ratings more common.

Timeline Pattern (Simplified)

The key structural difference is not severity — it is durability and lack of movement.

Trump’s negative net approval:

• Was not unprecedented in depth.

• Was unusually consistent.

• Occurred in an era of historically high partisan polarization.

• Is structurally similar to Biden’s pattern in terms of rigidity.

This suggests the phenomenon is systemic polarization, not merely reporting changes or uniquely catastrophic performance.

{rsform 189}