A 2020 poll!

close

Video

Fox News Poll: 46 percent approve of Trump's performance

New polls show voters' opinions on President Trump's job performance and likelihood of voting for him in 2020.

**Want FOX News Halftime Report in your inbox every day? Sign up here.**

On the roster: A 2020 poll! - I’ll Tell You What: Cat tent chief of staff - Pelosi makes a deal on to reclaim speakership - Audible: Mother Carter would approve - You know the ‘LOVE’ statue? Yeah, well…

A 2020 POLL!
Do you smell that? It’s not fresh snickerdoodles for the company Christmas party. It’s polls! Our stellar, bi-partisan polling team is just in with their latest national offering with lots of goodies of their own – including an early look at the 2020 Democratic field. With that in mind, let’s get right into some nuggets.

- “While the field is still undefined, it is no surprise better-known politicians currently rate higher.  Most Democrats say former Vice President Joe Biden (70 percent excellent or good) and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (63 percent) would be excellent or good as president. Some 38 percent of Democrats feel that way about Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, while about a third thinks Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke (36 percent), New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker (34 percent), and California Sen. Kamala Harris (33 percent) would be excellent or good.” Read it here.

- “Donald Trump continues to suffer from upside-down job ratings as his second year as president winds down.  In addition, views of the economy remain divided, voters feel the administration’s economic policies have not helped them -- and fewer are optimistic about future economic conditions than two years ago, according to the latest Fox News poll. Forty-five percent of voters think the economy will be in better shape a year from now, down from 56 percent who felt that way in December 2016.  Although the question has been asked at irregular intervals on the Fox News poll over the past 20 years, this is the most pessimistic outlook since February 2001.” Read it here.

- “A record 48 percent think the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russians in 2016.  Thirty-seven percent believe there was no coordination, down 15 points from a high of 52 percent in June 2017.” Read it here.

- We are told that it is news that former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro has launched a presidential exploratory committee. We first wonder at the news value of this since Castro and his brother, Rep. Joaquin Castro, have been exploring presidential runs since they were in about eighth grade. Castro is not to be taken lightly as he is tapped into both Obama and Clinton fundraising and is the first Hispanic politician to be making such an intentional play for 2020. But is there a market? Our guess is that the success of Beto O’Rourke noted above has seriously harmed Castro’s chances. At the very least, we can expect a serious tussle between the two in Texas if they both run. 

- North Carolina Republicans are in the “bargaining” phase of their grief in the still-unresolved House race in the state’s 9th Congressional District. In the face of lots of evidence of hanky stuff, Republicans now say that there should be a re-vote. They’ve changed their tune because of some new revelations about improprieties but also because how the re-vote takes place will matter. If a bill working its way through the state legislature or if Republican nominee Mark Harris is unexpectedly certified by state election officials as the winner and then rebuffed by the House, he will have to start all over – including a primary that he very well might lose to the man he beat, Rep. Robert Pittenger. But if the results are thrown out by the State Board of Elections, they will just re-run the general election. That’s not good news for Harris in the sense that his reputation is hardly better than when he ran the first time. But it’s his best shot to ever take power. 

- Josh Kraushaar is a smart human. You should read his piece on the GOP, the suburbs and 2020. “There aren’t many signs that House Republicans learned lessons from their midterm wipeout. But perhaps it’s because there aren’t many lessons to learn: Republicans are screwed with Trump, but they’d be in even worse shape without his backing.” 

- Back in August we discussed hard facts about the demise of the coal industry: It was the rise of cheap natural gas that ruined Big Coal more than anything else. While we’ve seen about a 1,500-person increase in employment by the industry since a year ago, that’s a relative blip. Fifty-three thousand Americans work in the industry now compared to almost 90,000 six years ago. And it’s a blip driven entirely by exports, a trend not expected to continue. Last week we got the report card on administration efforts to prop up the coal industry; forecast 2018 coal consumption by the Energy Information Administration. Coal consumption more than doubled between 1960 and 2011, when it started its decline. This year will be the lowest on record since 1979 when there were 100 million fewer Americans and the economy was seven times smaller. The war on coal is over, won not by environmentalists but rather by frackers.

- There are a lot of things we could say about Orrin Hatch’s farewell speech in the Senate today. It was, like the man – generous, funny, insightful, tough and patriotic. Certainly we could say that it is a stark warning to his colleagues and the republic as a whole. He describes a Senate in crisis and a politics so rotten that it takes us to the brink of a national divorce. But maybe the best thing we can say is this: Please watch and listen. He spent 42 years in distinguished service in the Senate and, we would submit, earned our brief attention as he leaves our midst. Thank you for your time, senator.

THE RULEBOOK: ELECTORAL COLLEGE 1.0
“Without the intervention of the State legislatures, the President of the United States cannot be elected at all. They must in all cases have a great share in his appointment, and will, perhaps, in most cases, of themselves determine it.” – James Madison, Federalist No. 45

TIME OUT: WHO MILKS THE PIT VIPERS?   
Time: “Eladio Sanchez, head of the Ezequiel Dias Foundation research facility in Belo Horizonte … visits  [Dr. Rodrigo] Souza’s rescue to collect venom from bushmasters (known officially as Lachesis muta), the world’s largest pit viper, to produce anti-venom as well as to test it as part of exciting new research into using venom to stop the spread of cancer, or metastasis. It’s a risky venture, but one the doctors think could save lives — human and reptilian. … ‘Snake oil,’ is a common way to refer to hoax medicine, but drugs backed by clinical trials derived from snake venom have shown very real success. A June 2018 study lists six groups of venom-derived drugs that have gotten FDA approval in the U.S. since 1981. One of the most successful drugs derived from snake venom is captopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor used to treat high blood pressure, heart failure, and kidney problems caused by diabetes. It also reduces the risk of death after a heart attack.”

Flag on the play? - Email us at HALFTIMEREPORT@FOXNEWS.COM with your tips, comments or questions.

SCOREBOARD
Trump job performance 
Average approval: 41.2 percent
Average disapproval: 52 percent
Net Score: -10.8 points
Change from one week ago: up 2 points 
[Average includes: CNN: 40% approve - 53% disapprove; Gallup: 40% approve - 56% disapprove; NPR/PBS/Marist: 43% approve - 49% disapprove; IBD: 39% approve - 55% disapprove; Grinnell/Selzer: 44% approve - 47% disapprove.]

I’LL TELL YOU WHAT: CAT TENT CHIEF OF STAFF 
This week Dana Perino and Chris Stirewalt are back together again! The duo discuss President Trump's search for a new chief of staff, the fate of Brexit and the proper use of a cat tent. Plus, Dana has mailbag questions for Chris and trivia!
LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE HERE

PELOSI MAKES A DEAL ON TO RECLAIM SPEAKERSHIP
WaPo: “Rep. Nancy Pelosi promised on Wednesday to step aside no later than 2022 as party leader in a deal with Democratic rebels, clearing a major obstacle in her bid to be House speaker. The announcement followed weeks of behind-the-scenes negotiations between Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the group of insurgents who wanted to force new blood into the top Democratic ranks. In the end, Pelosi backed off her resistance to setting a date for her departure but avoided becoming an immediate lame duck. ‘Over the summer, I made it clear that I see myself as a bridge to the next generation of leaders, a recognition of my continuing responsibility to mentor and advance new members into positions of power and responsibility in the House Democratic Caucus,’ Pelosi said in a statement. Under the accord, Pelosi, 78, will support a three-term limit for the top three House Democratic leaders, with a possible fourth term if Democratic members vote by a two-thirds majority to retain them. The limit would be retroactive, meaning Pelosi, incoming House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) and incoming House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) — all of whom held the same posts from 2007 to 2011 — would be effectively limited to one, maybe two, terms going forward if the policy is adopted.”

Payback time - NBC10: “There were reportedly ‘advanced negotiations’ Monday afternoon between Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic opposition - which would allow Pelosi to be elected speaker while still letting some vote against her. It’s unclear how one of the leaders of the group, Congressman Seth Moulton, plays into all this, but some people who helped get him elected in November are now actively looking to replace him in 2020. North Shore political activist Bambi Snodgrass and other 6th district progressives are not happy with Moulton’s unrelenting opposition to the House Speaker. She thinks Moulton’s time ‘has come and gone,’ adding, ‘Nancy Pelosi is the person most qualified to do the job, hit the ground running on Jan. 3, and start saving democracy immediately.’ … Snodgrass said Moulton has now jeopardized his future, ‘because we are actively looking and talking to people who are potential candidates who are going to primary him in 2020.’ Outgoing state Sen. Barbara L’Italien, who ran unsuccessfully in this year’s third district race despite living in the fifth district, has similar concerns about Moulton and is already looking ahead to possibly challenging him in 2020.”

PLAY-BY-PLAY
Pergram: McConnell hoping for ‘Christmas miracle’ to avoid another shutdown - Fox News

Theresa May survives no-confidence vote - NPR

Mark Meadows is out of the running to be the next chief of staff - WSJ

Claire McCaskill has some things to say - New Yorker

Top California Dems ousted in tumult - Politico

AUDIBLE: MOTHER CARTER WOULD APPROVE 
“[I’m] beginning to teach myself to play the autoharp. I've got a lot of free time in the Senate.” – Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., talking to Axios’ Mike Allen. 

FROM THE BLEACHERS
“I always enjoy (and mostly agree with) your commentaries. You are both civil and thoughtful - unlike many of your media peers. My specific point is this: your recent commentary on the tense white house meeting between President Trump, Sen. Schumer & likely speaker Pelosi, suggests a moral equivalency between the Trump and Democrat positions on border security. You describe it as merely a ‘useful wedge issue in American politics’ - perhaps no different than balancing the federal budget or approving federal judges. I think many Americans, myself included, consider border security to be a fundamentally different kind of issue. It involves the very rule of law, national security and the use of scarce public resources. The Democrat position seems to many of us as a blatant prioritization of illegal immigrants over actual American citizens and our values. It’s hard for many of us to imagine a reasonable Democrat motivation behind this position beyond naked electoral self-interest. When President Trump publicly, and perhaps somewhat rudely, challenges Democratic leaders on this key issue, I can only cheer his chutzpah and wish him well. Certain issues clearly involve a choice between right and wrong. I think many Americans consider this just such an issue - and one that is far too important to toss onto the pile of moral equivalencies.” – Tom Hansen, Chaska, Minn.

[Ed. note: I don’t know about you, Mr. Hansen, but I think that both of these parties and all of the politicians in that room are playing the American people for a lot of suckers. Whether border security increases by $1.6 billion or $5 billion is not a question of all or none. It’s piffle, and it doesn’t have anything to do with any of the things you’re talking about. What Trump and Pelosi managed to do was head fake their most loyal supporters into believing they had savagely roasted the enemy while managing to continue to abrogate their responsibilities of one of the most pressing issues of our time. There are millions of Americans who feel as you do that illegal immigration is a hugely important issue that must be addressed from the point of view of national sovereignty and the rule of law. There are millions of others who believe that our system is unfair to those who came here illegally for work and have become valuable members of our national family. (Those aren’t mutually exclusive positions, by the way.) So what shall we do about it? Internal enforcement? Nah. A long-term deal that trades security for legalization? Nopeski. Seriously negotiate? Lolz. There are simple if uncomfortable answers on immigration, but playing “Real Politicians of Pennsylvania Avenue” is not one of them. The scope of the discussion on immigration in the shutdown fight is laughably small and carries with it all the hallmarks of a fake Washington food fight designed to let leaders avoid the real responsibilities of office. I certainly understand your point of view and know that you and many of you fellow Americans want their government to get tough. I’d submit that what you saw this week is, in fact, quite the opposite.]        

“Is this where certain ‘non-essential’ units of government close, the public mostly doesn’t notice and the affected employees get what amounts to another paid vacation?” – J. Carter Marsden, Buckeye, Ariz.

[Ed. note: You got it, Mr. Marsden. This one will be even more limited in scope, but yes, the typical course of events is for the furloughed workers to receive back pay after the shutdown ends. Now, if you’re a GS-2 knocking down $500 a week before taxes, the prospect of starting an indefinite furlough isn’t a happy one the week before Christmas is no happy thought. I certainly keep a prayer for them. But in the larger sense, you’re right. Shutdowns, built into the system as a sanction against irresoluteness, cost money. And as they evolved under Clinton, Obama and Trump as political stunts, they ceased to be sanctions but rather opportunities to try to harm your political rivals.] 

“Quick question -- and maybe Judge Napolitano's input is needed -- but what is the difference between ‘hush money’ and an ‘out-of-court settlement.’ In the past I've seen out-of-court settlements for alleged sexual crimes... so what is the difference for the president and others who have paid for silence in the past? By the way, I nominate this fabulous newsletter for all the journalism awards! Sincerely thankful to receive this treat daily.” – Jack Whiteman, St. Louis

[Ed. note: I hope we can navigate this without calling in the heavy artillery, Mr. Whiteman! I think one refers to money paid in the absence of legal proceedings and the other happens in the context of a court case. A writer could call a settlement “hush money” if he or she wanted to make it sound seedy. But you’d rightly be using the term to describe money offered to buy silence without initiating a legal proceeding. Thank you for your kind words, but I think that we can safely avoid the fate of the woman from Michigan a few years back who lost the school board election because she forgot to vote for herself. You and you fellows have been generous with your recommendations so far, but please keep them coming!]

BEST OF JOURNALISM 2018 
It’s time again for our annual year-end edition saluting the year’s best journalism, and we need your input. What stories stood out? Which journalists helped you understand the world in a better way? Who did it with integrity and an unflinching commitment to the truth? What about the ones who made you think or laugh? You can read last year’s winners here to get an idea of what we’re looking for. Share your suggestions with us by email at HALFTIMEREPORT@FOXNEWS.COM 

Share your color commentary: Email us at HALFTIMEREPORT@FOXNEWS.COM and please make sure to include your name and hometown.

YOU KNOW THE ‘LOVE’ STATUE? YEAH, WELL…
WPTZ: “Driving down Route 128 in Westford [Vermont], you can’t miss the statue that’s pointing right at you. A giant, wooden middle finger is at the tail end of Ted Pelkey's yard. He said the $4,000 he spent on it is worth every penny. ‘I'm fed up and it was time to do something,’ he said. Pelkey owns a truck repair shop and filament recycling business in Swanton. He said he's been trying to acquire a building permit for his home property in Westford, with the hopes of relocating the business there. The town has not issued one, and in minutes from a development review board meeting last fall, a review of the application for a building permit appeal found it did not meet regulations. A town representative declined an on-camera interview, but noted the statue is considered public art. Pelkey alleges that the review board is biased against him, and says he has no plans to bring down the finger in the near future.”

AND NOW, A WORD FROM CHARLES…
“It was 10 o’clock at night, and I sat down to play [chess] and didn’t get up until 5 in the morning. I had found something that I loved, and I was in deep trouble.” – Charles Krauthammer (1950-2018) in an interview with the NYT on Oct. 9, 2010.

Chris Stirewalt is the politics editor for Fox News. Brianna McClelland contributed to this report. Want FOX News Halftime Report in your inbox every day? Sign up here.