An OPP President only:

Trump’s transition hits a rough patch
As inauguration nears, two polls show the president-elect’s standing has dropped.
DONALD TRUMP’S approval rating among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, a Gallup survey found. (Evan Vucci Associated Press)
By David Lauter
WASHINGTON — As a developer and a reality-TV star, Donald Trump seemed to believe there was no such thing as too much publicity.
As president-elect, he’s finding that’s not so.
Trump hasn’t yet taken the oath of office, but judging by the latest polls, he’s already started to wear out his welcome.
In the weeks immediately after the election, Trump got a small, but noticeable, boost in polls.
His efforts to prod Carrier Corp. to keep at least some jobs in Indiana got a lot of favorable attention — even if the numbers were less than he claimed. Independent voters, in particular, seemed to like the unifying tone he set with his speech on election night.
Two months on, that glow has worn off, and Trump’s standing with the public has returned to his normal, which is to say widely abnormal for any other newly elected president.
Only 44% of Americans approve of Trump’s transition so far, according to the latest Gallup figures, released Friday. Another poll last week, by Quinnipiac University , pegged the number even lower — 37% approved of Trump.
In either case, Trump stands far below the norm for a new president. In Gallup’s surveys, for example, 68% of Americans approved of Bill Clinton’s transition just before he took office, 61% approved of George W. Bush and a whopping 83% approved of Barack Obama.
Polls don’t say precisely why Trump’s standing has dropped, but there’s strong reason to think overexposure plays a part.
Throughout the presidential campaign, whichever candidate was in the spotlight consistently suffered. Constant attention reminded voters of what they disliked about either Trump or Hillary Clinton.
One of the reasons Trump won was that his aides succeeded in keeping him restrained in the final two weeks of the contest, allowing attention to focus on Clinton — a strategy helped by FBI Director James B. Comey’s late announcement of a renewed interest in Clinton’s emails. (Comey’s conduct will be the subject of an investigation by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog. )
Since the election, however, Trump has dominated the news. He seems to hate not being the center of attention, picking fights on Twitter, offering cryptic pronouncements on policy and largely eclipsing the final weeks of President Obama’s tenure.
Predictably, that approach has started to wear on people even before his inauguration.
The decline in Trump’s standing has been especially notable among the voters with the least attachment to either party: His approval among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, Gallup found.
Two numbers stand out from the Quinnipiac poll: Since November, Trump has lost ground on the share of voters who think he has good leadership qualities and those who think he has good judgment.
None of that is fatal — presidential standing goes up and down. But for nearly all presidents, support tends to decline over time. Part of the goal of a transition is to hit a high point that will provide a cushion against the inevitable disappointments that come with governing.
david.lauter@latimes.com

Welcome to Wall Tweet
Traders use algorithms that capture Trump’s remarks and then buy or sell affected stocks.
DONALD TRUMP is a prolific Twitter user who in recent weeks has taken to the social media platform to criticize corporate giants such as defense firms Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co. and automakers Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Toyota Motor Corp. (Jerome Adamstein Los Angeles Times)
By James F. Peltz
The jaw-dropping speed at which certain stocks have moved in response to Donald Trump’s tweets about corporate America makes it seem as if Wall Street already was waiting for the president-elect’s words.
It was.
Some sophisticated traders with automated programs are using computer algorithms that instantly capture Trump’s Twitter remarks and then immediately buy or sell the affected stocks, analysts said.
“It’s in the algorithms. They’ve done it,” said Joe Gits, chief executive of Social Market Analytics Inc.
Gits’ firm isn’t among those traders, he said. Instead, the company culls the 500 million tweets issued daily on Twitter to find comments from influential people such as Trump that could affect stocks and then immediately relays that “sentiment” data to traders.
Wall Street is tight-lipped about which firms use the automatic trading programs in their bid to profit from Trump’s tweets, and it’s unclear how much of the stocks’ trading volume reflects the automated trades.
Representatives from venerable investment firms such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley and Bank of America’s Merrill Lynch all declined to comment. So did Citadel Securities, a well-known automated trading firm that also operates a hedge fund. Gits likewise said he was not at liberty to disclose the names of traders using such automated programs.
The secrecy isn’t surprising because firms employing the programs, which try to profit from even modest point spreads on high-volume trades, don’t want to reveal their advantage, said Josh Brown, chief executive of Ritholtz Wealth Management who also runs the Reformed Broker website.
“Nobody would share this publicly,” Brown said. “Who would say, ‘Yeah, this is how we’re doing this, and it’s working great?’ But it’s obvious that’s not human traders.”
For average investors, the instant post-Trump market moves can largely be ignored, analysts said. That’s because the stocks that have quickly dropped in response to Trump soon bounce back, a trend that’s likely to continue, they said.
“If you’re a day trader, you want to know about it, but if you’re the average 401(k) investor, it doesn’t make any difference in the long run,” Gits said.
Nonetheless, there’s surging interest even among investors who don’t rapidly trade stocks to be immediately notified when a new Trump tweet appears.
At Bloomberg — a major provider of market data and news, with about 325,000 of its computer terminals used by traders and others worldwide — Trump tweet notifications are “one of the fastest-growing alerts for a news product that we have ever launched,” said Ted Merz, Bloomberg’s global head of news product.
There also are new phone apps from firms such as Trigger Finance Inc. and IFTTT Inc. that quickly alert users if Trump tweets about any companies in which they own stock.
Trump, who will be sworn into office Friday, is a prolific Twitter user who in recent weeks has taken to the social media platform to criticize corporate giants such as defense firms Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co. and automakers Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Toyota Motor Corp.
Trump attacked the defense firms for the high costs of certain aerospace programs, and he railed against the car companies for building vehicles in Mexico that are sold in the U.S.
In each case, the companies’ stocks dropped immediately after Trump’s comments appeared on his Twitter feed.
“The almost instantaneous movement in stock prices following some Trump tweets, most notably for Toyota, suggest to us that traders are using algorithms that execute trades immediately,” Merz said.
Trump jumped on Toyota on Jan. 5, tweeting his displeasure that the company plans to build Corolla cars for U.S. sale at a new plant in Mexico. “NO WAY!” he said. “Build plant in U.S. or pay big border tax.”
Toyota’s U.S.-traded shares quickly fell nearly 1%, wiping $2 billion from Toyota’s total market value, then soon recovered some of those losses.
The software and algorithms that enable Wall Street’s high-speed traders to respond automatically to Trump’s outbursts weren’t developed specifically in the aftermath of Trump’s defeat of Hillary Clinton on Nov. 8, analysts said.
“It’s been around for a time predating Trump,” Brown said. He pointed to how past tweets by Clinton, billionaire investor Carl Icahn and Tesla Motors Inc. Chief Executive Elon Musk, among others, have sparked immediate moves in stocks of companies they mentioned.
Clinton, for instance, sent biotech stocks tumbling in September 2015 after she tweeted about wanting to lower “outrageous” prices in the specialty drug market.
Trump’s market moves are “getting press now because of our next president’s propensity to tweet” and Trump’s upcoming ability to actually change the business climate, Gits said. “But it really started a couple of years ago.”
There are several ways traders could profit from Trump’s tweets. They simply could buy or sell the individual stocks involved, or they could simultaneously do both on different exchanges as an arbitrage play, whereby they profit from small discrepancies in the stock’s price.
They also could simultaneously buy the stock and short it — that is, sell the stock in hopes it drops and then buy it back later at a lower price — as a hedge maneuver.
There’s another contrarian tactic: If a stock suddenly falls in response to Trump’s comments, traders can buy the shares with the expectation they’ll soon rebound, said Zachary David, a senior analyst and automated-trading expert at the markets consultant KOR Group.
“It’s a strategy a lot of traders employ, to trade on overreactions,” David said.
So how do Trump’s tweets and Wall Street’s immediate response affect investors who don’t watch the market every hour?
CNBC markets analyst Jim Cramer said on his TheStreet.com website that “if you decide to make a strategy on [Trump’s] tweets, you better make it a buy strategy — because [Trump’s criticism] clearly hasn’t had any lasting effect” on stocks he mentions.
Otherwise, Brown said, “the only way to beat a high-frequency trader is to be a low-frequency trader. The longer your time horizon, and the more you own stocks for fundamental reasons, the less short-term price fluctuations matter to you.”
He cited billionaire Warren Buffett, who’s famous for holding solid investments for years.
“Can you imagine Warren Buffett trading on someone else’s tweet?” Brown said. “It would never occur to him.”
james.peltz@latimes.com

It is really going to be a POS now...oh well...its all about the contracts-the real government teat huh?

Lockheed yields to Trump
President-elect’s barbs prompt defense giant to agree to lower costs of its F-35 jet program.
CEO MARILLYN HEWSON says Lockheed Martin’s less expensive F-35s will also create 1,800 jobs. (Evan Vucci Associated Press)
By Samantha Masunaga and Aaron Gregg
For the second time in a few weeks, an aerospace giant emerged from a meeting with President-elect Donald Trump with news that the cost of a big-ticket program could be cut. It was the latest sign that defense contractors may have to play a new game when it comes to contract negotiations.
Lockheed Martin Chief Executive Marillyn Hewson told reporters Friday that the Bethesda, Md., defense giant is close to a new deal that would cut the cost of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program and also create jobs.
The fifth-generation fighter jet has frequently been targeted by Trump, who last week slammed the program for being “way, way behind schedule” and “many billions of dollars over budget.”
“We had the opportunity to talk to [President-elect Trump] about the F-35 program, and I certainly share his views that we need to get the best capability to our men and women in uniform and we have to get it at the lowest possible price,” Hewson said.
Her meeting followed a similar one with Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg in December, after which he told reporters that the company would build the next generation of Air Force One jets for less than $4 billion — a price tag Trump had slammed in a tweet earlier that month.
Such meetings between executives and the president-elect could set a precedent, said Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis at the Teal Group.
“It’s clearly his style,” he said.
Hewson also said Lockheed Martin would create 1,800 new jobs related to the program in Fort Worth as part of the new contract.
Lockheed Martin estimates the program accounts for 38,900 jobs in Texas, and the plane’s supply chain touches 45 states.
Lockheed shares climbed $1.91, or nearly 1%, to $254.53 on Friday on the news.
In recent months, the president-elect has not been shy about taking to social media to criticize or heap praise on individual companies and military programs.
A Dec. 6 tweet bashed Chicago-based Boeing for what he referred to as the “out of control” cost of the Air Force One presidential airplane.
Weeks later he turned in Boeing’s favor at the expense of Lockheed, tweeting that he had asked the company to “price out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet” because of the F-35’s high costs.
He also briefly brought up the F-35 in Wednesday’s news conference intended to clarify his business conflicts, saying he would “do some big things” with the program and find a way to trim costs and improve the plane itself.
Voices on both sides of the political aisle have criticized the F-35 program’s cost long before Trump took up the issue. The 15-year-old program has been beset by various delays and has never flown in combat.
Each plane costs more than $100 million, though Lockheed and analysts expect the price will fall as the program matures and more planes are built.
“Regardless of how many you buy” of any weapons program, “the development costs are going to be about the same,” said Mark Gunzinger, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “So you could spread it out over many, or you could spread it out over a few.”
Still, Trump’s pick for Defense secretary, James Mattis, told lawmakers the president-elect backs the program.
“Many of our allies have bet their air superiority on the F-35 program, and it bonds us tightly together with them,” Mattis said during a hearing on his nomination last week. “The president-elect has talked about the cost of [the F-35] but he has in no way shown a lack of support for the program. He just wants the best bang for the buck.”
samantha.masunaga
@latimes.com
Gregg writes for the Washington Post.

An OPP President only:

Trump’s transition hits a rough patch
As inauguration nears, two polls show the president-elect’s standing has dropped.
DONALD TRUMP’S approval rating among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, a Gallup survey found. (Evan Vucci Associated Press)
By David Lauter
WASHINGTON — As a developer and a reality-TV star, Donald Trump seemed to believe there was no such thing as too much publicity.
As president-elect, he’s finding that’s not so.
Trump hasn’t yet taken the oath of office, but judging by the latest polls, he’s already started to wear out his welcome.
In the weeks immediately after the election, Trump got a small, but noticeable, boost in polls.
His efforts to prod Carrier Corp. to keep at least some jobs in Indiana got a lot of favorable attention — even if the numbers were less than he claimed. Independent voters, in particular, seemed to like the unifying tone he set with his speech on election night.
Two months on, that glow has worn off, and Trump’s standing with the public has returned to his normal, which is to say widely abnormal for any other newly elected president.
Only 44% of Americans approve of Trump’s transition so far, according to the latest Gallup figures, released Friday. Another poll last week, by Quinnipiac University , pegged the number even lower — 37% approved of Trump.
In either case, Trump stands far below the norm for a new president. In Gallup’s surveys, for example, 68% of Americans approved of Bill Clinton’s transition just before he took office, 61% approved of George W. Bush and a whopping 83% approved of Barack Obama.
Polls don’t say precisely why Trump’s standing has dropped, but there’s strong reason to think overexposure plays a part.
Throughout the presidential campaign, whichever candidate was in the spotlight consistently suffered. Constant attention reminded voters of what they disliked about either Trump or Hillary Clinton.
One of the reasons Trump won was that his aides succeeded in keeping him restrained in the final two weeks of the contest, allowing attention to focus on Clinton — a strategy helped by FBI Director James B. Comey’s late announcement of a renewed interest in Clinton’s emails. (Comey’s conduct will be the subject of an investigation by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog. )
Since the election, however, Trump has dominated the news. He seems to hate not being the center of attention, picking fights on Twitter, offering cryptic pronouncements on policy and largely eclipsing the final weeks of President Obama’s tenure.
Predictably, that approach has started to wear on people even before his inauguration.
The decline in Trump’s standing has been especially notable among the voters with the least attachment to either party: His approval among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, Gallup found.
Two numbers stand out from the Quinnipiac poll: Since November, Trump has lost ground on the share of voters who think he has good leadership qualities and those who think he has good judgment.
None of that is fatal — presidential standing goes up and down. But for nearly all presidents, support tends to decline over time. Part of the goal of a transition is to hit a high point that will provide a cushion against the inevitable disappointments that come with governing.
david.lauter@latimes.com

Capitol Journal
Bail rules punish the poor
It’s time for state lawmakers to fix an archaic, for-profit system
STATE legislators sponsoring a bail-reform bill say research shows that defendants show up for trial at about the same rate whether they’re free on bail or not. (Jay L. Clendenin Los Angeles Times)
GEORGE SKELTON in sacramento
It’s a recurring nightmare: You get busted, perhaps for drunk driving and causing an injury accident, or maybe on a bum rap. You’re jailed and can’t make bail.
You’re shoved behind bars with a scummy cellmate. You can’t go to work. Bills go unpaid. And you don’t have any mobility to plan your defense.
You’re locked up solely because you don’t have enough money to arrange bail.
But some wealthy guy — booked on a more serious charge than you — waltzes out onto the street the next day after writing a check and posting bail.
Is that fair? Not by any stretch. It reeks of extortion, medieval practices and being un-American.
“If you’re a threat to public safety, stay in jail,” says state Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys). “If you’re a flight risk, stay in jail. But if you’re just poor, is that justice? Come on, man!
“Poor people get stuck in jail because they don’t have the few thousand dollars to get out on bail,” the veteran lawmaker continues. “And their whole life is turned upside down even though they’re not a public threat.”
Hertzberg and Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) are sponsoring legislation to reform California’s archaic bail system. Some other states and the federal government are way ahead of normally progressive California on this.
Even Mississippi, among the reddest of red states, has been enacting reforms. Our blue state is still in the Dark Ages.
“Justice shouldn’t be based on how much money you’ve got in your pocket,” Bonta says. “We have a profit-based bail system where a whole industry makes money off of posting bail.
“Only two countries in the world allow a for-profit bail system: us and the Philippines. It’s a wealth-based system, not a just system.”
Naturally, the bail bond industry doesn’t share that view.
“There might be room to look at how bail is set. We might want to tinker around the edges,” says Harmeet Dhillon, an attorney for the California Bail Agents Assn. “Nobody says it shouldn’t be changed.
“But bail has served a purpose for 100 years. It ensures a defendant’s attendance at trial. We’ve also found that having a monetary security is more effective than costly and ineffective devices like monitoring or ankle bracelets.
“It’s fair,” she continues, “because the same bail is applied to you whether you’re poor or a billionaire. It doesn’t discriminate on the basis of poverty or wealth. It’s like a utility bill.
“And the current system is constitutional.”
Yes, there’s plenty in those comments to incite argument.
A reform outfit, Equal Justice Under Law, has filed several lawsuits around the country challenging the constitutionality of bail systems, including San Francisco’s. Dhillon, a leading California Republican Party activist, is participating in the San Francisco defense, representing the bail agents’ organization.
This issue has been around the Legislature for decades, but the bail agents lobby is strong and has blocked major changes. There hasn’t been much serious action in years.
Now Hertzberg and Bonta are trying to elevate the issue to high-priority status — up there with crumbling highways, homelessness, Obamacare replacement and Donald Trump resistance.
“It’s tough,” says Hertzberg, a former Assembly speaker. “But we can get it done this year.”
He and Bonta aren’t sure what they want to get done, or realistically can. Their current legislation lists the problem, but is blank on the solution.
Late last year, Hertzberg briefly proposed just adopting the federal system. It involves a quick court hearing to determine whether a defendant is a public safety danger or a flight risk. If neither, he’s released awaiting trial.
Hertzberg says he didn’t press the issue last year because it would have interfered with Gov. Jerry Brown’s successful efforts to pass a sentencing reform ballot initiative.
Now he and Bonta are trying to weave together a coalition to pass a bill. Lots of things are being considered: ankle bracelets, probation-like monitoring, trial date reminder calls — like the ones from a dentist.
The legislators say research has found defendants show up for trial at about the same rate whether they’re free on bail or not.
In California, counties pretty much set their own bail rates. Typically, the agent charges a nonrefundable 10% fee for posting the bail. And the bail is forfeited — making the fugitive’s family financially responsible — if the defendant flees.
We’re talking big money. The Public Policy Institute of California two years ago estimated that the median bail amount in this state was $50,000 — five times higher than the rest of the nation. That reaps $5,000 for a bail agent. A recent federal survey found that 46% of Americans don’t even have $400 for an emergency.
The policy institute reported that roughly 63% of inmates in crowded county jails are there awaiting trial, largely because they can’t afford bail. Taxpayers are paying $116 a day to house and feed them.
Why do we need bail at all? Keep the dangerous characters locked up. Release the rest. If they stray, call out a bounty hunter.
“That might work in Maine or somewhere,” Dhillon says. “But in a state like California with a very large population of transients, it doesn’t support the assumption that people are just going to come back and stand trial.”
There should be ample room for compromise.
Sure, life often is unfair. But when government can do something to make it a little less unfair, it should.
george.skelton@latimes.com

An OPP President only:

Trump’s transition hits a rough patch
As inauguration nears, two polls show the president-elect’s standing has dropped.
DONALD TRUMP’S approval rating among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, a Gallup survey found. (Evan Vucci Associated Press)
By David Lauter
WASHINGTON — As a developer and a reality-TV star, Donald Trump seemed to believe there was no such thing as too much publicity.
As president-elect, he’s finding that’s not so.
Trump hasn’t yet taken the oath of office, but judging by the latest polls, he’s already started to wear out his welcome.
In the weeks immediately after the election, Trump got a small, but noticeable, boost in polls.
His efforts to prod Carrier Corp. to keep at least some jobs in Indiana got a lot of favorable attention — even if the numbers were less than he claimed. Independent voters, in particular, seemed to like the unifying tone he set with his speech on election night.
Two months on, that glow has worn off, and Trump’s standing with the public has returned to his normal, which is to say widely abnormal for any other newly elected president.
Only 44% of Americans approve of Trump’s transition so far, according to the latest Gallup figures, released Friday. Another poll last week, by Quinnipiac University , pegged the number even lower — 37% approved of Trump.
In either case, Trump stands far below the norm for a new president. In Gallup’s surveys, for example, 68% of Americans approved of Bill Clinton’s transition just before he took office, 61% approved of George W. Bush and a whopping 83% approved of Barack Obama.
Polls don’t say precisely why Trump’s standing has dropped, but there’s strong reason to think overexposure plays a part.
Throughout the presidential campaign, whichever candidate was in the spotlight consistently suffered. Constant attention reminded voters of what they disliked about either Trump or Hillary Clinton.
One of the reasons Trump won was that his aides succeeded in keeping him restrained in the final two weeks of the contest, allowing attention to focus on Clinton — a strategy helped by FBI Director James B. Comey’s late announcement of a renewed interest in Clinton’s emails. (Comey’s conduct will be the subject of an investigation by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog. )
Since the election, however, Trump has dominated the news. He seems to hate not being the center of attention, picking fights on Twitter, offering cryptic pronouncements on policy and largely eclipsing the final weeks of President Obama’s tenure.
Predictably, that approach has started to wear on people even before his inauguration.
The decline in Trump’s standing has been especially notable among the voters with the least attachment to either party: His approval among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, Gallup found.
Two numbers stand out from the Quinnipiac poll: Since November, Trump has lost ground on the share of voters who think he has good leadership qualities and those who think he has good judgment.
None of that is fatal — presidential standing goes up and down. But for nearly all presidents, support tends to decline over time. Part of the goal of a transition is to hit a high point that will provide a cushion against the inevitable disappointments that come with governing.
david.lauter@latimes.com

I'm kool today.....going on a nastysaltine-free diet today..reflecting on how far we've come and how far we will still go.....Pres Obama will take community organizing on a national, grass-roots level and will interpret and articulate policy for many.....that Brother is a Professor...piece of cake for him.....Trump has been a serious wake-up call....but I enjoyed the hell out of the last 8 years, both politically and socially...Pres. Obama is what a brother needs to be......a Scholar and a G..........

An OPP President only:

Trump’s transition hits a rough patch
As inauguration nears, two polls show the president-elect’s standing has dropped.
DONALD TRUMP’S approval rating among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, a Gallup survey found. (Evan Vucci Associated Press)
By David Lauter
WASHINGTON — As a developer and a reality-TV star, Donald Trump seemed to believe there was no such thing as too much publicity.
As president-elect, he’s finding that’s not so.
Trump hasn’t yet taken the oath of office, but judging by the latest polls, he’s already started to wear out his welcome.
In the weeks immediately after the election, Trump got a small, but noticeable, boost in polls.
His efforts to prod Carrier Corp. to keep at least some jobs in Indiana got a lot of favorable attention — even if the numbers were less than he claimed. Independent voters, in particular, seemed to like the unifying tone he set with his speech on election night.
Two months on, that glow has worn off, and Trump’s standing with the public has returned to his normal, which is to say widely abnormal for any other newly elected president.
Only 44% of Americans approve of Trump’s transition so far, according to the latest Gallup figures, released Friday. Another poll last week, by Quinnipiac University , pegged the number even lower — 37% approved of Trump.
In either case, Trump stands far below the norm for a new president. In Gallup’s surveys, for example, 68% of Americans approved of Bill Clinton’s transition just before he took office, 61% approved of George W. Bush and a whopping 83% approved of Barack Obama.
Polls don’t say precisely why Trump’s standing has dropped, but there’s strong reason to think overexposure plays a part.
Throughout the presidential campaign, whichever candidate was in the spotlight consistently suffered. Constant attention reminded voters of what they disliked about either Trump or Hillary Clinton.
One of the reasons Trump won was that his aides succeeded in keeping him restrained in the final two weeks of the contest, allowing attention to focus on Clinton — a strategy helped by FBI Director James B. Comey’s late announcement of a renewed interest in Clinton’s emails. (Comey’s conduct will be the subject of an investigation by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog. )
Since the election, however, Trump has dominated the news. He seems to hate not being the center of attention, picking fights on Twitter, offering cryptic pronouncements on policy and largely eclipsing the final weeks of President Obama’s tenure.
Predictably, that approach has started to wear on people even before his inauguration.
The decline in Trump’s standing has been especially notable among the voters with the least attachment to either party: His approval among self-identified independents has fallen from 46% a few weeks ago to 33% now, Gallup found.
Two numbers stand out from the Quinnipiac poll: Since November, Trump has lost ground on the share of voters who think he has good leadership qualities and those who think he has good judgment.
None of that is fatal — presidential standing goes up and down. But for nearly all presidents, support tends to decline over time. Part of the goal of a transition is to hit a high point that will provide a cushion against the inevitable disappointments that come with governing.
david.lauter@latimes.com