How do CNN, Fox News, and Rasmussen report differences in Trump's approval rating?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive Summary
CNN’s recent polling cycle shows President Trump’s approval in the high 30s, with a CNN/SSRS headline figure of 37% approval and 63% disapproval that CNN characterized as the lowest of his second term [1] [2]. Rasmussen’s nightly tracking has reported higher approval figures—around 44–45% with net approval near -8 points—producing a less negative picture than CNN’s single poll but roughly aligning with some aggregated averages [3]. Fox News’ coverage in the materials provided is inconsistent in tone and lacks a clear single headline figure here; one Fox-branded summary framed the numbers as “setting another record,” a characterization that could emphasize either record disapproval or historical context depending on framing [4]. Across sources, methodology (sample frame, likely voters vs. adults), weighting, and organizational slant explain most of the numerical spread rather than a single contradiction of facts [5] [6].
1. Why CNN’s 37% figure reads as a news event — methodology and timing that matter
CNN’s standalone poll reported a 37% approval and 63% disapproval as a moment-in-time snapshot and labeled that the lowest approval of Trump’s second term, with particular emphasis on economic evaluations where 61% said his policies worsened the economy [1] [2]. That result comes from a CNN/SSRS survey round and is presented both as a discrete poll and as part of CNN’s polling narrative; CNN’s Poll of Polls, compiled separately, averages multiple recent surveys and shows a somewhat higher multi-poll average near 40% approval [7]. The difference between a single poll headline and a pooled average underscores an important factual point: a single survey can headline a record low while an average across surveys softens that reading. CNN’s reporting therefore highlights a specific low point while also maintaining an aggregate measure that is less extreme [7] [2].
2. Rasmussen’s tracking — higher approvals, different universe, and partisan perceptions
Rasmussen’s nightly tracking reported approval figures in the mid-40s—about 44–45% approving, 53% disapproving, producing a net around -8 points, which is notably less negative than CNN’s single-survey headline [3]. Methodologically Rasmussen often samples likely voters and publishes daily tracking, producing smoother short-term trends that can run higher than single cross-sectional adult samples. Independent assessments of Rasmussen note a right-leaning bias or Right-Center orientation that can shape questionnaire wording and turnout modeling; evaluators have given Rasmussen mixed credibility ratings while acknowledging reasonable predictive performance in some cycles [6] [8]. Factually, Rasmussen’s numbers are concrete in the dataset presented and systematically differ from CNN’s headline poll because of the sampling frame and longstanding methodological choices, not because one source is inventing results [3] [6].
3. Fox News’ role — framing differences and ambiguous presentation in these materials
Within the materials provided, Fox-branded coverage appears to treat the approval/disapproval numbers as a noteworthy inflection—one summary framed Trump’s rating as “setting another record”—but did not present a clear single numeric comparison in the same way CNN or Rasmussen did in these excerpts [4]. That headline wording leaves room for two factual readings: emphasizing a record high in disapproval or underscoring record-setting dynamics generally. Fox News is typically identified as a conservative outlet whose editorial and coverage choices can highlight different aspects of polling for political effect, and the provided analyses note that Fox’s reportage often differs in tone from CNN’s [4] [8]. Factually, the Fox item cited does not supply a distinct alternative numeric consensus here, so the substantive difference in this dataset rests on CNN’s low single-poll headline versus Rasmussen’s higher tracking numbers [4] [3].
4. Aggregates, averages, and why the spread isn’t a mystery — polling mechanics produce predictable variance
Aggregators and poll-of-polls approaches compile disparate methodologies and produce intermediate figures: CNN’s Poll of Polls showed an average near 40% approval by late April into November, which sits between CNN’s low single-poll headline and Rasmussen’s nightly tracking [7]. The documented spread stems from three factual drivers: [9] whether the poll surveys all adults, registered voters, or likely voters; [10] weighting choices for partisanship, demographics, and turnout; and [11] timing and sampling error margins—CNN’s single poll carried a reported margin of error and demographic weighting decisions that explain variance versus Rasmussen’s tracking [5] [2]. These are measurable methodological differences, not mere spin; recognizing them explains why multiple reputable sources can all publish accurate but numerically different approval ratings.
5. What to take away — cross-checking, trend focus, and reading the coverage contextually
The fact pattern in these materials is clear: CNN’s headline poll reported a second-term low at 37% while Rasmussen’s tracking showed mid-40s approval—aggregates landed near 40%—and Fox’s cited coverage framed the numbers without a single contrasting figure [1] [3] [7]. The appropriate factual response is to treat each figure as valid within its methodological frame and to prioritize trends and multi-poll averages when assessing directionality rather than relying on any single headline. Given documented biases and sampling choices—Rasmussen’s right-leaning orientation and CNN’s left-leaning framing tendencies discussed in the analyses—readers should weigh polls by methodology, sample universe, and aggregation rather than outlet brand alone [6] [8] [7].