How do polls rate Donald Trump's likability compared to other presidents?

1. Where Trump stands now: low-to-middling approval and falling favor

Multiple recent national polls recorded Trump’s approval in the high 30s to mid 40s: CNN/SSRS reported 37% approval (a second‑term low), Reuters/Ipsos found 38%, and Morning Consult/Morning Consult‑style polls showed mid‑40s in some rounds—these results point to a net negative or near‑negative public appraisal and recent downward trends ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Reuters/Ipsos also documents that his approval among Republicans remains relatively strong (82% in that poll) even as overall approval drops, highlighting a partisan split rather than uniform decline ^[2].

2. How poll trackers let you compare presidents historically

Aggregators and trackers provide the clearest basis for cross‑presidential comparisons. Nate Silver’s Silver Bulletin maintains daily averages and archives approval polls for Trump and every president back to Truman, explicitly noting differences among pollsters and “house effects” that affect comparisons ^[4]. The New York Times’ approval averages chart Trump’s net approval against past presidents and shows his starting net approval ranks poorly relative to recent presidents ^[1]. RealClearPolitics compiles favorability polling as an ongoing reference for side‑by‑side comparisons ^[5].

3. What “likability” means in polling and why it matters

Many outlets conflate “approval” (job performance) with “favorability” or “likability” (personal views of the individual); pollsters measure these differently and with separate questions. Aggregated approval ratings indicate how the public judges presidential performance, while favorability series (like RealClearPolitics’ favorability index) more directly track likability across time — readers must compare like with like when examining presidents ^{[5] [4]}. Available sources do not present a single, standardized “likability” ranking that covers all presidents; trackers and poll series are the practical substitute ^{[4] [5]}.

4. Partisan sheltering and independent voters: where Trump is weakest

The supplied reporting highlights that Trump’s core Republican approval often remains high even when broader public approval slides: Reuters/Ipsos shows strong GOP approval despite overall decline (82% among Republicans) ^[2]. Other analyses and post‑election surveys indicate he has hit record lows with independents in some datasets — an important cross‑presidential comparison because independent support often determines broader historical popularity trajectories ^[6]. This pattern means Trump can have intense base loyalty while still trailing other presidents in general likability outside his party.

5. Poll volatility and methodological caveats

Journalists and polling analysts quoted in these sources caution that different pollsters yield different snapshots — Silver’s newsletter stresses disagreement among surveys and the need to account for pollster “house effects” when comparing presidents ^[4]. Single polls (e.g., Reuters/Ipsos, CNN/SSRS, Morning Consult) capture momentary conditions — news events like policy moves or scandals can produce short‑term swings — so historical comparisons should rely on averages and trends rather than isolated headlines ^{[2] [1] [3]}.

6. What to watch next if you want a fair comparison

For a rigorous comparison of Trump’s likability to other presidents, use multi‑poll averages and archival series: Nate Silver’s Silver Bulletin and the New York Times’ poll averages put presidents on the same timeline; RealClearPolitics’ favorability pages compile the underlying polls ^{[4] [1] [5]}. Watch subgroup breakdowns — especially independents and GOP base numbers — because they reveal whether declines are broad or concentrated ^{[2] [6]}. Available sources do not provide a single definitive ranking of “most likable presidents” that includes every president using one uniform question; rely on cross‑polling comparisons instead ^{[4] [5]}.

Limitations: this summary uses only the supplied November 2025 polling coverage and aggregators; it does not attempt to fill gaps where sources do not supply a uniform “likability” metric or a definitive historical rank ^{[4] [5]}.