What were the overall approval ratings of Trump among veterans before and after key remarks?

1. Numbers that catch the eye: Vote share versus job approval and how they move

Exit polls and periodic surveys paint a picture of consistently high but variable support for Trump among veterans. An exit poll during the 2016 election found 60% of veteran voters chose Trump versus 34% for Hillary Clinton, which indicates a strong electoral advantage at that moment. A Pew survey in April 2017 recorded 54% of veterans approving Trump’s job performance, down somewhat from the 2016 voting margin but still above general public approval. An AP–style snapshot from 2019 reported 56% approval among veterans, and a Pew poll in early September 2024 found about 61% of registered veteran voters backing Trump against Kamala Harris, with 55% saying his policies would improve veterans’ outcomes ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. No smoking gun: the sources do not link a specific remark to a change in veteran approval

The documents and polls provided do not identify a direct causal link between any particular set of public remarks and a measurable shift in veteran approval. White House transcripts of Trump speeches to veterans’ groups outline policy achievements and messaging intended to shore up support, but they do not include immediate pre‑ and post‑remark polling data to demonstrate an effect. Independent reporting that records outrage among some veterans over policy actions or cuts notes friction, yet these accounts still stop short of presenting a discrete before‑and‑after polling series tied to a single remark or speech ^{[4] [6] [5]}.

3. Partisan identity and demographics explain much of the stability and variation

Shifts in veteran approval are shaped strongly by party identification and demographic patterns. The April 2017 Pew survey showed near‑unanimous Republican veteran approval (reported as 98%) and very low Democratic veteran approval (about 10%), indicating that aggregate veteran approval largely tracks partisan alignment. Gender and service status also matter: one analysis reported male veterans were more likely to approve than nonveterans, while a majority of female veterans disapproved in that snapshot. These durable cleavages mean that aggregate approval can appear stable even as subgroups move in different directions ^{[1] [2]}.

4. Short‑term reactions differ from long‑term trends; policy actions matter more than rhetoric in some measures

Comparing vote intent in a campaign to job‑performance approval polls shows different dynamics: a 60% vote share in 2016 versus mid‑50s approval ratings in subsequent years suggests some erosion from peak electoral support to governing approval, but not a collapse. Later surveys again show recovery to the low 60s for electoral preference in 2024. Concurrently, VA‑focused metrics reported by administration sources highlight improved trust in VA services and programmatic accomplishments, which can influence veterans’ evaluations over months and years more than single speeches. These program outcomes are reflected in official VA summaries and in reporting about veterans’ reactions to budget and staffing changes ^{[1] [3] [7] [8]}.

5. What’s missing from the record — and why it matters for interpretation

The evidence package lacks high‑frequency, representative polling conducted immediately before and after specific remarks aimed at veterans, which is the only robust way to claim a causal “before and after” effect. It also mixes different metrics (vote choice, job approval, belief that policies will help veterans, trust in VA services), which are related but distinct. Official White House messaging emphasizes accomplishments, while reporting about cuts and layoffs highlights grievances; those differing emphases suggest potential agenda effects in the sources themselves. To resolve whether particular remarks changed veteran approval, a targeted polling experiment or time‑series data tied to the exact remarks is required ^{[4] [5] [8]}.