What New Polling Says About Tariffs, Immigration and More

Steve Odland: Welcome to C-Suite Perspectives, a signature series by The Conference Board. I'm Steve Odland from The Conference Board and the host of this series, and in today's discussion, we're going to talk about how the executive branch of the US government is currently polling, and what does it mean for the midterm elections next year? 

Joining me today is Cliff Young, president of Ipsos polling and societal trends. Cliff, welcome back. 

Clifford Young: Great to be here, Steve. 

Steve Odland:So Cliff, you do this every day. You do polls for clients, you do corporate clients, you do polls for political clients.You're doing general election polls, you have your finger on the pulse of everything that's going on. Talk about what you're seeing in all the recent polls.  

Clifford Young: A lot, right? And we're pulling on a lot. But I would just break it down into basically two themes. The first is trepidation, worry about the future. 

The average American is fearful of inflation. We've come off a fairly insidious inflationary moment in our history, right? Trump won on that, and Americans are worried about that, and they link inflation and cost of living with tariffs. And so I would say you have this generalized worry. Nothing's happened specifically to people, though they'reanticipating it in purchasing behavior, but nothing's happened specifically. So that's the first theme. 

The second theme is basically Trump himself. Like, how is he doing? And when we evaluate how he's doing, we're looking at his approval ratings. It's important to say that approval ratings are critical for predicting elections, as well as the ability to push the chief executive's agenda forward. 

And so he started off at 51-point approval rating. That's the average of all the polls. It's lower than the historic average, but not a bad place to be. Right now, he's at 45% approval rating, so he's lost six points. And the question, is that a lot? Is that a little? And solet's do a little bit of benchmarking. 

If you look at history since 1948, the average president loses about three percentage points on his approval ratings in the first hundred days. Trump has lost six, so he's outstripping that. He's a little bit more negative, a little bit. He's quicker to the decline than his predecessors, but nothing out of the ordinary, I would say. I wouldn't over-rotate on that. 

Ultimately, the question is why. And I think that goes back to my initial point that the primary theme that people are worried about the future, not quite surewhat's going to happen. Trump has thwarted a lot of convention, and there's a lot of friction because of that. And it's reflected ultimately in his numbers. 

Now that said, the last point I'd make is he's at 45%. And if he were to run on 45% approval rating in an election, if he were to be able to, he'd have something like a 75% chance of winning. Soit's not a bad approval rating to have if you're a sitting president. But that said, we're only in the first hundred days.  

Steve Odland: What I've read in various polls, not Ipsos polls, but in other various polls, is that the drop in approval rating, which you said is modest, has all been in people who didn't vote for him. That in fact the people who voted for him have not changed their point of view. 

The second thing that I've read is that his current approval rating is higher than at any time than it was at any time in his first administration. What does your polling say on those two topics?  

Clifford Young: On the second point, yes. He definitely is in a better place than he was, let's say, in 2017. From a levels perspective, he was in the lower 40s. He's in the mid-40s right now. Indeed, 2024, his electoral victory, he had a broader coalition. It was more muscular, and I think we're still feeling that. There's inertia to that strength, without a doubt. 

Listen, his decay in approval ratings has been mostly among independents. Republicans hold are holding fast. They still believe in their champion. Democrats obviously never supported him. They never gave him good ratings. So the decline has been mostly among independents. Some have voted for him, some have not. They could come back around if the agenda that he is pushing forward has a more positive effect. I don't think we should discount that too much, that some of the decline might be something he can get back later in the year or the beginning of next year. But for the most part, it's been independents.  

Steve Odland:Yeah. I should point out, Cliff, that neither Ipsos nor The Conference Board is a political organization. We are totally nonpolitical, nonpartisan. You're just calling it as you're seeing it, you're not advocating for or against any party or individual.  

Clifford Young:Yeah. I appreciate you saying that. So we draw the line at parties and politicians, we don't work with them, though. We work a lot on politics, but we typically work with the private sector to help them navigate the political milieu.  

Steve Odland: OK. So as you look at the first hundred days, that's behind us, and the next hundred days to come. I guess as you said, the issues come back to economics, and I think the biggest surprise here, and I don't want to put words in the mouth of your respondents, but the biggest surprise has been how he's come at tariffs. 

Everything else was pretty well described in the campaign and even before that in his first administration.But how he's come at it, and the speed and the depth of these things has been the major surprise, and that's what's really continuing to spark fears of inflation. 

Clifford Young:Yeah, there wasn't a lot of explanation as to what was going to happen relative to tariffs. It was something that, it was mentioned maybe here or there, once in a while, during the election, but ultimately took shape after it. And again, there's a lot of, like I said before, tariffs in and of themselves is a bad word, right? People don't like it. Why don't they like it? Because they're worried about inflation. They see it as inflationary. 

That said, they do believe that other countries take advantage of America. And you have that kind of juxtaposition: I don't like it. I'm worried about making ends meet on the one hand, but man, I don't like it. I don't like what China's doing at this point. 

Now, Trump's primary talking point has been, we need a little bit of pain in the short term for more gain in the long term. They've been hammering that home. The question is, how does that talking point stick? And I think it depends, right? About 49% of Americans agree with that talking point. Agree with that position. A vast majority of Republicans do. They're willing to stick it out. They're willing to feel that pain cause they think there'll be benefits in the longer term. Democrats much less so, obviously, and independents are in the middle, a little bit less than 50%. 

Again, there's worry about inflation. Though countries are taking advantage of them, there's not clear consensus about wanting to bear the brunt of tariffs. But Republicans are still there. They're resilient.  

Steve Odland:It's interesting. Your polling lines up precisely with The Conference Board's Consumer Confidence Index, which has two components: The Present Situation Index and the Expectations Index. Present situation is how are people feeling about their current economic situation, their job, and so forth. And the expectations is, over the next six months, what do you expect? 

And the present situation Index has held up pretty well, even though the Consumer Confidence Index in total has come down Pretty significantly, all based on what they fear might happen in the next six months. And so it is interesting that the polling, and your polling, our indices all aligned to this fear of what could happen in the next six months. Do you have any more granularity on what could happen? 

Clifford Young: But what will actually happen? Well again, from the consumer or public opinion perspective there's a vagueness about fear, about a fear of what will happen. We've run different models and looked at—taking your data, by the way—and looked at what might happen in the future. 

I think you're—correct me if I'm wrong, Steve—but your base case is basically 10% tariffs across the board. By the way, we've been saying at Ipsos that one, we believe that Trump is a savvy political figure. That he's going to feel the edges of public opinion, what he can do—and elite opinion, excuse me—what he can do and what he can't do when it comes to tariffs. I think that's what we're seeing right now, he's stepping back a bit. We're going to have a more prescribed tariff regime. I think that'sprobably what is possible, politically speaking. 

And just to add another point, cause our angle is always public opinion, right? We're not economists, obviously, but economic variables do have impact on politics, has impact on the likelihood of voting for someone, how you think a president's doing in terms of approval ratings? And your own base case suggests that there's not going to be a huge political impact on approval ratings. 

Now we don't have a crystal ball. Maybe we're missing a variable here or there. But a lot, I think what we're seeing is, per your point, is worry about the future, but today's OK. Uncertain about that. But if you look at the projections, inflation and unemployment. They're not at levels that seriously change his political trajectory from an approval standpoint. 

Steve Odland:Yeah. Now it is interesting that if you talk to people, now, this isn't a poll, but I'm interested in what your polls actually say, what the data say. But if you talk to people, they say look, if this is just all negotiations and posturing, and this is all a means to an end, and they get through it in the next three to six months, OK, we get that. 

Obviously, the administration is not showing that hand because that would be basically telling the other side what their negotiating strategy is. But people are saying, OK, if that's what it is, OK. That, we can live with that. But if this is something more permanent, yeah, that's not so good. What do your polls say?  

Clifford Young: It says the same thing. Basically, there is this sort of a subset, a swath of America, especially Republicans, think he's using negotiating tactics to get what America needs. And they're all behind it. Democrats definitely don't see it like that. There's a huge rift between Republicans and Democrats and how they view all of that. What I can ultimately say is from a household decision-making standpoint, and we've done a lot of work on this, that's how they're preparing. 

They're making decisions in the shortest of terms. Maybe not traveling by plane on summer vacation. Buying that washer dryer now in anticipation of maybe something that might happen longer term, but they're not making more drastic cuts to household spending. So if you just use the household as an analog for what's going on they're making these short-term tweaks, believing they're going to be able to ride the wave, and you don't have greater or deeper cuts going on. 

Steve Odland: And what do you hear from the business community on this? What actions are they taking in this time of uncertainty?  

Clifford Young: A lot of the same. The business community mimics, in some ways, the same sort of behavior. So you have stockingup of materials and products, to the extent possible. There's looking at how you can make supply chains more efficient. And sowhat's interesting, whether you're talking at the corporate level or at the household level, a lot of the same strategies are being deployed at this point.  

Steve Odland:Yeah. And so basically, from a corporate standpoint, from a business standpoint, that means people have shifted into neutral. They're not making, as you said, the big commitments. And those are the long-term capital kinds of commitments. And that creates friction and drag on GEP growth. But it seems like the consumers are continuing to spend. Consumer debt is at an all-time high. They're using their credit cards. And that's really propping up the economy. 

What do you see in the numbers that would be an inflection point, either positive or negative, on that?  

Clifford Young: Right now, what we're seeing from a consumer perspective is basically this anticipatory behavior, right? So there is stocking up there is buying big-ticket items, anticipation of potential tariffs. And sowe're seeing all those sorts of things. 

And again, like I said before, this all anticipatory, we're not seeing necessarily deeper cuts that would suggest that the household, the average American household, is thinking we're heading into something in something dire. I think if we start to see, ultimately we start to see deeper cuts, where you're buying down from your premium brands to cheaper brands, as an example. If you're cutting non-essentials, there's like a serious cutting of non-essentials like travel or luxury and leisure, I think those are all indicators of the household being much more worried. But again, we're not seeing it in great frequency right now.  

Steve Odland:We're talking about the polling as it relates to the economy and the administration. We're going to take a short break and be right back. 

Welcome back to C-Suite Perspectives. I'm your host, Steve Odland, from The Conference Board, and I'm joined today by Cliff Young, the president of Ipsos' polling and societal trends division. 

So we were talking about, Cliff, before the break, the polling as it relates to the consumer and how businesses are doing. Let's shift a little bit. What do the polls say as it relates to some of the geopolitical issues like trade and immigration? 

Clifford Young: So geopolitically, the conflict, let's say in different places, they'revery different and distant for people. Whether we're talking about Gaza as an example, or we're talking about Ukraine, there are partisan splits there, but these things don't weigh on the average Americans, weigh on their consciousness when they're thinking about certain things. Immigration's a big deal. 

And indeed, Trump won on cost of living, won on inflation this last electoral cycle, but immigration has been a very important issue, especially since 2016. It really is the bailiwick of the Republican Party. It's Trump's bailiwick. And what we're seeing now is an extension of the agenda that's developed over the last few electoral cycles. 

Where do Americans fall? It's nuanced, and I think it'svery important to state that. Yes, it's a highly polarizing issue. It'sprobably the issue that best defines if you're a Republican or Democrat. Indeed, if you run statistical models in the United States or even around the world, immigration or immigration-related issues are the most important sort of predictors of where you fall on the political spectrum, but when it comes to the United States and specifically what's going on today, what we find is that there's nuance. 

And so on the one hand, a vast majority of Americans would say, yeah, we probably should deport illegal immigrants who are criminals. But only a plurality, and a weak one, would say, yeah, we should deport children, or we should have some sort of deportation with children. And it just shows the spectrum of what we actually see. There is some sort of alignment with Trump's agenda, maybe not complete, but in specific instances there is. 

We can see his efforts thus far have been along those dimensions, or in other words, they mostly focused on, or at least publicly so, on illegals who are also immigrants. That said, while Americans might get behind the signature issues when it comes to immigration, they actually don't necessarily agree with the method. 

And sothey're not really in favor of spiriting away someone during the dead of night, not having due process, and support there kind of. In essence, breaks down. And so that's where we are. We have a very divisive issue that divides the two parties, though there is some sort of common ground about what can be done. And ultimately, the Trump administration so far has lost points on it because of the method by which they're operationalized. 

Steve Odland:It's interesting, you mentioned, you used the words common ground, which you don't hear coming out of Washington very often. But it is interesting in the polls, when you split Democrats and Republicans we are really fractured as a society. It is like whatever the administration does, he gets a 90% approval rating from Republicans and a 90% disapproval rating from Democrats, even if those actions were consistent with a prior administration of the opposite party. 

So how do you sort all that? Has it just become, it doesn't matter what they do, one side likes 'em, the other side dislikes 'em, and it, and the policy doesn't matter? 

Clifford Young: Yes and no. And so if we're just looking at sort of approval ratings, right? Really the big swings that we find are going to be with independents. And we talked about that. So there are certain sort of subgroups that could support, could not support, and ?really what will determine where a given presidency, including Trump, is sitting. But it's the same sort of thing with immigration policy, right? 

Let's take deportation as an example. You don't have a majority of Americans in favor of deporting children, let's say, or some sort of initiatives associated with deporting children. But you have a vast majority, 87% in support, of deporting immigrant illegal immigrants who are also criminals. And yes, it's highly partisan, highly polarized, but these issues do have nuance. And there is support at a certain level. 

And ultimately what I would say is when it comes, and I already noted this, the method by which they're deporting people, as an example, people disagree with, they don't like the method. There'sultimately this notion in America among the average Americans of fundamental fairness. So is it being done in a fair and just way? And we're seeing a lot of pushback at this point. So I guess just, in sum, yeah, highly polarized society explains a lot. There is nuance and variability there, too. And you have to understand that, as well, obviously.  

Steve Odland: One of the big issues that we've got in the Congress is the dealing with the tax bill. You've got the 2017 tax bill, which is expiring this year, and they're putting together what that tax bill will look like to renew some things, to change some things. What does the polling tell you about what Americans want to see out of that?  

Clifford Young:It's fuzzy, right? And soit's not so clear. What's interesting is Americans tend to be populist in orientation. They tend to believe that the rich should be taxed and the less affluent should be, should not be taxed or should have lower rates. That's where we typically are, right? And that's where, if you're just ask the polling independent of the specific bills or who sponsored, then that's where Americans would be. 

What I find interesting is that it's a confused scenario, right? We have the tax bill, whether it's going to be renewed or not. You have this kind of discussion of tax on millionaires that historically would maybe be a Democratic issue, right? But it not necessarily the case. And so I would say there's a lot of confusion around the issue of taxes, because it's not clear in people's minds where the two parties actually fall. 

Steve Odland:Yeah, it's interesting, I don't know if you have any numbers on this, but I've read polls in the past that says they should tax the rich, the populist thing that you just talked about. And then when you ask them, what's the maximum amount that the government should take from anyone, it almost alwayssolves to be around 25%. Which, of course, the current tax rate is much higher than that. And the marginal tax rates are higher than that. Sowe're already collecting more of that. 

What do your polls say about any of that and any of the misalignment between what is real and what they're saying?  

Clifford Young:Yeah. Once again, I think the polling's unclear. I think that people, it's fuzzy in their head. I don't think the two parties have clear tax positions. They do, but they don't. You have a Republican party that's increasingly becoming populist in orientation, though they hold some of the policies of the old Republican party. The Democrats are not clear on their messaging. And once that happens, the tax issue is very distant for people. It's very abstract for people. It becomes fuzzy. 

Now that said, like I already said, Americans tend to be populist in orientation. They believe that everyone should pay their fair share, especially the rich. And so if you were to ask that question, you probably get the same answers today as you would've gotten 40 years ago.  

Steve Odland:Yeah, but it's interesting, the parties have scrambled a little bit. What used to be a clear Democratic issue and a Republican issue had, and some of those are the same, but a lot of them have swapped over time.  

Clifford Young:That's the confusing thing. And so because it's a more abstract issue, the parties would frame it for people. They would frame it in a way that would make sense. And we don't have that right now.  

Steve Odland:You've got the midterms right around the corner, the campaigning and all the challenges typically start after the new year. So that's in January, so almost half a year away. And we're going to be right back into that season again. What do your polls say about the prospects for the House and the Senate next year.  

Clifford Young:Yeah. And so obviously a midterm, an off-election year, not presidential, typically favors a party out of power. And that would be the Democrats in this at this point, though the Senate is very different than the House, right? The Senate tends to be very idiosyncratic. Each race is a race. There's brands in and of themselves, unto themselves. And this electoral cycle favors more Republicans than the Democrats. And so probably the Republicans, in our mind, the base case is they'd keep the Senate, though there are some arguments to the contrary. But I think that, given the number of seats that are up, that makes sense. 

Now on the House, that typically falls by the wayside. The party in power typically loses it. What we can say right now, and maybe that should be our base case, the Democrats take it. But ultimately the polling isn't, the Democrats are not super strong on that ballot question right now. It might come into better relief later in the year, but at this point, it would be a close race, one way or the other . And I would still say the Democrats probably will win. But it's not so clear at this point.  

Steve Odland: And obviously, there's a long way to go. We're only a hundred days in and we've got, obviously, the rest of this year and most of next year before the elections occur. But I think it comes back, as you said before, to what happens over the course of this year. Do the tariffs get resolved? Does inflation abate? Does cost of living flatten out? Is this just the administration negotiating, they'll get through it, and then we'll have nirvana? Or is this going to continue, and you're going to have this economic malaise continuing into next year, in which case it's not good for the House. 

Clifford Young:Yeah. I think that's right. I think you're absolutely right. I don't think we're going to have an economic disaster. I think everything suggests that we won't. I think that would be the best case for the Democrats. That's what the Democrats have been hoping for. I don't think that will be the case. 

And so the question is, does Trump go into next year net neutral? And if he's net neutral, it probably favors the Democrats. Net negative favors the Democrats. If he's net positive, that would help the Republicans. We'll see where we are going into next year. But most probably it leans to Democrat rather than Republican. 

Steve Odland:Yeah. And those flashpoints are inflation, which tariffs play a— 

Clifford Young: Unemployment. 

Steve Odland: Unemployment, but you also have the geopolitical situations. Where does Ukraine stand at that point? Gaza, the South China Sea, and are those getting settled, or are they flaring up? And all of that bears on these elections, as well.  

Clifford Young: Yeah, I would say the geopolitical stuff, it will weigh less. Most important would be domestic issues. 

Steve Odland: Interesting. Yeah. Very interesting.  

Clifford Young: For us, they weigh a lot. For the average person, they weigh less.  

Steve Odland:Yeah. It’s our backyard. And any final things that you can share with us on what you see in the numbers?  

Clifford Young: I would just say that I think many analysts, many people have over-rotated on the confusion/disaster side. I think that there's friction in the system, and that's what we're seeing now. I think it will dissipate. I think he showed himself that, Trump has shown himself to be a savvy political actor, he's backed off the worst of what could happen and probably have a much more prescribed and focus tariff regime. That's not going to hurt the economy. That's not going to hurt politics as much as people think. And so I think that's the right perspective. That's our perspective in POV at this point.  

Steve Odland: Cliff Young, president of Ipsos polling and societal trends, thanks for being with us today. 

Clifford Young: Thank you so much. It was great, Steve. 

Steve Odland: And thanks to all of you for listening to C-Suite Perspectives. I'm Steve Odland, and this series has been brought to you by The Conference Board.