The headline number

President Donald Trump’s job approval stood at 31% in the Reuters/Ipsos survey conducted October 16–19. The published topline put disapproval at 66%, with the remaining respondents skipping the question.
Who was asked
Ipsos surveyed 1,679 U.S. adults through its probability-based KnowledgePanel. The reported margin of sampling error for the full sample is plus or minus 2.4 percentage points. Results for smaller groups carry greater uncertainty.
A divided response
The same tables show approval of 77% among Republican respondents, compared with 5% among Democrats and 20% among independents or others. Those are descriptions of the survey sample’s views, not turnout estimates.
What sits behind the percentages
The poll’s registered-voter table gives Democrats 47% support on the congressional question and Republicans 35%. That question asks about a party’s candidate where a respondent lives, rather than naming every candidate. Ipsos’ accompanying methodology explains that interviews took place in English and that the data were weighted for characteristics including age, education, household income, region, political identification and 2024 vote choice. Weighting is intended to bring the sample into alignment with population benchmarks. It does not turn undecided respondents into decided voters. The useful reading is to put the approval and congressional answers alongside each other while keeping their different questions and respondent groups visible.
Read the ballot separately
A presidential approval question is not a vote count. House races take place district by district, while Senate races occur in individual states. The poll provides context for the campaign; it cannot determine which candidate will win a particular contest.
Why this story is in the editionSelected for current U.S. news relevance. No verified search-volume ranking is claimed.
Prepared with AI assistance. Source-based reporting checked on October 23, 2026. This article does not update automatically. Read our editorial standards.





