# OPEN LETTER: Mr. President, Your Numbers Tell the Story of Your Failure > Introduction: a letter no one at the White House will want to read - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Open letter - Published: 2026-07-03 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/lettre-ouverte-lettre-ouverte-monsieur-le-president-vos-chiffres-racontent-votre-echec ## Key takeaways - The Marist poll (June 18, 2026) gave 36% approval, with only 33% approving of his handling of the economy. - An American Research Group poll (June 23, 2026) gave 30% approval and 66% disapproval. - A Reuters/Ipsos poll carried by Forbes (June 9, 2026) gave 35% approval, with most Americans expecting gas prices to keep rising. - The aggregate average in mid-June 2026 was about 39.2% approval against 57.9% disapproval, which the author calls the most honest snapshot. - The author links the decline to the Iran strike controversy and to unfulfilled price promises, and warns of midterm losses. ## Introduction: a letter no one at the White House will want to read ### An unusual exercise, but a necessary one Mr. President, I'm writing to you directly because the usual intermediaries, your spokespeople and your favorite television sets, are clearly not passing along the same picture that emerges from the **independent** **polls** published in recent weeks. This isn't an exercise in flattery, nor an attempt to tear you down for sport: it's a cold **reading** of numbers that, added together, paint a **second term** in real trouble with the American electorate. You have often said you dismiss **polls** that are unfavorable to you while celebrating the ones that flatter you. This letter doesn't try to settle that debate by cherry-picking a single number, but by reading cumulatively across several serious **pollsters**, with their **methodologies**, margins of error and collection dates clearly identified. ### Why this letter, why now The timing isn't accidental. Between mid-June and the end of June **2026**, a series of **polls** from **pollsters** using different **methodologies** converge on the same finding: your **approval rating** has hit its lowest point since the start of your **second term**. This convergence deserves to be named, documented and explained, rather than ignored in favor of more flattering numbers published elsewhere. ## The Marist poll, an economic alarm bell ### 36%, the unprecedented floor The **Marist** poll released on **June 18, 2026** gives you only **36% approval**, a level this pollster had never recorded for you since your return to the **White House**. That number alone would be enough to alarm any **administration** concerned about its **voter base**, but the most troubling detail lies elsewhere. Only **33% of respondents** approve of your handling of the **American economy**, an area your **administration** has nonetheless presented as its absolute top priority and its main source of popular legitimacy since your inauguration. ### The economy, your campaign promise turned vulnerability You were elected, in large **part**, on the promise to tame **inflation** and restore purchasing power to American families. The **Marist** poll suggests that central promise has turned against you, with Americans harshly judging your **economic** management even as gas and consumer **prices** continue to weigh on family budgets. This erosion on your preferred political turf is, in my view, the most worrying signal for your **administration**, far more than any passing geopolitical controversy. ## The American Research Group's record, a historic floor ### 30%, the number that should worry you most On **June 23, 2026**, the **American Research Group** published a **poll** giving you only **30% approval**, an absolute negative record for your **second term** according to that pollster. By contrast, **66% of respondents** disapprove of your performance, a ratio of more than two to one that should alarm any serious political strategist. This level of unpopularity, if confirmed by other upcoming **polls**, would place your **administration** among the most contested in recent history at this precise stage of a presidential **second term**. ### A trend, not an isolated statistical accident What makes this number **part**icularly significant isn't its standalone value, but its consistency with several other **polls** published in the same time window. A single poll can be a statistical fluke; several converging **polls** from different **pollsters**, using distinct **methodologies**, form a trend that becomes hard to ignore or wave away. Your **communications** team can search all it wants for the most favorable **poll** to cite publicly, but the average of all available data tells a noticeably less flattering story for your **administration**. ## Reuters/Ipsos and Forbes confirm a structural decline ### 35%, a number that fits a longer pattern On **June 9, 2026**, a **Reuters/Ipsos** poll carried by **Forbes** gave you **35% approval**, a number close to the floor of your **second term** according to that source. The poll also found that most Americans expected gas **prices** to keep rising, an expectation that weighs directly on the country's **economic** mood. This negative expectation about future **prices** is a troubling leading indicator: even if official **economic** figures improve, public perception already seems anchored in a pessimism that's difficult to reverse quickly. ### Collective psychology matters as much as official statistics There's often a gap between official **economic** **statistics** and the lived perception of ordinary households. That gap seems **part**icularly pronounced right now, with Americans expressing economic worry that far exceeds what some macroeconomic indicators published by your own **administration** would suggest. Governing with favorable official numbers while losing the battle for public perception is a classic political trap, and you currently appear locked inside it, Mr. President. ## The lingering shadow of the Iran decision ### A strike that continues to divide opinion Several **polls** cited in this letter explicitly link your popularity decline to the persistent controversy over your decision to strike **Iran**. A significant **part** of the American electorate, including within your own political camp, continues to question the necessity and long-term consequences of that military intervention. This pushback isn't limited to circles usually critical of your **administration**: it also runs through segments of **public opinion** traditionally more supportive of a firm **foreign policy** posture. ### The political price of military adventures Recent American political history is full of examples of presidents watching their popularity collapse after controversial military decisions, even when those decisions were initially presented as tactical successes. Your current situation appears to fit that historical pattern, despite your **administration's** efforts to present the confrontation with **Iran** as an undisputed strategic victory. American **voters**, as I've observed over recent political decades, rarely forgive easily military adventures whose human and financial cost remains unclear or publicly disputed. ## The aggregate average, a verdict impossible to dodge ### 39.2% approval, the most honest snapshot available Beyond individual **polls**, often used selectively depending on whether they're favorable or not, the **aggregate average** compiled in mid-June **2026** gives you roughly **39.2% approval** against **57.9% disapproval**. This average, which smooths out methodological variations between **pollsters**, is probably the most honest snapshot of your actual political standing. A gap of nearly twenty points between **approval** and **disapproval**, at this stage of your **second term**, represents a considerable political burden for your **party** heading into the **midterm** elections. ### What this average means for your party **Republican** candidates who will have to defend their seats in the upcoming legislative elections are watching these numbers with growing concern, knowing presidential popularity traditionally influences **midterm** election results, **part**icularly in the most contested **districts** in the country. Your current unpopularity, if it persists into the fall of **2026**, could cost your **party** dearly in dozens of **districts** where every percentage point genuinely matters to the outcome. ## The troubling contrast with more favorable polls ### An administration that picks its numbers carefully It's true that some **polls**, particularly those conducted right after progress was announced in negotiations with **Iran**, give you noticeably more favorable scores, sometimes above **47%**. Your **administration** has naturally favored **communicating** those more flattering numbers, a classic political practice that shouldn't obscure the underlying trend documented by the full set of available data. This strategic selection of favorable **polls** is a legitimate **communications** practice, but it changes nothing about the overall statistical reality, which continues to tilt unfavorably for your **administration** over time. ### The intellectual dishonesty of statistical cherry-picking Systematically choosing the most favorable **poll** while ignoring the five others that tell a different story is, in my view, a form of intellectual dishonesty that American **voters** generally end up perceiving, even when official **communications** work hard to mask it skillfully. Americans aren't fooled indefinitely by this arbitrary selection, and the **aggregate average** will keep reflecting reality even if your presidential **communications** team chooses to ignore certain uncomfortable numbers. ## Prices, the persistent blind spot of your presidency ### Perceived inflation remains your Achilles' heel Several **polls** cited in this letter explicitly point to **economic** concerns and expectations of rising **prices** as major factors behind your current unpopularity. This dynamic isn't new: it has run through your presidency from the start, but it appears to have worsened recently rather than easing as your **administration** initially promised. American **families** struggling to make ends meet generally aren't persuaded by favorable official **statistics** when their daily experience at the checkout counter tells a different, more painful story. ### A campaign promise the public doesn't believe was kept Your election **campaign** made controlling **prices** an absolute priority, almost a personal guarantee to the most economically fragile American **voters**. Current **polls** suggest a majority of Americans don't consider that promise kept, a political finding that could prove more damaging electorally than any **foreign policy** controversy. **Voters** sometimes forgive distant **foreign policy** failures; they far more rarely forgive broken **economic** promises that directly hit their wallets every day. ## What your administration's silence reveals ### The absence of a substantive public response Faced with this pileup of unfavorable **polls**, your **administration** has largely chosen silence or minimization over a substantive public response directly addressing the **economic** concerns expressed by respondents. If this **communications** strategy continues, it risks further fueling the sense that your administration is disconnected from the electorate's real worries. Prolonged silence in the face of such troubling numbers is itself a form of political response, generally interpreted by **public opinion** as an implicit admission of difficulty in effectively answering the criticism raised. ### The risk of prolonged denial Recent political history suggests that **administrations** that persist in denial against unfavorable and convergent **statistical** trends generally end up paying a heavier electoral **price** than those that quickly acknowledge problems and adjust their **communications** accordingly. I respectfully invite you, Mr. President, to consider that publicly acknowledging these **economic** difficulties could prove more politically productive than systematically denying them in front of increasingly skeptical **voters**. ## The consequences for the midterm elections ### A burden your candidates will have to carry With the **midterm** elections approaching, **Republican** candidates will need to decide in the coming months whether to closely tie themselves to your presidential record or, instead, distance themselves to protect their own electoral chances in sometimes highly contested **districts**. This strategic decision, multiplied across dozens of candidates nationwide, could further fragment your **party** at the very moment unity would be most needed against a **Democratic** opposition closely watching every one of these unfavorable **polls**. ### Midterm history generally isn't kind to unpopular presidents Recent American electoral history consistently shows that presidential **parties** suffer significant losses in **midterm** elections when the sitting president's popularity falls below forty percent. Your current numbers, if they persist into the fall, would place your party in that historically well-documented danger zone identified by political scientists. Ignoring this statistical reality would mean repeating the communications mistakes of several previous administrations that paid dearly for refusing to adjust their strategy in the face of clearly identifiable warning signs. ## What I'm asking of you, in all honesty ### A public acknowledgment, not a surrender I'm not asking you to surrender to your critics or abandon your core political priorities. I'm simply asking you to publicly acknowledge, with the honesty American voters deserve, that your perceived economic management is currently going through a difficult period documented by multiple independent and serious polling institutes. This acknowledgment, far from weakening your political position, could instead demonstrate genuine attentiveness to popular concerns, a quality American voters generally appreciate in their leaders, even those they didn't initially support. ### A change of course on prices, not just on messaging Beyond communications, I invite you to consider concrete measures aimed at easing the daily economic burden on American families, rather than simply hoping the situation improves on its own over time without further intervention from your administration. Polls generally don't lie about voters' real priorities: they want lower prices, preserved purchasing power, and an administration that honestly acknowledges their struggles rather than systematically minimizing them. ## The lesson history may remember ### Presidents who listen tend to fare better electorally American presidential history is full of examples of leaders who went through similar periods of unpopularity, some successfully adjusting course, others persisting in denial all the way to painful electoral defeats for their party. The choice you make in the coming months will likely determine which category history ultimately places you in. American voters, despite their deep divisions on many issues, generally share one common expectation of their leaders: honesty about difficulties, even when that honesty is politically uncomfortable to embrace publicly. ### A final thought, without personal animosity This letter isn't meant to harm you personally, Mr. President, but to convey to you, with the honesty I try to apply to every subject I cover, an honest reading of the numbers currently circulating in the American public sphere. You can choose to ignore them, but they will keep shaping the electoral judgment awaiting you, whether you like it or not. The West is going through a period perilous enough, facing the combined threats of **Vladimir Putin's** **Russia**, **China**, **Iran** and **North Korea**, that a weakened American leadership at home becomes a geopolitical problem as much as a domestic one. ## The uncomfortable comparison, with your predecessors ### A historically contested second term Compared to several of your predecessors at the same stage of their respective second terms, your overall approval numbers rank among the lowest recorded recently, a statistical reality even your most fervent supporters will struggle to seriously dispute given the accumulation of converging data. This historical comparison, far from a gratuitous attack, simply serves to put into context the scale of the political challenge your current standing represents in American public opinion. ### The paradox of a loyal but insufficient base There's a striking paradox in your current situation: your **Republican voter base** remains largely loyal, with internal party approval rates well above your overall national average. This paradox, documented by several separate polls, suggests growing polarization rather than a uniform erosion of your support across the entire electorate. This partisan loyalty, while politically valuable, will probably not be enough on its own to secure electoral wins in the most contested districts where independent voters play a decisive role. ## What independents are quietly telling you ### The voting bloc that actually decides close races **Independent** voters, the group often decisive in the country's most contested districts, show particularly low approval levels toward your administration according to several recent polls, with some putting their support at just **38%** even in the surveys most favorable to your administration. This **deficit** among independents is probably the most reliable indicator of your electoral difficulties ahead, far more revealing than any overall approval figure that blends together electorates with very different behaviors. ### Winning back their trust, the real challenge ahead Winning back the trust of this independent electorate, generally more sensitive to concrete economic issues than to partisan ideological battles, is probably the most urgent political challenge of the second half of your current presidential term. Ignoring this challenge in favor of communications aimed solely at your most loyal base would risk further worsening your electoral position ahead of next November's midterm elections. ## Conclusion: the choice still belongs to you ### The numbers aren't a foregone conclusion, but a warning This open letter doesn't claim to predict the future with certainty. Polls fluctuate, political circumstances evolve, and you still have time before the midterm elections to adjust your course if you choose to listen to these signals rather than systematically ignoring them as your administration appears to have done so far. But ignoring such a broad convergence of data from pollsters with different methodologies would amount to a political blindness for which your party, more than you personally, could pay the electoral price next November. ### One last word, as a columnist I will keep documenting these numbers, whether favorable or unfavorable to your administration, with the same rigor and the same methodological transparency. That's the minimum I owe my readers, and it seems to me it's also what you owe the American electorate that put you in power and that could, if nothing changes, turn away from your party en masse in the next election. History will judge your second term on **concrete results**, not on carefully selected polls. The time you have left to change this trajectory is now measured in months, not years. **By Maxime Marquette, columnist** ## Columnist's transparency note ### Editorial stance I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies. I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events. ### Method and sources This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here. **Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies. **Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations. When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**. ### Nature of the analysis The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted. My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors. This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text. ## Sources ### Primary sources - [Ground News — Trump approval rating hits second-term low in new polling, June 29, 2026](https://ground.news/article/trump-approval-rating-hits-second-term-low-in-new-polling_7f784b) - [Marist Poll — It's Trump's economy and Americans are not impressed, June 18, 2026](https://maristpoll.marist.edu/polls/its-trumps-economy-and-americans-are-not-impressed-june-2026/) - [USA Today — Trump approval rating hits record low in new poll, June 23, 2026](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/06/23/trump-approval-rating-record-low-poll/90662565007/) ### Secondary sources - [WLT Report — CNN: President Trump has highest own-party approval, June 29, 2026](https://wltreport.com/2026/06/29/cnn-president-trump-highest-own-party-approval/) - [USA Today — Donald Trump approval rating hits new low, June 14, 2026](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/06/14/donald-trump-approval-rating/90548023007/) - [Forbes — Trump's approval rating near record low as most expect higher gas prices, June 9, 2026](https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2026/06/09/trumps-approval-rating-near-record-low-as-most-expect-higher-gas-prices/) --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/lettre-ouverte-lettre-ouverte-monsieur-le-president-vos-chiffres-racontent-votre-echec