President Donald Trump’s supporters are willing to take a financial hit in order to support his policies, according to a new poll from POLITICO and Public First.
Democrats are also willing to shoulder economic pain to oppose Trump — though they’re not willing to go as far as Republicans.
In a polling experiment, POLITICO and Public First modeled how Trump can shape voters’ opinions of legislation that would cost or save them money. The typical Trump supporter would overlook having to pay about $65 more per month in taxes to back their leader, while anti-Trump voters would forego about $33 in savings if it meant opposing Trump’s agenda.
The findings demonstrate the role of partisanship in shaping public opinion about policy, and they reveal a dynamic that observers have long noted: The loyalty of Trump’s base, and the dedication of his opposition, sometimes seem to overpower voters’ apparent self-interest. Eventually, however, partisans on both sides had their limits.
Questions of economic burden and partisan loyalty were at the forefront of U.S. politics this week, with voters across several states repudiating Trump and his party and electing Democrats by enormous margins. Many of the Democratic winners, including in New Jersey and Virginia, campaigned on voters’ anger about the high cost of essentials such as energy prices, housing and health care.
The POLITICO Poll results are a reminder that — while many of Trump’s supporters have a reputation for intense loyalty — they also have a breaking point. And Tuesday’s election results suggest that despite Republican voters’ willingness to pay a literal price for Trump’s policies, the Trump agenda to date may have pushed voters too far.
The poll sought to measure just how much Trump’s stances on potential legislation affected voters’ views.
The polling experiment was designed to solve a common problem with issue polling: There is often a gap between voters’ views on something when they initially hear about it, and how they feel about that same issue once it becomes politicized. Poll respondents may say they support a particular policy, but feel differently if a politician they like comes out against it.
“One of the main challenges pollsters face is how to poll something after a politician has announced it. By that point, it can be impossible to separate genuine support for the policy, from support for the politician, from support for the arguments being made for and against it,” said Seb Wride, head of polling at Public First. “To counter this, we cut out all the substance of the announcement, and looked just at how quantifiable impacts and statements of partisan support cancel each other out.”
Respondents were given a choice between two hypothetical bills. They were described not in terms of specific policies, but in terms of effects: The impact on their personal income taxes, the number of jobs in their state and the price of a dozen eggs.
Survey respondents were also told whether Trump, Republican lawmakers and Democratic lawmakers supported or opposed each bill.
After giving several variations of bills to thousands of survey respondents, we had tens of thousands of data points on voters’ preferences — enough to model out how respondents’ support for the hypothetical legislation was influenced by the approval of Trump and lawmakers.
The results were clear: There’s a real Trump endorsement effect on support for a bill.
The median Trump voter would choose a bill that would cost them $65 in monthly taxes if Trump also favored it, over a bill that saved them on taxes but did not have Trump’s support.
The trend was similar with other metrics. Trump voters were also willing to back bills that resulted in up to about 2,000 lost jobs in their state or a $1.14 increase in egg prices, provided that Trump was supportive.
For 2024 Trump voters, the president’s support was uniquely powerful. Republican lawmakers’ endorsement also had an impact with those voters, but it had less than half the power of Trump’s. Controlling for Trump’s support, GOP respondents were only willing to accept a $27 monthly tax increase for a bill backed by Republican lawmakers.
And Trump voters did not care what Democratic lawmakers thought of a bill; Democrats’ support for a bill did not move Trump voters’ positions in any statistically significant way.
Voters who had cast their ballots for former Vice President Harris in 2024 had the opposite response.
The median Harris voter would give up tax breaks to oppose Trump’s agenda, only favoring a bill backed by Trump if it decreased their monthly taxes by $33 or more.
Those Democratic voters were also willing to miss out on the creation of more than 1,000 jobs in their states, or a 40-cent cut in the price of a dozen eggs, because of Trump’s support for a bill.
Harris voters, on the other hand, were amenable to Democratic-backed legislation that increased their taxes by $61, compared to an alternative bill that did not have Democratic support. For Trump voters, the effect of Democratic lawmakers supporting a bill was not statistically significant.
