The second year of Donald Trump’s second term is already off to a characteristically chaotic start. The political environment feels like a constant loop of breaking-news alerts, “policy” announcements, and the lingering sense that something major has just happened or is about to. Beneath that noise, however, there is a more practical question worth asking: how do voters actually think the administration is performing on the promises that brought it back to power?

To get at that, we tested several policy areas tied directly to the administration’s core campaign commitments, which tend to shape voters’ daily experiences.

The issues evaluated included:

• lowering food and energy prices,

•  improving the quality of life nationally and locally,

• managing the economy, controlling government spending,

• lowering gas prices, keeping America safe, and

• controlling the border.

The results suggest a public that remains broadly skeptical of the administration’s performance so far, particularly on issues tied to household costs and the economy. At the same time, the intensity of those views varies across policy areas, with some issues producing far sharper criticism than others. Taken together, the data paint a picture of citizens who are highly attentive to cost-of-living pressures and who evaluate policy success through a very practical lens: whether life actually feels easier or more affordable than it did before.

Overall, Americans are dissatisfied with Donald Trump’s performance one year into his second term as president. While this is not entirely surprising given how polarizing his administration has been, the breakdown of what Americans are most unhappy about is particularly notable.

Among the campaign promises tested, Americans seem most frustrated with his failure to lower food prices. A clear majority (71%) gave him low marks (0-4), while 15% offered a mid-range score (5-7), and just 14% rated his performance highly (8-10). Grocery prices consistently rank among the top concerns for voters, largely because of rapidly increasing costs driven by higher production expenses, rising labor costs, price gouging, and tariffs. Within this environment, many Americans feel the administration has not delivered.

Following closely behind food prices, Americans also expressed significant dissatisfaction with Donald Trump’s performance on lowering energy prices. When asked to evaluate this campaign promise, 65% of respondents gave the administration low marks (0-4), 19% offered a mid-range score (5-7), and 16% rated his performance highly (8-10).

Energy costs remain a major financial burden for many households, affecting expenses for transportation, electricity, and heating. Because of this, voters often view energy affordability as a direct reflection of economic policy. While the administration emphasized lowering energy costs on the campaign trail, many Americans feel those expectations have not been met, contributing to continued frustration around the issue. Worth noting is that this data was collected in the middle of February, before the US and Israel began bombing Iran.

In contrast to these issues, Donald Trump receives his highest marks for border control. When evaluating this campaign promise, 46% of Americans give the administration low marks (0-4), 19% give a mid-range score (5-7), and 35% rate his performance highly (8-10).

Although the country remains divided on immigration policy, border control is the area where Trump’s approval is comparatively strongest among the promises tested. A larger share of respondents believe the administration has made meaningful progress on this issue compared with others, although a plurality still gives the administration low marks.

Red State Blue State

Looking more closely at the data, the evaluation of Donald Trump’s performance varies noticeably depending on a state's political makeup. In Blue States, dissatisfaction is particularly pronounced on economic issues. For example, 67% of Blue State voters give the administration poor marks for lowering food prices, while only 15% give it high marks. A similar distribution appears in energy prices, with 66% giving low marks and 17% giving high marks. Even broader measures of economic performance show skepticism: 59% give low marks for handling the economy, and just 16% rate it highly.

Swing states show a very similar pattern. When it comes to lowering food prices, 74% of voters give low marks, while 12% give the President high marks. Energy prices follow a similar trend, with 63% giving low marks and 13% high marks. Overall economic evaluations are somewhat less severe but still critical, with 63% receiving low marks and 20% high marks.

Red states produce the administration’s strongest numbers, though even in states that gave the President his strongest support, a majority give him low marks on all the issues we tested, except controlling the border. On lowering food prices, 73% of Red State voters give low marks, while 14% feel the President is doing a bang-up job. When it comes to energy prices (again, this was pre-war with Iran), 65% give low marks and 17% high marks. The one issue on which a majority of Red State voters do not give the President low marks is border control; however, even on this signature issue, 48% give low marks, while just 34% feel the Administration is doing a good job.

The Gender Divide

Another clear divide in the data appears when looking at evaluations of Donald Trump’s performance by gender. Across nearly every issue tested, women are significantly more critical of the administration than men, particularly on economic and quality-of-life measures.

Among male voters, opinions are more mixed, with larger shares willing to give the administration higher marks. For example, 58% of men give low marks for lowering food prices, and 22% offer high marks. On lowering energy prices, 54% give low marks, while 25% give high marks. Evaluations of the broader economy are somewhat similar, with 51% giving low marks and 25% high marks. Men are also more positive on issues tied to security and immigration. Forty-five percent give low marks for keeping America safe, compared with 36% who view the job as being done well. Controlling the border receives the highest evaluation among men, with 36% low and 45% high.

Female voters, however, are considerably more negative across the board. On lowering food prices, 80% give the administration low marks, while only 9% give high marks. Similarly, 74% give low marks for lowering energy prices, compared with just 9% high marks. Broader evaluations of the economy and quality of life follow the same pattern: 71% of women give low marks for handling the economy and for making life better across the country, while only 11% and 13% offer high marks, respectively. Even on issues where the administration performs relatively well, such as keeping America safe and controlling the border, women remain more skeptical, with 63% giving low marks on safety and 54% on border control.

Trump Voters

Arguably, the most damning numbers come from Americans who voted for Trump in 2024. While their reviews are the highest of any cohort, the reviews are not exactly stellar.

A majority of 2024 Trump voters give the President high marks on just two issues: controlling the border and keeping America safe. On five issues, a plurality gives high marks, but the difference between the high and low marks is in the low single digits for both. The two issues where Trump is underwater with his own supporters are lowering energy costs and lowering food prices, both of which receive a plurality of low marks. In fact, on lowering food prices, the President is close to a majority of his own voters (48%), giving his job so far low marks.

There is no real expectation that 2024 Trump voters will suddenly leave the MAGA tent and start voting for Democratic candidates. However, motivation is a key part of electoral success, and as we have seen in every election in 2025 and early 2026, it is clearly not on the GOP side.

Looking at it all, Trump’s second term so far has been a whirlwind of headlines, policy moves, and more legal cases than we can count. There is very little in these numbers that points to anything truly positive for the Administration at this time. Mix in a prolonged war in Iran, and it is anyone’s guess on where these numbers move, but overall, the news is certainly not good for the White House. The big question is whether the Democrats can convince a broad range of voters that they represent a better path forward.

Latest Episode of What Happens Next is out