Lead: A Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll conducted Feb. 25–26, 2026, of just over 1,000 U.S. adults finds President Donald Trump’s Feb. 24 State of the Union failed to convince most Americans that he is prioritizing prices and affordability. While voters list jobs, prices and health care as their top concerns, the president devoted a small share of his address to those topics and a larger share to immigration and foreign policy. The mismatch appears to have left many viewers unconvinced that the White House has shifted its focus to the economic burden facing households.
Key takeaways
- Poll field dates and sample: The survey interviewed just over 1,000 U.S. adults from Feb. 25–26, 2026 (post‑SOTU).
- Perception gap: 57% of adults say Trump is “mostly focused on other things,” while 30% say he is focused on “the issues that matter most to me.”
- Speech allocation: Strength In Numbers’ speech analysis found 13% of the SOTU discussed affordability, jobs, and health care combined, versus 24% on immigration and 20% on foreign policy.
- Viewer impressions: Among those who watched the address, 21% said immigration got the most attention; 14% said jobs; 10% said deportations; 9% said prices.
- Issue priority mismatch: 46% of all adults name jobs and prices as most important personally, but only 23% of SOTU viewers said the president focused most on those issues.
- Campaign context: The speech was intended as a pivot toward economic messaging ahead of the 2026 midterms, but the emphasis favored enforcement and trade themes where the president is weaker in public opinion.
Background
The Feb. 24, 2026 State of the Union was widely framed by allies as an opportunity to reposition the president on pocketbook issues as the White House prepares for an intensified 2026 campaign season. Economic stresses—higher grocery bills, rent, child care and health insurance—rank at the top of voter concerns in recent national polling. Political strategists expected the address to highlight concrete steps to lower everyday costs and signal responsiveness to those worries.
At the same time, immigration and trade have been signature priorities for the president’s administration and base. Those topics often generate intense media attention and energize core supporters, creating a tension for messaging that seeks to both reassure swing and working‑class voters about affordability while sustaining enthusiasm on enforcement themes. Strength In Numbers partnered with Verasight to run a short, targeted poll immediately after the speech to measure whether viewers perceived a genuine economic pivot.
Main event
Analysts from Strength In Numbers coded the speech and found only 13% of the address devoted to affordability, jobs and health care—the three issues voters report matter most today. Instead, the largest single share (24%) focused on immigration, including deportations and references to crimes by unauthorized migrants. Foreign policy accounted for roughly 20% of the remarks.
When asked which topic the president spent the most time on, 21% of people who watched the SOTU answered immigration, while 14% said jobs, 10% said deportations and 9% said prices. Another common response was “something else,” reflecting notably long segments awarding medals and praising public figures, including the U.S. men’s Olympic hockey team.
Overall, 46% of respondents named jobs and prices as the most important issues to them personally. Yet among those who tuned into the address, only 23% reported that the president had focused most on those two priorities—revealing a substantial perception gap between voter priorities and the speech’s emphasis.
Analysis & implications
The polling suggests a messaging mismatch that could hinder the White House’s bid to reframe the agenda around everyday costs. A successful pivot would require not only mentioning prices and jobs but centering the address on concrete plans and sustained emphasis; the measured share of time spent on those topics appears insufficient to change many minds.
Politically, the consequence is twofold. First, swing voters who rank affordability highest may not perceive the administration as addressing their immediate concerns, undercutting the intended campaign reset. Second, using prime address time for immigration and trade—areas where national support is weaker—risks energizing the base at the cost of persuadable voters.
Strategically, the White House can respond in several ways: follow up with targeted policy announcements on costs of living, deploy regional messaging aimed at high‑priority constituencies, or accept that the SOTU reinforced existing perceptions and plan alternate outreach. For opponents, the finding offers a durable line: that stated priorities and observed emphasis do not align in the president’s highest‑profile speech.
Comparison & data
| Topic | % of SOTU time | % of viewers saying it got most attention | % of adults naming it most important |
|---|---|---|---|
| Affordability / Jobs / Health care | 13% | 23% (combined) | 46% (jobs & prices) |
| Immigration (incl. deportations) | 24% | 21% | — |
| Foreign policy | 20% | — | — |
The table above contrasts the share of speech time with viewer perceptions and stated voter priorities. It shows that topics most important to the electorate received a smaller portion of the address than immigration and foreign policy, and that viewer impressions tracked the larger segments rather than the administration’s stated strategic emphasis.
Reactions & quotes
Our early polling indicates the SOTU shift toward economic questions did not persuade most voters, especially on prices and jobs.
G. Elliott Morris / Strength In Numbers (poll analysis)
Allies previewed the address as focusing on restoring jobs and lowering energy costs, but the final speech spent more time on enforcement and trade.
Staff statements & public previews reported by Strength In Numbers
Unconfirmed
- Whether the speech’s awards and ceremonial segments materially reduced perceived time on economic topics for all viewers; the poll captures perceptions but cannot isolate cause.
- Whether a follow‑up policy push or targeted regional messaging will shift public views—future polling will be needed to confirm any lasting change.
- Longer‑term voting effects from this single speech are unknown; the poll measures immediate impressions, not election behavior.
Bottom line
The immediate post‑SOTU polling from Strength In Numbers suggests President Trump’s attempt to pivot public attention toward the economy did not persuade a majority of Americans. Viewers and non‑viewers alike continue to list costs, jobs and health care as top concerns, while the speech devoted a larger share of time to immigration and foreign policy.
For the White House, the finding is a warning that one high‑profile address may be insufficient to alter public priorities; sustaining a perceived focus on affordability will likely require repeated, concrete policy steps and continued messaging. For political observers, the poll is an early indicator to watch as the campaign season unfolds and additional data are released.
Sources
- Strength In Numbers / G. Elliott Morris (independent poll analysis; post‑SOTU flash poll and methodology)