> Surely, nationwide daily protests would make elected officials reconsider their positions, given an upcoming midterm election, while there still is one.

Hah. When was the last time a non-violent protest yielded some kind of result by itself? Certainly never in american history.

Anyway, there are daily protests. They just aren't covered by the media. Hell, the protests for palestine never stopped... the media just never wanted to cover them.

Largest protests in US history in the past year:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protests_and_demonstra...

Although 36% is low, it's not that low. The US's two-party system means that ~40-50% are aligned with either party and approve/disapprove on GP. The real number to pay attention to is the change over time in the approval rating: https://www.cnn.com/polling/approval/trump-cnn-poll-of-polls

Trump's highest rating was ~47% when he came into office, but he was pretty stably in the low 40s until the new war. The actual drop is somewhere from ~40-42 to ~36-38 - about 10% of his base. Significant, but probably not enough to actually matter unless it drops further.

Then again, nationwide daily protests would give the Trump administration an excuse to send ICE / the army / whoever else they can send to the cities where the protests take place (I guess they would be mostly blue-leaning ones) to "restore order", and at the same time lay the groundwork for influencing the November elections.

But the turnout at the periodic nationwide "No Kings" protests has been very good, and they have fortunately stayed peaceful.