Institutional of Affiliation
Chun-Ping Changa and Chien-Chiang Lee research to identify whether presidential approval varies with the economic performance of a country have found out that people approve more of regimes as their economic performance is. This nonlinear relationship identifies that presidents whom the economy performs best when they are in power will receive more approval than those who the economy goes downhill. Due to the recent unemployment rates and recession and raising debts of Americans President Barack Obama popularity had been going downhill, the little unpredictability of the economy results to quick reaction from Americans than any other incident. Voters have different magnitudes of reaction towards negative economic progress than towards expansion of the economy. Despite this, over the long run, there is a varying popularity depending on the nature and magnitude of change. People are more responsive to consistency than dynamic economic changes that are not stable. Chun-Ping Changa and Chien-Chiang Lee study found out that economic factors have a big impact on the popularity of the American president (Chang & Lee, 2010).
Gronke and Newman in their review of President William Clinton found an unusual trend in his presidential approval rather. Despite being implicated in the Monica Lewinsky crisis his public support continued to increase. Presidential approval is an important strategy for re-election and also keeping citizens happy, some presidents become puppets just to make people happy and approve of their stay in office. Some leaders have lost approval through policies that have brought negative publicity to their administration. Presidential agenda receives more support from the public and administrators when they are enjoying high public approval. President Ronald Reagan unlike William Clinton had received more publicity from his exemplary leadership qualities whereas Clinton through his successful economic policies received publicity despite his controversial personal profile (Gronke& Newman, 2000).
American presidential approval increases when crisis faces the country than when everything is running just fine. American needs a leader to step in during a domestic and foreign crisis as they need a leader who can liberate them. The media has a great role in presidential approval in America; the more the media highlights the negative aspects of an administration, the more the president as their leader popularity diminishes. The media can create political agenda and economic priming which can have grave implications towards the country presidential approval. In 2012 American elections Obama faced less support due to weak economic policies than his rival Romney, who was more proficient in monetary terms than President Obama. However due to overwhelming support from Democrats Obama received much popularity that helped him retain the American top seat. Policies and economic improvement increased president Obama popularity in his bid for reelection. Most people did not blame him for the poor state of the economy but instead blamed his predecessor for the American economic woes. Little improvement in the economy gave Obama the much-desired approval for a second term. Obama policies also targeted the poor and basic American needs like healthcare; this made him more popular amongst the ordinary Americans than Romney whose policies seemed to favor the American rich.
Presidential approval rates are used for many purposes in American politics. Approval ratings are used to plan campaigns and also provide forecasts of election outcomes. Voters behave differently depending on the factors that they are using to approve their leaders. While some focus on the leader personal achievements others focuses on their policies and leadership attributes (Jacobson, 2013). Technological and communication development has increased the level of information that reaches the voters this has made presidential approval even more complex and demanding. Leaders have to take care of the negative publicity before it reaches the public eye. Scandals and adverse policy outcomes are now more likely to affect presidential approval due to the digitization of information making it reach a majority of people and fast. Political and economic analysis by media houses also greatly affect presidential popularity since issues are discussed and their outcomes predicted in live television (Hillygus, 2011).
Inflation of countries currency especially in the US and other countries with a similar structure as that of the US the presidency approvals are mostly to blame as per the articles study (Chappell, 1990). Apart from inflation in the country also other factors or issues such as unemployment are as a result of the presidential approval rate, this is as per the Real GDP. But the Real GDP variables that are provided do not apply to all the countries, but just a few countries are falling under the structure similar to that of US. But a thing worth mentioning in all these predictions is the political influence of these other countries.
The clear observation is that these issues that affect the country such unemployment can also depend on the nature of the people of the country apart from just the president decisions.
The president approval rate and unemployment components happen to have a direct relation to the sanctions imposed by the president in the country. But they do not have an impact or connection with the expected outcome of these decisions. This is another feature realized not just the United States but also the other countries with a similar government structure as the of the United States (Drury, 1998). The roles also of the opposition political parties should play a major role in the ensuring the president’s approval and decisions happen to be in the line of interest of the country and the people in the country; this plays out as a benefit of democracy in the country.
After the great economic crisis that befell the US four years ago, democrats, the republicans and the independents all came together to move the country forward. The American dream was almost slipping away after they had experienced the two wars in the previous administration (Metzger, 1999). However, after all, the political parties came together; the country is now rebounding from its great economic recession. The al-Qaida has been made weaker, and the manufacturing industry is now growing at an unprecedented rate than ever before (moving American forward, 2012). Despite the growth, the country still needs to work together to complete what they had started together. The country believes in the philosophy that hard work pays. The 2012 election meant a lot to the country; it was not all about two political parties or two candidates, but it was about the future of the Americans.
The Democrats argue that they had the best strategies that will see the American economy grow and built from the middle class. They refute the argument put forth by the Republicans who still perceive the economy needs to be managed from the top down. This they argue that will not work as it was the primary cause of the crushed economy.
Democrats believe in the power of teamwork; they see America as a young country that is made strong by their diverse ingenuity and talent. When each of Americans potential are well harnessed, they will be able to overcome all the hurdles that they are facing. They argue that noting they do together they can fail to attain.
The Democrats had a well laid down strategy that they believed would foster their growth. The first strategy was rebuilding its middle-class security. They knew that to build their economy, they had to empower, educate, out-build and out-innovate the world. They needed to build an economy that would provide jobs of the future. Thus, they stated that they would focus on the education sector, the health sector and making tax cuts to its working population. On the other side, the Republican Congress came up with strategies that they would like to increase the taxes on the middle-class population and channel the tax revenue on education, building roads and airports and research and technology.
When the Democratic Party took office, with President Obama as the steering leader, they put Americans back to work. To regain the depressed economy, President Obama first strategy was to cut tax for the working families; this increased their income thus having a higher income disposal. These group in turn investment the extra income into the economy thus building the economy (moving American forward, 2012). The government also focused on the health ministry, by making it more available and affordable. Further, he focused on enhancing the social security and Medicare for its citizens. After the successful establishment and implementation of the above strategies, they were able to rebuild the economy at last. They have been able to enhance the energy policy, out-innovating and out-building than the rest of the world and also improving the American automobile and manufacturing industries. Consequently, in the workplaces discipline and order have been instilled, everyone is made to play by the same rules thus enhancing equity. The government is more transparent and accountable than ever before; there are campaign finance and lobbying reforms, people are becoming greater together, the American communities are growing stronger, the military troops and veterans are being supported, and Americans with disabilities are given specialized attention. Moreover, the rights and freedom of all Americans are given precedence, quality of life is also ensured, security is enhanced, and everyone is assured of security than ever before.
All our lives revolve around economic factors; almost all areas of our lives are influenced by economic situations. Having an extensive insight on economic factors is essential for policymakers in designing and implementing policies that they are congruent with economic growth. A study was done by Lewis-Beck & Stegmaier, (2000) showed that there are three primary factors that influence the presidential popularity functions of the US, they include inflation, budget deficit and rates of unemployment. They noted that an increase in the above three above variable then the presidential popularity index will decrease. Consequently, a research study conducted by (Highton, 2008) indicated that volatility is an essential factor in determining the presidential popularity rate. It is important in determining the unexpected outcome of events as well as in the history of events. Further, (Chan, 1997) in his study “Vote and Popularity Functions”, found out that economic regressions conducted always turn out to be negative. The study concludes that the determinants are the GDP, the rate of inflation and unemployment rates. Furthermore, a study by (Metzger, 1999) on getting to find out the complexities of the US presidential approval, they found that based on economic factors are not linearly linked to the presidential approval rates.
There are different approval rates for different state officials. Before finding out the approval rate, the first step always entails data collection from the respondents. Four options are given for the evaluation; poor, good, fair or excellent (Highton, 2008). The approval rates for governors as well as senators have investigated mores systematically as compared to other ratings. Presidential ratings vary from state to state. The variation also results to different interpretations. They are primarily influenced by time-invariant measures; turn out levels and the presence of a third party candidate.
The regression analysis is used to examine the approval ratings. Due to immeasurable nature of actual performance, the analysis is mainly done during the fourth and first month of every term. The regression model is simple in determining presidential approval ratings. While pursuing this model, three techniques of regression can be performed; four-month rating analysis, one time series for each and pooled data estimation technique which incorporates ratings from a particular period (Highton, 2008). The goodness of fit of measure of this technique is good. The significance of economic conditions particularly those projected for the next quarter can easily be determined. The model is thus relatively effective and efficient in determining presidential approval ratings.
Maurice argues in his research study that the best way to understand a president as a product is by viewing his office and its occupants as a consumer product. This should be done in response to citizens, consumers to the product as estimated by popularity. Based on various pieces of literature, economics, time, and change of events influence presidential approval ratings. Furthermore, the relationship between the citizenry and the today market presidency is enhanced. The product life cycle and the three stage two stage relationship do not determine the presidential approval rate but instead helps in developing a more concrete understanding of the today presidency.
References
Chan, Steve, 1997. ‘In Search of Democratic Peace: Problems and Promise’, International Studies Review 41(1): 59–91.
Chang, C. P., & Lee, C. C. (2010).US macroeconomic conditions and asymmetric adjustment in Presidential approval.Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 13(3), 251-258.
Chappell, Henry W., Jr. 1990. “Economic Performance, Voting and Political Support. A Unified Approach.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 72(2): 313–20.
Drury, Cooper, 1998, ‘Revisiting economic sanctions reconsidered’, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 35, No. 4 : 497-509, SAGE Publication LTD.
Gronke, P., & Newman, B. (2000). FDR to Clinton, Mueller to??: A “State of the Discipline” Review of Presidential Approval. In annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, August (Vol. 31).
Highton, B. (2008). Job approval and Senate election outcomes in the United States. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 33(2), 245-261.
Hillygus, D. S. (2011).The evolution of election polling in the United States.Public opinion quarterly, 75(5), 962-981.
Jacobson, G. C. (2013). How the economy and partisanship shaped the 2012 presidential and congressional elections. Political Science Quarterly, 128(1), 1-38.
Kenski, Henry C. 1977. “The Impact of Economic Conditions on Presidential Popularity.” The Journal of Politics, 39(3): 764–73.
Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Stegmaier, M. (2000). Economic determinants of electoral outcomes. Annual Review of Political Science, 3(1), 183-219.
Metzger, M. R. (1999). The incredible shrinking president and the economy. The Social Science Journal, 36(4), 659-663.
Moving America Forward: 2012 Democratic National Platform. Democratic National Committee, 2012.
