Presidential Performance Research Articles

Predicting Presidential Performance in the United States: Equation Replication on Recent Survey Results

For more than 2 decades, researchers have tried to identify the variables that predict the overall performance of U.S. presidents. In 1986, there emerged a 6-variable prediction equation (D. K. Simonton, 1986c, 1987b) that has been replicated repeatedly. The predictors are years in office, war years, scandal, assassination, heroism in war, and intellectual brilliance. The author again replicated the equation on recent rankings of all presidents from George Washington through William Jefferson Clinton according to a survey of 719 experts (W. R. Ridings, Jr., & S. B. Mclver, 1997). The original 6-variable equation successfully predicted both the overall rankings as well as the 5 core components of the rankings (leadership qualities, accomplishment, political skill, appointments, character and integrity). The predictive value of the equation was illustrated for the presidencies of Ronald W. Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Clinton.

Assessing Americans' Opinions About the News Media's Fairness in 1996 and 1998

This article reports an analysis of Americans' opinions about the news media's fairness in covering public affairs. The data come from the 1996 and 1998 National Election Studies, which contained variables tapping exposure to and opinions about the news media, as well as key political dispositions−partisanship, ideology, and opinion about presidential and congressional job performance−and a plethora of demographic variables. The data show that people who adhere to traditional moral codes and are misanthropic tend not to trust the news media to cover politics fairly. In a presidential election year, opinion about the president's job performance affects perceptions of the press's fairness. In an off-year election, however, opinion about the president's job performance is replaced by opinion about how the Congress has been doing its job. In addition, perception of how the media covered the Lewinsky scandal also influenced opinion about the press's fairness in general.

George W. Bush and the Ghosts of Presidents Past

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” the American philosopher George Santayana famously asserted. By the same token, a president who is well furnished with institutional memory should be less likely to commit avoidable errors and more likely to get the most out of his (and, at some point, her) time in office. The reflections that follow on what George W. Bush might learn from his predecessors were completed three weeks before his inauguration as the forty-third president of the United States. They appear in print after the Bush presidency has passed its hundred-day mark. Although they cannot take account of Bush's initial presidential performance, they do draw on the extensive record of his life and prepresidential political career.

Revisiting Midterm Loss

The phenomenon of midterm loss—the drop in the midterm congressional vote for the president's party from its level 2 years prior—is more than a century old and counting. Some see this as a predictable referendum on the president's performance to date. Others argue that the referendum model does not hold up over time; still others, using survey data, find scant evidence for “pocketbook” voting in congressional elections. The data in this article escape reliance on a tiny sample of postwar midterms by using state-level data to test variants of the referendum hypothesis. They indicate no significant connection between state-level income change and the state's midterm vote. However, consistent with the referendum hypothesis, national income change and presidential approval have a strong overall impact, though this impact has declined markedly since the mid-1970s. Short-term lagged vote variables and measures of congressional incumbency have grown stronger over time.

Candidate status, presidential approval, and voting for US senator

This research tests whether the effects of assessments of presidential performance on the senate voting decision are largest for out-party incumbents and smaller for out-party incumbents and candidates in open-seat contests, a pattern suggested by the restricted in-party culpability thesis. Analysis of data from the 1988–1990–1992 Pooled Senate Election Study reveals that the effects of appraisals of presidential performance are greatest in open-seat contests and those with in-party incumbents, contrary to the restricted in-party culpability thesis. For incumbents of the out-party and candidates in open-seat contests, the effects of assessments of presidential performance are principally a function of the competitiveness of the contest. Assessments of presidential performance shape the voting decision in contests with in-party incumbents regardless of the level of electoral competitiveness.

Presidential rhetoric's visual turn: Performance fragments and the politics of illusionism

This essay explores the aesthetic and rhetorical implications of prudent and imprudent presidential performance fragments embodied in photo‐opportunities, thereby addressing presidential rhetoric's “visual turn. “Assembled as a critical rhetoric text, this essay posits that presidential performance fragments privilege the dominant ideology and its power relationships. In addition, this project argues that prudent presidential performances signal a chief executive's consubstantiality with the mythic presidency, centralized authority, and active political leadership. Imprudent photo‐opportunity performances, by contrast, impact negatively a president's image, agenda, credibility, and authority. The essay concludes with a discussion of how political images symbolically affect the citizenry and democratic processes, and advances foundational issues for the critic.

Bankers or peasants revisited:: economic expectations and presidential approval

This paper updates and expands the argument that the US electorate is forward-looking when evaluating presidential performance on the basis of the economy. The electorate's approval of the president depends on its economic expectations regarding the future level of prosperity. More is incorporated in this evaluation than a simple extrapolation from the past. When evaluating the president, the US electorate efficiently combines its knowledge of the current economy with its informed expectation of economic change.

Estimating the public's social preference function between inflation and unemployment using survey data: The survey research center versus Gallup

Economists often use Gallup Poll data on presidential performance to analyze the interaction between politics and the state of the macroeconomy. The household survey undertaken by the Survey Research Center (SRC) of the University of Michigan provides an alternative data base. The SRC asks respondents about the government's performance specifically with respect to inflation and unemployment. We compare whether the Gallup or SRC data are the more useful for estimating the public's social preference function between inflation and unemployment for the Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton presidencies. The estimates that use Gallup Poll data are unsatisfactory because for two of the periods the coefficients of inflation and unemployment are not well estimated and for one period there is serial correlation of the residuals. The estimates using the SRC data set are satisfactory and the results are consistent with economic theory. We conclude that a researcher using survey data to estimate the public's reaction to varying rates of inflation and unemployment should prefer the SRC series when it is available.

Presidential Personality and Performance. Alexander L. George , Juliette L. GeorgeThe Paradoxes of the American Presidency. Thomas E. Cronin , Michael A. Genovese

<i>Presidential Personality and Performance</i>. Alexander L. George , Juliette L. George<i>The Paradoxes of the American Presidency</i>. Thomas E. Cronin , Michael A. Genovese

Looking Back at Chief Executives: Retrospective Presidential Approval

Americans hold their chief executive in high esteem. Schoolchildren view the president as a benevolent and capable leader, a person who symbolizes the good in the American system of government.(1) Feelings of awe for the president wane with the passing from childhood to adult life but do not disappear completely. The incumbent president ranked first in the Gallup poll's admired man survey in thirty-nine of the forty-seven years in which the question was asked. Between 1977 and 1996, the incumbent president was the admired man in every year but 1980, when Pope John Paul II topped the poll. Both Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan led the polls continuously during their respective eight years in the White House. Gerald Ford is the only post-World War II president to never rate as the admired man in America, but this is hardly a damning criticism given that Gallup skipped the question in 1975 and 1976. Moreover, out of the public eye does not necessarily mean out of the public's mind. Former presidents frequently appear among the top ten in Gallup's admired man poll. For example, Jimmy Carter, Reagan, and George Bush appeared on the list behind front-runner Bill Clinton in the 1994, 1995, and 1996 polls, respectively.(2) This high level of support has not, however, prevented the public from being critical of a president's performance while in office. At their most popular, Richard Nixon and Reagan secured the approval of only two-thirds of the American people. Ford and Carter did only slightly better. Every president also experiences a decline in popularity during his term of office, although for some the fall from grace is more extreme.(3) The difference between John F. Kennedy's highest and lowest approval ratings was just 27 percentage points. Harry Truman's popularity, by contrast, plunged 64 percentage points during his term. On average, the difference between a president's highest and lowest approval ratings is 42 percentage points.(4) Assessments of presidential performance are not limited to the current occupant of the White House. In addition to asking people to judge the incumbent's performance, the Gallup poll occasionally asks its respondents whether they approve or disapprove of the ways in which past presidents handled the job. How do Americans view their former presidents? What factors explain levels of retrospective presidential approval? Do public and scholarly opinions of former presidents agree? The present article addresses these questions. Looking back is a common activity of the American public. As V. O. Key Jr. and Morris Fiorina have aptly demonstrated, voters' judgments often hinge on their perceptions of past performance of the parties. Candidates are rewarded or punished in line with appraisals of achievements in office, and voters look to the past in predicting future deeds of the parties.(5) The substantial decrease in voter participation since 1960 has been attributed to declining partisanship within the electorate and growing distrust of government. These attitudes reflect discontent with the past performances of the parties and government officials.(6) Assessments of former presidents might well contribute to these images of the political system. Retrospective Presidential Approval In 1990, Gallup poll respondents were asked, From what you have read or remember about our past presidents, please tell me if you approve or disapprove of the way they handled their job as president. A similar question was asked in 1993.(7) Table 1 presents the results of these surveys of former presidents' performances. The retrospective approval ratings of the presidents included in both polls are remarkably similar (r = .98). The greatest difference is seen in Kennedy's approval ratings, which dropped 6 percentage points from 1990 to 1993. This is hardly significant, however, because it is at the edges of the [+ or -] 3 percent margin of error for these polls. …

The U.S. presidency in crisis: a comparative perspective

The founding fathers intended separation of powers between executive and legislative branches to protect citizens from capricious actions of both president and Congress. In latter third of this century, dynamics between president and Congress have become increasingly gridlocked, leading to a distemper in public discourse. Americas leaders find it virtually impossible to discuss, much less tackle, burning issues, a situation which poses a very clear threat to legitimacy and viability of our system of government. The U.S. Presidency in Crisis sheds light on U.S. presidency through a comparative study of executive leadership in United States, Great Britain, Canada, and Australia. It focuses on common challenges faced by chief executives of other Anglo-American democracies, offering a unique and rich context for examining U.S. presidency. Campbell stresses that while individual chief executives function in different ways, it is important for all leaders to invest more time and care in discerning strengths and weaknesses of each management style. The author believes that it is only when these different management styles are thoroughly dissected and reformed that executive problems can be effectively addressed. The U.S. Presidency in Crisis covers Clinton administration in detail, placing administration in a context which has seen a gradual erosion of presidential power over past 30 years. It pinpoints what went wrong with Clintons first term and interprets consequences of 1994 and 1996 elections. The text also deals extensively with the governability gap, seeming incapacity of presidents and Congress to cope constructively with core issues faced by country. Essential for advanced undergraduate courses which compare executive leaderships and bureaucracy, The U.S. Presidency in Crisis derives and amplifies lessons that, if applied, can improve presidential performance.

President Clinton's First Term: Matching Campaign Promises with Presidential Performance

In every Presidential campaign, candidates make policy promises on a wide variety of issues. Often a newly elected president finds it difficult to fulfill these promises even if he has good intentions to do so. This leads many voters to the assumption that presidents do not fulfill their campaign promises. Since voting theories, however, suggest that voters do listen to campaign promises, candidates must carefully consider their promises as well as the barriers they will face when translating their promises into policy once in office. This article examines the content of Clinton's 1992 campaign promises as well as his policy initiatives during his first term in office indicating that there is a notable degree of correspondence between them. This analysis of Clinton is then placed in perspective with the analyses of previous presidents' promises and policies. It is evident that not only the number of promises, but also their content and specificity can both assist and constrain the president when he attempts to fulfill his campaign promises.

The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and Historical Analysis

Appointments Process provides a unique, comprehensive overview of the constitutional dynamics and significance of the federal appointments process throughout American history. Michael J. Gerhardt includes each American president's performance record regarding judicial and non-judicial appointments, accounts of virtually all the major confirmation contests and controversies, and discussion of relevant legal and constitutional questions. Appointments Process is an essential tool for understanding the selection and confirmation of presidential appointments. Michael J. Gerhardt is Arthur B. Hanson Professor of Law at the William & Mary School of Law. He is the author of The Federal Impeachment Process: A and Historical Analysis and coauthor of Constitutional Theory: Arguments and Perspectives.

Electoral Competitiveness and the Voting Decision Evidence from the Pooled Senate Election Study

Scholarship on congressional elections holds that competitive elections are different from noncompetitive elections. Specifically, some scholars argue that the level of competitiveness determines the criteria or the weight of various criteria for the voting decision. Using the 1988–1990–1992 Pooled Senate Election Study, this research finds that enhanced electoral competitiveness increases the importance of assessments of presidential performance on the voting decision. These effects are particularly large for voters with high levels of educational attainment. Contrary to previous research, in highly competitive elections the role of ideological considerations is smaller than in less competitive elections.

Book Reviews

Book reviewed in this article:Charles E. Walcott and Karen M. Hult. Governing the White House: From Hoover Through LBJ.Robert D. Loevy. The Flawed Path to the Presidency 1992: Unfairness and Inequality in the Presidential Selection Process.Arthur H. Miller and Bruce E. Gronbeck, eds. Presidential Campaigns and American Self Images.Stephen Skowronek. The Politics That Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush.Donald J. Lisio. The President and Protest: Hoover, MacArthur, and the Bonus Riot.Patrick Anderson. Electing Jimmy Carter: The Campaign of 1976.Lyn Ragsdale. Presidential Politics.Peter B. Levy. Encyclopedia of the Reagan‐Bush Years.David Mervin. George Bush and the Guardianship Presidency.Shirley Ann Warshaw. Power sharing: White House‐Cabinet Relations in the Modern Presidency.Michael Foley and John E. Owens. Congress and the Presidency: Institutional Politics in a Separated System.Richard J. Carroll. An Economic Record of Presidential Performance: From Truman to Bush.Harvey L. Schantz, ed. American Presidential Elections: Process, Policy and Political Change. 1996.Gunter Bischof and Stephen E. Ambrose, eds. Eisenhower: A Centenary Assessment.Barry D. Friedman. Regulation in the Reagan‐Bush Era: The Eruption of Presidential Influence.

Priming and Media Impact on the Evaluations of the President's Performance

The period between August 1990 and early November 1992 was characterized by two “issue regimes,” the Gulf War and an economic recession. Analysis of aggregate media content and opinion poll data shows that President George Bush's job approval ratings were closely tied to the changes in the salience of these two issues. Guided by priming theory, hypotheses were formulated and tested concerning media effects on voters' evaluations of President Bush. Results show that the pattern of forming Bush's approval ratings is related to two different issue regimes. The total dominance of the public arena by one issue during an issue regime sets the foundation of Bush's overall approval ratings. However, direct media priming effects are found limited. Implications of these results are discussed.

Presidents and the Prospective Voter

The economy being the key to presidential popularity, what is the economic intelligence inspiring the approval judgments of American voters? According to one school of thought, the public relies on the current performance of the economy (the retrospective voter), while a rival makes the case for expectations about the future economy (the prospective voter). I conduct a time-series analysis combining consumer surveys and presidential approval polls (1960-1993). The results unequivocally reject the prospective claim and confirm the retrospective one. Depending on the measure used, economic expectations either prove too sensitive to political interventions (change in the White House, wars, and scandals) to shape presidential approval; or else, economic expectations do no more than encapsulate information about the current state of the economy. The research bears out the wisdom and the fairness of the retrospective calculus. To judge a president's performance in office is not a question about things to come b...

An economic record of presidential performance: from Truman to Bush

Figures and Tables Acknowledgments Preface Introduction General Economic Indicators Major Events and Timeline, 1945-93 GDP Growth Employment Growth and the Unemployment Rate Inflation Money Supply and the Real Interest Rate Saving and Investment Rates Productivity and Compensation in the Business Sector Poverty Line Stock Market -- Dow Jones Industrials The Federal Government Total Federal Budget Growth and Share of GDP Budget Deficits and the National Debt Composition of Government Budget Social Security Taxation Overall Presidential Performance -- A Synthesis of the Indicators Postscript: The Economy after Bush and Clinton's Early Returns Appendix I: Technical Notes Appendix II: Statistical Appendix Bibliography Index

Governing the White House: from Hoover through LBJ

Charles Walcott and Karen Hult maintain that the organization of the White House influences presidential performance much more than commonly thought and that organization theory is an essential tool for understanding that influence. Their book offers the first systematic application of organizational governance theory to the structures and operations of the White House Office. Using organizational theory to analyze what at times has been a rather ad hoc and disorganized office might seem quixotic. After all, the White House Office exists within a turbulent political environment that encourages expedient decision-making. And every four to eight years it must be reinvented by presidents who have their own theories and preferences about how to organize a staff to serve their policy needs. But Walcott and Hult argue that White House staffs are not simply puppets of presidential preference and style. Yes, staff structures evolve primarily from presidents' strategic responses to external demands. But those structures in turn significantly influence how the executive branch perceives and responds to further demands. The first part of their book lays out the theoretical argument. The second examines White House outreach: congressional liaison, press relations, personnel selection, executive branch oversight, and interest group and intergovernmental liaison. The third focuses on White House handling of policy development and implementation. The fourth analyzes staff structures that facilitate the operation of the presidency itself: presidential writing and scheduling, staff management, and cabinet coordination. The book concludes by identifying general patterns in the emergency, nature, and stability of governance structures in the White House. Original and instructive, Governing the White House provides a much-needed primer on the inner workings of the White House staff and will be an essential volume for anyone studying the presidency.

The rally 'round the flag effect in U.S. foreign policy crises, 1950?1985

We calculate the rally 'round the flag effect (Mueller, 1970, 1973) for all 41 U.S. foreign policy crises, 1950–1985, identified by the International Crisis Behavior Project (Wilkenfeld, Brecher, and Moser, 1988). The mean change in the president's approval rating is surprisingly small: 1.4 percent among all respondents. The greatest influences on the rallying effect of a crisis are whether or not the United States is involved in an ongoing war and, especially, theNew York Times's coverage of the president's major response to a crisis. When a major response is reported in the headlines, the rally is more than 8 percentage points greater,ceteris paribus, than when it is not reported on the front page. TheNew York Times's reporting is influenced by the nature of the president's response, the efforts of his administration to publicize his actions, the degree of Soviet involvement, the location of the crisis, and the willingness of opposition leaders to take a newsworthy position regarding the president's performance.