The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
There are a lot of smart people here; some probably even have a bit of the political junkie in their veins. So maybe someone can explain this to me: How is it that Mr. Obama, after a year and a half of almost uniformly unpopular policies, with unemployment still at levels barely seen in a generation, with economic growth essentially non-existent, and having made a mockery of his “post-partisan” promise in record time, still manages to hold a 46-47% (Real Clear Politics average) job approval rating? I find this utterly baffling.
My bafflement has two sources. The first is simply arithmetic. In round numbers, polls consistently show the American public to be about 25% “liberal,” 40% “moderate,” and 35% “conservative.” (The most recent polls actually tend to show about 40% “conservative,” but never mind.) For Obama to have a 46-47% approval rating and a 48-49% disapproval rating implies (since all the remaining “Obama conservatives” could fit inside a very small phone booth) that “moderates” are saying they approve of Obama’s job performance by something like a 3:2 margin. And this, in the face of countless polls showing large majorities of “independents” disapproving of virtually every initiative Obama has taken in his presidency, simply makes no sense.
The second is historical. The spectrum of public opinion tends to be continuous, without sharp breaks – kind of like a rope. When one end of a taut rope gets raised or lowered a significant amount, the parts of the rope closer to the middle rise or fall as well, though by lesser amounts; the right or left end of the rope doesn’t just break off. Thus, historically, whenever the Left or the Right has turned highly negative toward a president (think, e.g., Carter or Bush II), that president’s overall approval numbers have slipped into the 30s – not because of the intensity of one side’s dislike (approval ratings do not capture intensity), but because the same things that caused intensity of disapproval on one side or the other have, with less intensity, caused more widespread disapproval in the middle.
But this does not seem to be happening yet with Obama, or at least not fully. The only things I can think of by way of possible explanation are:
- People’s self-characterizations are not really very accurate – i.e., a lot of self-described “moderates” are really fairly liberal. This may or may not be true, but doesn’t explain the fact that most of the polling on individual Obama initiatives (health care, bailouts, Porkulus, etc.) tends to be consistent with the conservative-leaning 25-40-35 split.
- Some respondents implicitly bring a “comparison with the alternative” into their response, reasoning, in effect, “well, I disapprove of a lot of the things Obama’s done, but Bush was worse, so I guess, in comparison with Bush, I sort of approve of Obama.” This could be, but if you look at the Gallup historical data, this effect appears to have worn off by about the middle of the first year for other presidents who’ve followed highly unpopular incumbents.
- Personal magnetism – people just like Obama personally, far more than they approve of his policies. Well, maybe, but I really, really don’t get it. I got why a lot of people liked Reagan; I even got why a lot of people liked Clinton. But Obama? The guy is cold, aloof, arrogant, condescending, and hyper-partisan. What is there in that personality to like?
- In a variant of the above, it’s not Obama’s personality that some moderates like, as much as the idea of Obama – someone well-educated, who speaks in complete sentences, who seems sophisticated and cosmopolitan, and to top it all off is actually African-American. They feel, in some vague sort of way, that to disapprove of Obama is to side with hoi polloi instead of with the “right sort” who ought to be running things.
With absolutely no data to back this up, my gut tells me that the last of these is the most credible, that there is probably a block of around 4 or 5% of the electorate who feel perfectly free to disagree with many or most of Obama’s policies, but can’t bring themselves to disapprove of Obama himself – and that without these people, Obama’s approval numbers would be in the low rather than the high 40s – more consistent with where other presidents who have pursued unpopular policies in poor economies have been. But I’m curious as to whether anyone can offer a better or more convincing rationale for why Obama’s approval numbers appear measurably more buoyant than those for his actual policies and initiatives.
- Comment (27)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
May '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
#4 does sound plausible. I think, too, it helps him that the media is still on his side. If every day people saw criticism of him in newspaper headlines & editorials, the evening news, late night monologues, award show speeches, etc. etc. it would knock him down a few more points.
May '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
I agree that your last idea is partially to blame. I'm sure even some conservatives hesitate to tell strangers that they dislike Obama because they're afraid of being called racist.
But another factor might be simple ignorance or aloofness. It can be easy for news junkies to forget that many people prefer to avoid politics altogether or only pay attention to local news. Some people, if you put them on the spot, will only remember one or two things Obama has screwed up, even if they disapproved of a dozen or more actions.
It's also not uncommon for people to fail to make a connection between their small perceptions/beliefs and what those add up to. We all know a thing is not always the sum of its parts. That's particularly true with social (political, religious, moral) beliefs. People often go with whatever feels right, rather than laboriously making a reasoned judgment. Sometimes, we don't even realize that our grand view can't be reconciled with our lesser beliefs.
Jun '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Obama's "popularity" is reactionary. It's fueled by by the mythology that most of Obama's opposition is greedy, racist, nativist, or plutocratic in nature. So, if you hate the haters (and who doesn't?) and you hate the "greedy filthy rich," then you support what you see as the only practical alternative--Obama.
Jul '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, but might there be a percentage of the population who approve of his job performance because it's so abyssmal, and therefore sets up the other side for the big win?
Or else, it could be the same dynamic that elected him in the first place: people say they approve of him to avoid being accused of racism.
Jul '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
People have seen how those who disagree with Obama's policies are smeared as racists and so they are careful to avoid telling pollsters what they really think.
Jun '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Door #4 of Steve's post, thank you. Ditto Ragnarok at #5.
Edited on Sep 2, 2010 at 12:08pmJul '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
most people are not political, and don't pay any attention to 'the news' aside from a few headlines, etc. The Junkies are watching Fox following Beck, Hannity, etc, and they are a very small part of the whole mix.
Obama is good looking, he has physical grace, and when he speaks, he sounds reasonable and intelligent. What's not to like?
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Yeah -- kind of scary, isn't it. But if that weird spell ever does get broken, he will sink like a stone.
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
heathermc: most people are not political, and don't pay any attention to 'the news' aside from a few headlines, etc. The Junkies are watching Fox following Beck, Hannity, etc, and they are a very small part of the whole mix.
Obama is good looking, he has physical grace, and when he speaks, he sounds reasonable and intelligent. What's not to like? · Sep 2 at 1:06pm
Here's another, somewhat related possibility: what else, some might think, is a President supposed to do aside from inspire the nation to let him carry out his agenda without any interference?
Jun '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Ricochet contributor Shelby Steele explains much of this in terms of a "gratitude response:" when a member of an oppressed class adopts the "mask" of a "bargainer" extending to members of the dominate class the bargain "I won't treat you as an oppressor, or hold you responsible for past wrongs, if you treat me right here and now" But listen to Dr. Steele tell it: http://www.ricochet.com/conversations/Ricochet-Podcast-31-Question-Time
or read his A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama...
http://www.amazon.com/Bound-Man-Excited-About-Obama/dp/1416559175
Jun '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
The idea of Obama is really the ideas of Obama. He means so much to so many, from race, to not-Bush, to compassion, to intelligent, to hip/new/cool, etc. That is why I voted for him, certainly - as an emblem of a possibility. (That, and the unpleasant gag in my throat I felt whenever I heard McCain blather...)
Each individual appearance is great. He is presidential. He sounds reasonable. He says all the right things. I WANT him to be right, to believe his rhetoric. I want the ideas of Obama to be real.
You must string his words into a story - through time - to hear the overall trajectory of his actual effects. And, you have to be looking for something to be wrong. Most of my friends are Obama supporters and many worked on his campaign. They do not find his policies abhorrrent, but admirable. They accept his frames - he is correcting a decade of failed Bush/Republican debacle. "Give the guy a chance" I hear again and again. They view criticism as pure partisan politics.
May '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
So I have a confession. I voted for Barack Obama.
He was the first Democratic presidential candidate I ever voted for.
I was disillusioned by George Bush's second term, fed up with Republicans in Congress, feeling like Wall Street (where I work) needed reform, disenchanted by McCain's needy, conviction-less, angry pandering, and thought I was voting for black Bill Clinton.
He was smart and (yes Joe Biden) articulate and he was of my set. I even knew people that sent their kids to the same tony private school in Chicago attended by his daughters. The apparent anger of the McCain crowds, the accusations of socialism, and the crazy birthers all fueled my conviction along with, I'm sure, a healthy dose of white guilt. I mean, what's a little more regulation -- how bad could it be, right?
But now though, I think I am probably angrier and more disillusioned as a duped centrist than many conservatives who were never drawn in. (I mean here I am railing about the guy's taste in carpeting after all.) I feel lied to and manipulated and I'm angry.
I can't imagine I'm the only one.
Jun '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Thank you, Trace for sharing. Anyone else? Anyone?
May '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Ya, Trace, I thought I noticed a "those of us who were fooled" phrasing in one of your earlier posts. No biggie. And I confess voting for Perot in '92.
As for these approval numbers: The key is that one demographic group representing 12% of the population is not budging from 90% approval--African Americans. That skews the stats. No other president in recent history has had such a large group that was so non-volatile. George W. in his darkest hours, for example, may have retained 50-60% approval with evangelicals, but nowhere near 90%.
So until the AfAm population gets at least somewhat disenchanted, it will be very unlikely that Obama hits Bushian levels of disapproval.
Edited on Sep 2, 2010 at 2:43pmJul '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Pilgrim
Thank you, Trace for sharing. Anyone else? Anyone? · Sep 2 at 2:05pm
Well, I voted Libertarian.
But while your confessional is open, I have to admit that sometimes I talk in a little tiny baby voice to my bull terrier.
Jul '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Trace Urdan: So I have a confession. I voted for Barack Obama.
He was the first Democratic presidential candidate I ever voted for.
I was disillusioned by George Bush's second term, fed up with Republicans in Congress, feeling like Wall Street (where I work) needed reform, disenchanted by McCain's needy, conviction-less, angry pandering, and thought I was voting for black Bill Clinton.
[...]
I feel lied to and manipulated and I'm angry.
I can't imagine I'm the only one. · Sep 2 at 1:57pm
Ditto on all counts, Mr. Urdan, and I, too, admit to being smitten by and voting for Obama. Another factor for me was disappointment both at Sarah Palin as a VP candidate and at McCain's failure as a decision maker in choosing her for the only reasons that seemed apparent at the time: she was a woman and she would be able to rouse the party's base. Neither are adequate qualifications to execute the duties of the President of the United States should she be called upon to do so.
Jun '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Kenneth
Pilgrim
Thank you, Trace for sharing. Anyone else? Anyone? · Sep 2 at 2:05pm
Well, I voted Libertarian.
But while your confessional is open, I have to admit that sometimes I talk in a little tiny baby voice to my bull terrier. · Sep 2 at 4:13pm
TMI
May '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
I voted for Obama. I also thought I was a liberal Democrat until a year and a half ago. Once I learned that the NYT and Washington Post are willfully misleading (because I knew a lot about a particular issue and could recognize it), I actually started reading "conservative" commentary, and whole lifetime of delusion fell away.
Aug '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Two thoughts:
1) While it is no longer verboten in polite company to express displeasure with Obama's policies (I mean, even liberals can't deny how bad things remain), I suspect it is still widely frowned upon to express personal displeasure with him, for fear that one will be deemed "racist." Thus, his personal popularity as measured in such polls remains relatively less tarnished.
2) If you are a sports fan, think of situations where a head coach is personally popular and liked but also patently in over his head and/or past his prime. One thinks, for example, of Bobby Bowden. I'm certain that FSU die-hards still love him. But I feel equally confident that they were relieved when he was ushered out of the job. In sum, "it's time for a change" is not at all incompatible with "but I still like the guy."
Aug '10
Re: The Perplexing Buoyancy of Obama
Gosh, that was a pretty explanation of the phenomenon.