Newsletter Subject

Do presidential approval ratings still matter?

From

bloombergview.com

Email Address

noreply@mail.bloombergview.com

Sent On

Fri, Apr 30, 2021 11:38 AM

Email Preheader Text

Follow Us Get Jonathan Bernstein’s newsletter every morning in your inbox. . The Cook Politic

[Bloomberg]( Follow Us [Get the newsletter]( Get Jonathan Bernstein’s newsletter every morning in your inbox. [Click here to subscribe](. The Cook Political Report’s Amy Walter has a [good look]( at President Joe Biden’s approval ratings so far. What’s clear is that [Biden’s approval]( tends toward the low side of recent presidents over their first 100 days (other than Donald Trump, who was off-the-scale unpopular); that his disapproval remains the highest of anyone other than Trump, continuing the trend of new presidents beginning with significant disapproval; and that his approval has remained remarkably stable. Going forward? Here’s where I depart from the conventional wisdom. Barack Obama had a relatively narrow approval range over his eight years. Trump’s was even narrower. So far, Biden has hardly any range at all. So the conclusion many have drawn is that partisan polarization is effectively all that matters. As the Washington Post’s Philip Bump [puts it](, “Measuring presidential approval ratings used to be like taking the country’s temperature. Now it’s more often like the recent effort to finalize the true height of Mount Everest: refining a calculation that tends not to vary much.” And yet … I’m still not convinced. After all, it’s not that long ago that George W. Bush’s approval ratings were anything but stable. Bush’s wild swings, including record approval levels in September 2001 and near-record lows in his final year, were if anything more sensitive to events than, say, Dwight Eisenhower’s approval had been. Then Obama had an unusually good honeymoon. Only after that strong start faded in 2009 did the era of stability begin. And it’s not hard to find stories that explain it without the effects of polarization. After the recession bottomed out in early 2009, the rest of Obama’s presidency was stable. The economic recovery that followed was steady, but unusually weak, meaning that people didn’t really feel that prosperity had arrived until late in his second term — at which point Obama’s approval began a long, slow revival, gaining about 10 points in his last year. In foreign affairs, Obama’s two terms were even less eventful; they were most notable for “forever” wars, which had neither the victories nor the disasters of Bush’s presidency. (Yes, the death of Osama bin Laden was an exception, but the rally effect was small and brief.) In other words, for eight years the big things that get ordinary voters’ attention were rarely either good enough or bad enough to push people to change their opinion about the president. If Obama was “no drama,” Trump was nothing but drama. For the first three years, however, that drama was almost all personal, while the nation as a whole continued the same not-quite-peace and mostly-prosperity. And while Obama’s lack of significant scandal helped keep his approval numbers steady, it’s possible that Trump’s constant scandals had much the same effect. As for the pandemic and recession in his fourth year, it’s just hard to know what we would’ve seen with a normal president. In other words: While Biden may be locked into a small approval range, it’s also possible that a quick end to the pandemic and a few more quarters of strong economic growth could still boost his approval to Bill Clinton-like levels above 60%. It’s also possible that a recession or other bad news could send Biden down to where Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter and both Presidents Bush bottomed out — a good 10 or 15 points below Trump’s worst. What we’ve seen in Biden’s first 100 days just doesn’t tell us much about which of those possible futures is likeliest. 1. Fiona Cunningham at the Monkey Cage on [India and China](. 2. Dan Drezner on [Biden’s foreign policy so far.]( 3. Daniel Gullotta on [Never-Trumpers and the Free-Soil Party](. 4. My Bloomberg Opinion colleague Michael R. Strain on [unemployment and incentives](. 5. And Jonathan Chait [on Senator Ted Cruz](. Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. [Click here to subscribe](. Also subscribe to [Bloomberg All Access]( and get much, much more. You’ll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close.  Before it’s here, it’s on the Bloomberg Terminal. Find out more about how the Terminal delivers information and analysis that financial professionals can’t find anywhere else. [Learn more](.  You received this message because you are subscribed to Bloomberg's Early Returns newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Bloomberg.com]( | [Contact Us]( Bloomberg L.P. 731 Lexington, New York, NY, 10022

Marketing emails from bloombergview.com

View More
Sent On

21/07/2024

Sent On

20/07/2024

Sent On

19/07/2024

Sent On

18/07/2024

Sent On

17/07/2024

Sent On

16/07/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.