Many progressives--myself included--have argued that once once the economy starts creating jobs, Democratic electing fortunes will improve. Well, economists predict that the economy added 513,000 jobs in May, the most in well over a decade. And yet, May has not been a good month for President Obama''s approval rating, which is actually on the decline.
Here is the Pollster.com trend from May 1st through today: (more in the extended entry)
President Obama approval rating, May 1st through current
That is pretty ugly, showing a net decline of around 3.5%. Certainly doesn't seem like adding more jobs has improved Democratic prospects much.
For that matter, check out the U3 measure of unemployment during 2005 and 2006, when George Bush's approval rating fall off a cliff, and Democrats were able to regain control of Congress:
For good measure, here is the U3 unemployment from 1993 to 1994, during the Republican rise to power that culminated in the 1994 elections:
U3 Unemployment rate, 1993-1994
On the other hand, Reagan saw his political fortunes reverse when the employment and economic situation began improving in 1983:
While the Reagan graph is pretty stark, it is the exception to the other three. Overall, there doesn't seem to be any direct connection between adding jobs and an improvement in the electoral fortunes of the governing party. Other factors, both economic and otherwise, must play an equal or greater role.
All of this makes you wonder if the focus on jobs as the electoral savior of the Democratic Party is a bit of wishful thinking. I am not saying that I have the answer, and I am also not saying that the employment situation isn't important. What I am saying is that Democrats are in trouble for more reasons than just the employment situation, and as such have a lot of work cut out for them over the next five months.
