Record number of jobs created in May, but Obama's approval rating declined anyway

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 19:00


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)

Chris Bowers :: Record number of jobs created in May, but Obama's approval rating declined anyway

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:

U3 unemployment rate, 2005-2006

Bush's approval rating dropped by a net of around 25% during this two-year stretch, even though unemployment started low and went very low.

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.

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Record number of jobs created in May, but Obama's approval rating declined anyway | 30 comments
These numbers don't mean much (4.00 / 2)
when you get on the ground.  Washington DC is so disconnected from the rest of the country that they think the 10 million people out of work, many of whom know they will NEVER get a high-paying job again, will be so elated by news of an alleged jump in job creation (none of which jobs seem to be in their neighborhood, BTW) that they will love the president.

The economy is crap, bogus numbers (soon to be "revised downward" no doubt) notwithstanding.

And there was that oil spill, badly handled.

The numbers this month .. (4.00 / 2)
that Chris talks about are skewed by the Census hirings
[ Parent ]
Chris .. (4.00 / 4)
how much has the ongoing oil spill effected his numbers? .. I read somewhere(maybe Greg Sargent had them) .. polling numbers to the effect that close to 75% of people want Obama to put the hammer down on BP .. or has he called it "put his boot on their neck"  .. you know .. stop being so accommodating to corporations
A number of polls I have seen (0.00 / 0)
seem to indicate that more and more of the public is getting their info from Fox, Limbaugh, etc.  For example a very large percentage supports the Arizona law.  And a lot of people think Obama has raised taxes/the stimulus caused unemployment to rise/the government will be paying for health care for the poor/that $1.4 trillion 2009 deficit was Obama's not Bush's etc.  On top of this, I'm not seeing much counter-information getting out there through non-rightwing outlets.



--

Seeing The Forest -- Who is our economy FOR, anyway? Twitter: dcjohnson

Obama blasted the GOP today (4.00 / 2)
it wasn't on ANY of the national news tonight. I don't even want to tell you how Mark Knoller of CBS spun his speech.  
[ Parent ]
Faux doesn't reach as many people you think .. (4.00 / 2)
it's the fact that the TradMed isn't doing it's job .. then again .. neither are the Democrats
[ Parent ]
TradMed IS doing its job (4.00 / 2)
You won't see someone from labor explaining why it is a good thing to join a union on TV or in your newspaper.

So the corporate media IS doing its job.

--

Seeing The Forest -- Who is our economy FOR, anyway? Twitter: dcjohnson

[ Parent ]
The TradMed isn't doing its job (4.00 / 1)
because the Democrats aren't doing their job.  When the two parties actively dispute an issue, than both sides get a decent (fair is too strong a word) hearing.  When one side takes a strong stand and the other side is mushy or agrees with them, then coverage is one sided.  

(Obviously, there is no reason this has to be the way the TradMed operates, and few policy issues can be adequately boiled down to two sides - but those are more fundamental problems.)  

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
I think generally have a pretty good sense (4.00 / 5)
of their economic situation regardless of where they get the news. I mean, they can read their bills and their bank balances.

Do you honestly believe that people would feel good about the economy if not for Fox?

[ Parent ]
During the Bush admin... (4.00 / 6)

 ...the media kept telling us all how gloriously awesome the economy was.

 Most people knew better. And voted accordingly.

 Now it's the Democrats' turn to get sunk by this. Why? Because they've spent the last two years pretty much continuing Bushonomics.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

[ Parent ]
They did? (0.00 / 0)
Most people knew better. And voted accordingly.

In 2002 and 2004, the people voted to retain Republican governance. Did they really know better?  

[ Parent ]
In '02 and '04... (4.00 / 3)

 ...the Democrats did virtually nothing to distinguish themselves from Republicans. (There was that 99-1 vote on the Patriot Act, for starters.) Many Democrats supported the Bush tax cuts. A few scattered Democrats attempted to draw a contrast with the GOP, but they were quickly dealt with by the party establishment.

  With no real choices available to voters, inertia carried the day. Then in 2005 Bush floated the idea of privatizing Social Security, and the Democrats FINALLY remembered they were supposed to be an opposition party. Electoral successes followed... even as the media kept propping up Bush until the bitter end.

   

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

[ Parent ]
The media pounded Bush hard (0.00 / 0)
on Katrina and Social Security and pounded Democrats hard on national security and Iraq before that. It's not a coincidence the Democrats were finally winning when the media sudden;y woke up.

[ Parent ]
Yes, definitely (0.00 / 0)
the media creates a narrative. And for most of the Bush administration that narrative was "Everything's fine, if you don't think so, you're a whiny America-hater" and people believed it.  
[ Parent ]
That is not what I said (0.00 / 0)
Lots of people believe the general narrative that Obama has raised their taxes, for example.  A majority supports the Arizona law.

--

Seeing The Forest -- Who is our economy FOR, anyway? Twitter: dcjohnson
[ Parent ]
The economy is still shitty (4.00 / 9)
And with every passing more American blame Obama, as opposed to Bush, for it. Plus a lot of these jobs are temporary census jobs, which are about to end. This will be the high point in job creation. Under Clinton, the economy created an average of 400,000 jobs a year for eight years.

I've actually been a little surprised at how resilient his numbers are; the bottom's not falling out even as he takes a beating on the spill. But I'm not sure he's going to be able to withstand the ongoing non-recovery, which will be exacerbated by the crises in the states, the decline in stimulus spending, and the end of unemployment benefits for millions of people.  

Style points! +100! (4.00 / 5)
In two grafs you laid it all out.

I'll only add one thing: as the Deficit Terrorists find their oats, spending will decline and the economy--which is on life-support thanks to pseudo-Keynesian largesse--will tank.

How on earth these idiots think this will somehow pan into a positive election year result is beyond me. There's just way too much unaddressed suffering for them to think that way... and yet they do.

Whatever they're smoking, I want some!

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

[ Parent ]
Agree (4.00 / 2)
The deficit focus is going to hurt them.  It is really bad policy. You have to invest in infrastructure and jobs to grow the economy.

--

Seeing The Forest -- Who is our economy FOR, anyway? Twitter: dcjohnson
[ Parent ]
Please give this response a chance: (0.00 / 0)
What drove job creation pre-Obama?

Debt.

What is driving job creation now?

Debt.

The recent collapse of confidence that manifested itself as a recession was driven by the following:

no matter how much money the banks create, it doesn't bring more copper or more oil or more arable land into existence.

There is a physical limit to the expansion of the consumer society. Prices began rising faster than the debtors' ability to service their debts. They had to curtail consumption, they had to curtail borrowing, they had to default.

What has changed in the last two years?

In the big picture? Nothing, or perhaps it's worse.

And people know this.

On the flip side, technology can give us perpetual economic growth. That hasn't changed. So what is the problem? Why should a person be pessimistic? Because under the current spiritual paradigm, demand will always outrace the pace of technological development.

Only when we can live (happily) within limits, collectively and individually, can we get on a sustainable economic and political path.

The people know this.

Only an honest strategy will restore their confidence: the elites that know only how to win the PR game must be replaced by elites who can address material problems.

Look no farther than the oil spill for a crystal clear example of what I am talking about.

[ Parent ]
Oil spill isn't helping (4.00 / 4)

 I don't know what political advisor told Obama that being meek and deferential to BP was a political winner, but I hope he's been fired.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn
That's almost certainly Rahmalamadingdong. (4.00 / 1)
On matters like these, the Chief of Staff is GOD.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates
[ Parent ]
As with many things political... (4.00 / 2)
... it's more important that the public THINKS things are getting better than it is important if they actually do get better.

This is the first I've heard of any massive job creation and I haven't noticed anything personally different (I have the same number of freelance jobs I've had for the past six months or so).  Most people in the poll probably are in the same boat: no personal indicators either way and not enough press for them to have internalized a narrative (false or not).

Perception and Reality (0.00 / 0)
If jobs (without the Census) continue to grow from now until November that should ground the perception that the economy is slowly turning around in reality.  However, if things move sideways -- a good report, a bad one, a so-so one, etc. it will just be a continuation of the fear that the economy is stuck.  The "it would have been worse" argument might be true, but it's not a political winner.  
Unemployment is often a statistic about "the other guy" (4.00 / 2)
Unemployment is high, but political participation among the unemployed is low. Unemployment is so discouraging that people mostly "drop out" of optional activities, like politics, while other immediate problems force them to desperation.

So that is anecdotal, but I think there may be a statistical way to test some of the theory:

Plot presidential approval vs. median income (not average income, but median).

High unemployment drives median income down for many reasons. Median income recovers more slowly than employment because wages are depressed even as jobs return.

Unfortunately, I do not have easy access to these statistics, or I would try running the correlation myself.

ec=-8.50 soc=-8.41   (3,967 Watts)

The oil spill is dominating everything right now.... (0.00 / 0)
The economy is secondary, so it's premature to say that the economy and electoral fortunes are related.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!
Mistakes you don't recover from (4.00 / 2)
Voter anger tends to have some inertia.  It took several months of economic recovery before Clinton's polling started recovering, around 1995.  Until then, people were still pissed at the recession that Clinton inherited from Bush.

When people write the history of the Obama administration, the under-sizing of the stimulus package in the name of bipartisanship (remember when they were predicting 80 votes in the Senate?) may rank as strategically the single worst mistake they made.

Surely kowtowing to Wall Street, with the odd Kabuki dressing down, ranks as their second biggest mistake, ruling out any further stimulus packages because they have been tainted by the bailouts.

Where'd the young voters go? (0.00 / 0)

 Young voters were essential to Obama's victory in 2008, and most polls show that the youth vote trends significantly Democratic.

  What have Obama and the Democrats done to consolidate this base? Anything at all?

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

What he did, he did it (0.00 / 0)
young voters still overwhelmingly approve of Obama, more than any other age group.

they also approve of Democrats in Congress more than any other age group

and yet they're not planning on voting this year.  

[ Parent ]
via Digby (4.00 / 4)
Chronic Joblessness Bites Deep

We can bet that many of these folks were dependable voters, or related to others who are.

For as many pixels as have been wasted on unemployment numbers online, I'm pretty surprised to see U3 being discussed here without a reference to U6.

And, while "jobs" might be at the top of the list, the ongoing housing crisis can't be far behind.  Even if Voter A is current with their mortgage (and feeling secure with their job), that doesn't mean that the value of Voter A's home hasn't been affected by neighbor Voter B's default.

It ain't just jobs.

obama and the dems have allowed the gop to define the situation (4.00 / 3)
from day 1 obama should have been tearing the gop a new one. obama swallowed his tongue. he should be shouting tax cuts to the rich, clinton surplus turned to debt, billions for the iraq war, debt, economy, jobs etc. he also should be humiliating the republicans whenever the economy comes up: why would I want to work with the morons that wrecked the economy? if they want to work on my ideas ok. instead we got friendlies and niceties. have you seen any friendliness from the right?

I was saying this from the beginning. don't let them put the blame on you.  

Record number of jobs created in May, but Obama's approval rating declined anyway | 30 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox