
Updated with correction and new graphs at bottom of the post, 5/5.
President Bush's approval rating is on course to set a record low for mid-term elections. The magnitude of the problem is greater than commonly perceived. The previous record low approval in the last Gallup poll of October was 41% for President Truman in 1950. Based on approval trends in 2005-06, the President and Congressional Republicans are facing an election day 2006 approval of between 20.4% and 40.8%. (The range is highlighted in the graph for 2006. The "dot" is the estimate based on the trend in most of 2005, which is less than half the current rate of decline.)
During January 1, 2005-April 30, 2006, the president's approval has trended at three rates. From 1/1/05-11/11/05, I estimate a decline of -0.0309% per day (there were also shocks of -1.3% for Katrina and -1.9% for the Libby indictment but these didn't change the rate of decline.) From 11/11/05-1/31/06 my estimate is approval gains of +0.0362% per day. Since February 1, 2006 the trend has again turned negative, at -0.072% per day, the most serious rate of decline in the Bush administration.
To put these in persepctive, in the first 11 months of 2005, approval declined 1% every 32.3 days. During November-January it rose 1% every 27.6 days. Since February approval has fallen 1% every 13.9 days, or over twice the rate of most of 2005.
Given these rates, we can estimate approval as of the midterm election on November 7, 2006, 189 days from today.
If the current rate were sustained throughout the year, approval would stand at 20.4% on election day, below the all time low of 22% for Truman. (Gallup cites 23% as Truman's low, and they should know, but there is a February 1952 Gallup poll that appears to show the 22% I cite. I'm trying to get this clarified. Either way Bush would be below Truman's record.)
If the rest of the year returned to the rate of most of 2005, -.0309 rather than -.0720, then election day approval would be 28.1%.
If the president can rally and sustain the same rate as during November-January, then election day approval would be 40.8%.
Sustained improvement in presidential approval has not been seen in the Bush administration except during the 2004 election campaign period. From 5/1/2004 through 11/2/2004 approval rose at a rate of +0.0112% per day (or +1% every 89 days.) At that rate, approval at the midterm would stand at 36.1%.
And, of course, if approval simply stabilizes at the current level, approval would be 34% on election day.
Approval can surge dramatically, as the aftermath of 9/11 and the start of the Iraq war illustrate. However, such surges commonly accompany dramatic international events and not new domestic initiatives. By their nature, such events are unpredictable. The surge in support is also usually short-lived.
I was frankly shocked at the above results. Other presidents have suffered low approval ratings, and President Bush still stands above the lows of four of the ten other post-war presidents. But I had not appreciated how much the current approval is below other mid-term approval ratings, even without extrapolating current trends. We have simply never seen a president this unpopular going into a midterm election.
I will be surprised if the current rate of decline continues. But I will also be surprised by a sustained upturn at the rate of November-January. Either would be an extreme outcome. But approval between the upper 20s and lower 30s seems entirely plausible. There is no precedent for a midterm with approval at those levels.
UPDATE (5/5): Anonymous pointed out in the first comment below that Truman in 1946 had a 33% approval rating in September 1946 and 34% in November. No October poll was conducted. I left that election out because 1946 is commonly treated as part of the "war years". Political scientists usually exclude the war years from elections models because the war makes them atypical, and I did so without really thinking about it for that reason. However, Anonymous' point is well taken and including that year is an important corrective to my claim that "There is no precedent..." for midterm approval as low as President Bush's current level. So amend that to read "almost no precedent", and thanks to Anonymous for making the point. Also while Ford was relatively popular in October 1974, Nixon in May of '74 was at 25%, which surely had more to do with Republican fortunes that year than did President Ford. (David T makes this point in a comment below.)
Here is the updated graph WITH 1946 included. As you can see, the range of plausible Bush approval is still mostly below even that low Truman 1946 figure, though there is the possibility that President Bush recovers enough to have October readings above Truman 1946.

In another comment (and they are all quite good-- worth reading!) Apol asked what we could estimate of October approval based on May approval. As it happens I had just put that graph together and here it.

While May approval does predict October approval the fit is far from perfect. The gray diagonal line provides a reference for where October is exactly equal to May. The solid blue line shows the regression line that estimates the best fit between May and October. The slope of that line is less than 1.0, indicating the presidents with very high May approval tend to fall, while those with low approval in May tend to rise. This is called "regression to the mean" in statistics, and is not necessarily due to some substantive political process at work. However, this fit does provide some encouraging news for the White House. Given May approval of 34%, the estimated October approval would be 38.1%. A not huge but certainly welcome move up for Republicans. I hasten to add though that the uncertainty in this estimate is so large as to be virtually useless: a 90% confidence interval is +/- 13%, so somewhere between 25 and 51%!
If you abandon statistics (did I say that??) notice that JFK62 and GWB02 are both coming off crisis rallies and GHWB90 had just abandoned his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. If you also let me take 1946 out, then the rest of the cases lie very close to the diagonal line, suggesting that May is a much better predictor of October for most presidents, the exceptions being in the aftermath of a crises or broken campaign pledge. Of course the danger of this kind of nonstatistical analysis is that it is easy to think of a reason to take out cases selectively to bolster your case.
So I'll go back to my original analysis based on the trends in 2005-06. The range of values shown for GWB06 in the dotplots, from about 20% to about 40% represent what I believe are the plausible limits of either further decline OR substantial recovery, and either of those extremes would be surprising to me. So I'd still say that approval in the high 20s to low 30s would seem most plausible, given the trend in approval over the past 16 months. And that remains bad news for Republicans and hopeful news for Democrats. Republicans need some serious successes before November, and Democrats need an attractive alternative platform to take advantage of Republican weakness.
Click here to go to Table of Contents
11 comments:
I'm curious why you did not include elections prior to 1950. For instance, Gallup has Truman at 33% 9/46 and 34% 11/94, so while there's no October poll, it's pretty clear the country was not happy with him during this time period.
Very interesting post, thank you.
It is interesting what that chart says about the relationship between the president's poll rating and the way his party fares in Congress in the moidterm election. Obviously, there is *some* relation--GW Bush in 2002 and Clinton in 1998 were able to defy the usual midterm "law" about the party controlling the White House losing seats in the House, largely because they had such high job performance ratings. And Reagan's popularity in 1986 helped keep GOP losses in the House down (but not in the Senate, where a large number of vulnerable Republicans elected in the 1980 GOP sweep went down to defeat). Conversely, the Democrats did poorly in 1950 and 1966 when their president was unpopular, and the same with the Republicans in 1982 (we are so used to thinking of Reagan as a popular president that we forget how bad his numbers were for much of 1982 and early 1983).
On the other hand, the relationship is not complete--Ike's reasonably high ratings in 1958 couldn't save the GOP from massive losses in that recession year, and Gerald Ford wasn't getting *that* bad a rating in 1974--but obviously the election was a judment on Nixon as well as Ford, especially after the pardon. Clinton's numbers in 1994 were just slightly below 50--not good, but not bad enough by itself to explain the political earthquake that year.
Anonymous-- absolutely right! I started with 1950 because most political science analysis treats 1946 as part of the "world war II" elections, and hence exceptional. So we usually leave them out of our analysis. I did that, frankly, without thinking much (at all!) about it. Likewise I left out '42 for the same reason.
Truman's '46 does indeed look relevant, and makes my "unprecedented" claim less powerful. President Bush may well have Harry Truman for company, in more ways than one.
David T: I'm putting together a post that will help visualize your point. In general, forecasting models for midterm lost have focused on presidential approval and the economy. However, more recent work has shown that these two are considerably weaker than commonly thought, and that presidential performance in the preceding election is more potent. I'm working on a post that will look at all that and show what power approval does have. But right now that pesky day job is going to keep me from posting that (unless I shirk!)
Charles
I've been tracking these numbers for 9 months. My midpoint estimate is approximately 32 points in October (average over many polls). Although my interval is broader, it is not stochastic, and I would venture that the midpoint is also close to as low as it could go (individual polls WILL go lower, and very soon).
The "shock event" that will upset all statistical trend analysis ..
CAPTURE OF OBL in Late-Mid October.
At some point you're going to hit Bush's floor, meaning that all of those who still approve of his performance are the ones who would approve of him even if he murdered his whole family on national TV. The implication of this, of course, is that we would see a rapidly diminishing rate of decline, regardless of the conditions. I'm curious as to your thoughts on this matter. Might some of your estimates (20%) be implausible on account of this?
Is it possible to impute Bush's October approval rating not on the basis of current trends but on the relationship between May (or spring, if you want a smoother measure) and October approval ratings for other president's in your analysis? Or could you also display the May approval ratings for other presidents so we could get a sense of how much change there usually is between May and October?
Adam,
I have a post on how low can approval go at http://politicalarithmetik.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-low-can-approval-go.html
that tries to answer this question.
The bottom line is that President Bush suffers from unusually low Dem and Ind approval while being held up by unusually strong Republican support. If you look at the graph in that post, you'll see that a president's partisans have often been substantially LESS supportive than Republicans are currently. So it is NOT the case that your partisans will never desert you-- in the past they have. Now maybe Bush has succeeded so well in developing a hard core base in the party that they won't abandon him. However, I think there is quite a bit of room for Republican support to decline. Coupled with the incredibly low Dem and Ind numbers, that could cause a slide into the low 20s without straining credulity.
So I'm not satisfied we are at the rock bottom yet. Conservatives are now more willing to express dissapproval of the President. That definitely doesn't mean they share liberal's policy preferences, but rather they have come to disapprove of the performance even though they may still agree with Bush's values. That is terrible news for the White House. (See today's AP/Ipsos poll for evidence on this point.)
Apol: I added to the post above to address your question. Thanks!
Charles
Looking at your May vs. October plot, I notice the following:
1. Four presidents drop at least 15% between May and October (GWB02, JFK, GHWB and HST46).
2. Nine presidents move just a few points up or down between May and October (HST50, RR82, LBJ, RMN, Ike54, RR86, WJC98, WJC94 and Ike58). Seven of these move two points or less.
3. Only one president moves a significant distance upward (JEC with about 10%).
It seems that the clearest take-away from this graph is that presidents almost never gain significant approval (three or more points) between May and October. During this time period presidents are much more likely to tread water or, with a little less frequency, sink significantly.
Using my reading, it looks like there are two likely possibilities for GWB in October. If he treads water then he should be within a couple points of his current rating (say, 32-36%). If he sinks and history repeats itself (as with GWB02, HST46, JFK, and GHWB), his rating should drop to somthing astonishingly low. I'm thinking 19% which, after reading your "How low can approval go?" article, appears to be a feasible prediction.
Charles:
Just FYI, an excelized bastardization of your graph -- with GWB at 31% -- appears in this week's (May 13) Economist, sourced to "Charles Franklin, www.mysterpollster.com" (p. 31).
Burt
Burt,
Thanks! I'll have to get over to Borders and buy a copy. You know the old pols used to say "Just spell the name right", so I guess I should be happy about that. But I would like to add: "Get the blog's name right too!"
(Of course, being associated with MysteryPollster is a compliment, so I'm not too upset!.)
Charles
Post a Comment