The Polls: Searching for Determinism: A Comparative Assessment of First Term Approval Volatility, Buoyancy, and Polarization

The search for a recurring trend in presidents' approvals has received much attention by presidency scholars--and for good reason. The identification of a deterministic seasonal pattern in approval has implications for the debate between the presidency- and president-centered approaches. Evidence of an approval trend would appear to lend support to the idea of a president constrained by the institution, whereas an absence of pattern may suggest that approval is purely an ad-hoc reflection of the predilections of the individual. There are two theory-driven expectations for approval trends, both plot either an increase or decrease in presidential approval relative to an earlier time in an administration. The first, the cumulative decision explanation, argues that a president's broad coalition of support, built while campaigning, will steadily erode in response to the accumulation of decisions that must necessarily follow an election. Many of these decisions may not fully resonate with coalition members' preferences, the consequence being a predictable, steady decline in approval. The second, the psychological response explanation, argues that presidents come to office with inflated approval due to unrealistic expectations. These expectations, when not met, lead to disillusionment and subsequent approval decay. Trend lines are often looked to for confirmation of these approaches. However, evidence of a pattern has been fleeting. This article argues that there is sound theory to suggest recurring patterns in approval, but to illustrate these patterns we must broaden our attention beyond the confining focus of individual-presidency trend lines constructed independent of each other. Through a comparative assessment of first term approval, this article examines evidence of deterministic patterns in approval when approval is evaluated along the dimensions of volatility, buoyancy, and polarization. In addition, borrowing from both the cumulative decision and psychological response explanations, the patterns evidenced are consistent with the agenda articulation approach, which reasons presidential approval reflects the president's ability to define an agenda by staking positions on salient issues early in the administration. Volatility, buoyancy, and polarization are useful because they allow us to make comparative assessments of the modern presidents at similar points during their terms. Simply, utilizing a comparative approach and looking beyond single-presidency trend lines, we are able to identify larger deterministic patterns. This comparative approach is inherent in the way we conceptualize and measure these dimensions of approval. Approval volatility measures a president's short-term fluctuations in approval and controls for larger trends, such as either downward or upward drift in approval. Approval buoyancy taps the ability of the president to earn and sustain approval relative to his colleagues at similar points in the term. Approval polarization identifies the range between in- and out-party approval for each president relative to his colleagues throughout the term. Agenda Articulation The nature of majoritarian election rules compels presidential candidates to cobble together disparate groups in an effort to build a broad coalition of support. Efforts to build this support often result in presidential campaigns that are marked by rhetoric, promises, and the embracement of valance issues. But once elected, the early period of a president's term is marked by a flurry of policy-defining activity as presidents immediately begin the process of defining and acting on an agenda (Burke 2000, 5). Policy-defining activities are those activities that signal both the direction and means of a president's agenda. Indications of the public policy direction of a new administration, and the means by which it hopes to accomplish its goals, may be explicit in official policy statements and speeches released by the White House or simply culled from the president's comments endorsing proposed legislation. …