Does a Strong Economy Guarantee a President's Re-Election?

  • News
  • Thread starter jduster
  • Start date
In summary, the rule for presidential elections is that if the economy is well, voters will support the empowered party, and if the economy is not well, voters will support the opposing party. This rule has been consistent throughout history, with a few exceptions such as the Vietnam War and the Great Depression. Charisma may also play a role in winning elections, but it is not enough to overcome a bad economy. In 2012, the economy was slightly improving but had not fully recovered, making it possible for Barack Obama to potentially be an exception to the rule. However, other factors such as his large campaign funds and the unpopularity of the Republican Party may have also played a role in his re-election.
  • #1
jduster
2
0
My rule for presidential elections is: If the economy is well, voters will support the empowered party. If the economy is not well, voters will support the opposing party.

Historical Context

1956
Economy: Well
Eisenhower is re-elected.

1960
Economy: Had a little downturn near end of decade.
Kennedy is elected over Nixon.

1964
Economy: Well
Johnson is re-elected

1968 - Okay, Vietnam was a huge exception

1972
Economy: Well
Nixon re-elected

1976
Economy: Concerns of inflation
Ford loses to Carter.

1980
Economy: Stagflation
Reagan defeats Carter

1984
Economy: Recovery
Reagan re-elected by landslide

1988
Economy: Still well
Bush succeeds Reagan.

1992
Economy: Unemployment increases.
Bush, once considered unbeatable, loses to Clinton because of economic concerns.

1996
Economy: Well
Clinton is re-elected

2000
Economy: Well
Gore won the popular vote here.

2004
Economy: Recovered from post-9/11 recession
Bush gets re-elected

2008
Economy: Downturn
Obama defeats McCain. As the economy got worse, McCain's support fell.

2012
?

Essayist Paul Graham has a theory that charisma wins elections, but can any president in a bad economy be charismatic?

Obama's approval rating fell since he could not find an instant cure to the recession.
Reagan's approval dropped in 1983 when the economy went into a recession.

In 2012, the economy has gotten better, though only slightly, but has not recovered. Barack Obama has a huge warchest and a Republican Party which is extremely unpopular, so he could end up being an exception to my rule.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Have you considered the great depression with Roosevelt being elected time after time?
 
  • #3
Of course.

Coolidge and Hoover were elected over a booming economy.
Hoover lost to Roosevelt as the economy sank into the Great Depression.

1936
Yes, the country was in the midst of a Great Depression, but economic conditions improved and unemployment rate went down in those years, significantly, even if the nation was still in a depression.

In 1940, the economy wasn't as bad as it was in 1929. And during WW2, the economy was booming, resulting in a 4th term.
 
  • #4
jduster said:
Of course.

Coolidge and Hoover were elected over a booming economy.
Hoover lost to Roosevelt as the economy sank into the Great Depression.

1936
Yes, the country was in the midst of a Great Depression, but economic conditions improved and unemployment rate went down in those years, significantly, even if the nation was still in a depression.

In 1940, the economy wasn't as bad as it was in 1929. And during WW2, the economy was booming, resulting in a 4th term.

Also during World War II, people probably figured it best to leave the guy who was president in place, as opposed to bringing in someone totally new.
 
  • #5


As a scientist, it is important to approach this question with objectivity and evidence-based reasoning. While there may be some correlation between a strong economy and a president's re-election, it is not a guarantee. There are many other factors that can influence voters' decisions, such as foreign policy, social issues, and the candidates' personal qualities. Additionally, the economy is a complex system and can be affected by a multitude of factors, making it difficult to attribute its state solely to the actions of one president.

Looking at the historical context provided, it is clear that there have been exceptions to the rule that a strong economy guarantees a president's re-election. For example, in 1992, George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton despite the economy being in a downturn. This could be attributed to other factors such as Bush's handling of foreign affairs and the charisma of the opposing candidate.

Furthermore, it is important to consider that a president's approval rating can also be influenced by factors other than the economy. As mentioned in the essay, Obama's approval rating dropped during the recession, but it is not solely because he could not find an instant cure. Other issues such as healthcare reform and foreign policy decisions may have also played a role.

In regards to the question about charisma winning elections, it is possible for a president to be charismatic even in a bad economy. Charisma is not solely based on a president's ability to improve the economy, but also their ability to connect with the public and inspire trust and confidence. A president can still be charismatic even if the economy is struggling.

In conclusion, while a strong economy may be a contributing factor to a president's re-election, it is not the only factor. It is important to consider the complexity of the political landscape and the many factors that can influence voters' decisions. As a scientist, it is crucial to approach this question with objectivity and not make sweeping generalizations based on limited data.
 

1. What is the Presidential Election Rule?

The Presidential Election Rule, also known as the Electoral College, is a process in which the President of the United States is elected indirectly by the people through a group of individuals called electors.

2. How does the Presidential Election Rule work?

The Presidential Election Rule works by assigning a certain number of electors to each state, based on their population. These electors then cast their votes for the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in their state. The candidate who receives the majority of electoral votes becomes the President.

3. Why was the Presidential Election Rule created?

The Presidential Election Rule was created by the founding fathers to balance the power between large and small states. It was also seen as a way to prevent direct democracy and ensure that the President was chosen by a group of educated individuals.

4. Has the Presidential Election Rule ever been changed?

Yes, the Presidential Election Rule has been changed twice in history. The 12th Amendment was ratified in 1804, which introduced separate ballots for President and Vice President. The 23rd Amendment, ratified in 1961, gave Washington D.C. three electoral votes.

5. What are the criticisms of the Presidential Election Rule?

One criticism of the Presidential Election Rule is that it can result in a candidate winning the popular vote but losing the election, as seen in the 2000 and 2016 elections. Additionally, some argue that it gives more weight to votes in smaller states and can lead to candidates focusing on winning certain key states rather than the overall popular vote.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
31
Views
7K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
7K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
13K
Replies
27
Views
5K
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
29
Views
4K
Back
Top