| Sumario: | Although foreign policy has enormous implications for public support of the president, the research on the dynamics of presidential approval emphasizes the impact of economics and tends to downplay the impact of foreign affairs. Data limitations have impeded the incorporation of a more refined sense of the impact of foreign affairs on presidential approval. In this article, the author discusses these limitations and presents a methodology that allows one to compare the public's assessment of presidential job performance of both economic and foreign affairs. The data, which span the Clinton years, display the similarities and differences in over time movement of economics and foreign affairs approval. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.
|
|---|