still the economy...

In a Zogby poll this week, Obama's approval rating dipped below the 40% marker for the first time since taking office. With a new statistical bone in sight, the politerati pounced - and we got a new wave of predictions for Obama 2012 and advice on what policy stands and leadership initiatives he can take to win America back.

But wiser heads suggest that Barack's current disapproval ratings and 2012 prospects have, as always, more to do with the economy than health care, Afghanistan and Sarah Palin combined.

We've all heard "it's the economy, stupid" a zillion times, but I was curious to see just how much the economy ruled our collective opinions about our Leader in Chief. So I decided to spend my Thanksgiving charting it out, pulling down unemployment stats (thought to be the clearest economic indicator on Main Street) from the BLS and historical approval ratings from UCSB.

Here is the harvest of my labor.

At first glance there doesn't seem to be an air-tight case for "good economy=presidential approval", but if you take a close look, the evidence is suggestive if not convincing.

First thing to notice is that when presidents enter office, they usually do so on a well-spring of positive reviews (only Reagan and Clinton entered with less than 60% love). I also pointed out on the chart three non-economic events that caused extreme swings in approval. Two positive - the Gulf War and 9/11. One negative - Watergate. (Other blips - including Reagan's assassination attempt, Iran Contra, the 2nd Gulf war - couldn't be squeezed in.)

But incoming presidential ardor and the rare non-economic factor aside, it does look like one of the worst things for a president's ratings are rising unemployment rates.

The gray areas highlight times of soaring unemployment. In most cases, while the red of unemployment goes up, the blue of approval goes down. Eisenhower's ratings dipped during both times of rising unemployment. Nixon's first spate of unemployment also spelled disfavor; by the second surge in joblessness his ratings were so battered by Watergate they couldn't get much worse. Ford and Reagan entered office with unemployment spiking and so saw their approval plummet (Reagan got a temporary popularity reprieve after being shot by Hinckley). As for Bush I & II, not even the hugely popular Gulf War and the patriotic fervor following 9/11 could stave off the dive in popularity they'd soon suffer from joblessness.

The non-gray areas, conversely, show how good economic times can boost ratings, the biggest beneficiaries being Reagan and Clinton. The only presidents who buck the trend are LBJ, Carter and Bush II. LBJ and Bush II both had the albatross of dragged out wars dragging them down, which may have outweighed rosy job markets. As for Carter, he had another economic problem - inflation - causing him loss of love. (The one benefit of inflation, not coincidentally, is lower unemployment.)

So where does that leave Obama? Like Reagan, Barack came into office with unemployment on a steep incline. That combined with the normal inflation of popularity of incoming presidents meant that it was only to be expected Obama's popularity would take a beating once in office. A few have taken the Reagan comparison further, pointing out that once people start getting jobs again Obama will likely follow in Reagan's footsteps picking up popularity points as well. Given the record of our Oval Office leaders since the days of Ike, barring a Watergate or military quagmire, Obama should indeed be putting all his bets on more jobs. It could, indeed, still be the economy, stupid.