Factors Influencing the Evaluation of President Obama - Dissertation Example

 Factors Influencing the Evaluation of President Obama Introduction Elections are democratically recognized worldwide as a standard way of ensuring proper representation. Therefore after and before every election, candidates are often subjected to scrutiny. Mature democracies like the United States have usually based their decisions for evaluation of the leaders on issues like the economy, healthcare and other social welfare issues. When the president came to power after a George Bush’s reign in the year 2008, the country was hopeful of a brighter future. The resounding victory of the democratic candidate at that time was a vote of confidence on the president’s vision for the people of America and beyond. Many critics have pointed out that the president’s first term saw him renege on some of his promises and especially on the economy that has struggled to recover from the post war downfall. In the recently concluded United States elections, the country was highly divided on several issues making the contest so scathing that polls were not able to clearly predict who the next president was. The president carried the day after a long fight and given the mandate to guide the country for four more years as the Democratic Party faithful like to say. However, the divisive nature of the elections cannot be overlooked and without a strategy of outwitting the opponent, the president might have lost at the ballot. It is therefore important to examine the areas of evaluation that the president may score highly or lowly depending on the various categories of issues in the public domain. This paper looks at the various determinants or influencing factors that are a subject of the presidents’ performance evaluation. They are presented in the form of independent variables that may be influenced with other factors. The proposed variables shall be that of party identification, Economy, Education, Gender and Race. Through the use of regression analysis, the paper will analyze the weight of the various variables. Relevant literature concerning the evaluation of president Obama will also be looked at with a view of providing an overview of the interplay of the various factors of evaluation. The results will be presented and, finally, conclusions arrived at. Literature Review Life evaluation trends have been fast changing over the years with the great economic turbulence experienced in the nation (Newport 5). The issue of economy has taken the center stage in the way citizens evaluate the president’s performance especially with many Americans using income as a gauge. Another issue that has been on top priority is that of politics and that is where party affiliation or Party ID comes in. The way Democrats asses the economy is usually different with how their Republican counterparts may see it and therefore, it is possible for one side to disapprove or approve the president on other matters simply because of his party affiliation. The president’s track record has been relayed by various surveys and polls conducted by various organizations apart from expert opinions on some issues also taking the center stage of several media platforms. It is essential that proper methods of evaluation are used and the use of scientific methods like regression analysis is important. According to the Gallup approval rating poll of 2010, a year after the president came into power, the approval ratings by Democrats was at 84% with that of Republicans at 14% showing a great disparity in how the members of the two parties are likely to evaluate the president. Race has been a major historical issue in the United States and most laws on human rights came as a result of the struggle to eliminate racial prejudice (Charles, Gerken and Kang 2). Figures indicate that in October 2010 there was a big disparity in the way different racial groups held varying opinions on the performance of President Obama. Four out of five black Americans accounting for 78% gave the president a rating of 8 or even higher. On the other hand, a dismal 27% of whites gave the same rating as their black counterparts. Actually, on average the whites showed a mean rating of 4.5 for the president at that time compared with 8.4 for African Americans and a more positive rating of 5.7 for other categories of racial groups in the country (Gallup Poll 1-4). The results have been on a steady path with consistency of the same showing in other more recent surveys. For instance, over five weeks of polling by the Gallup group between the 4th of April and the 8th of May in the year 2011, Obama’s approval rating averaged 38% for whites compared with 59% for nonwhites including 85% for African Americans. Gender, like other factors, has equally remained a great determinant or influencing factor in the way the president’s performance has been evaluated. Statistics of the recent two elections show that the president convincingly won the women votes against his rivals especially among the Hispanic and black women. Indications are that Hispanic women noted for Obama on 76-23 basis thereby giving him a margin of victory close to 53 points. On the other hand, the African-American women went for the president on a 96-3 percent basis point reflecting a massive 93 percent approval points. A combination of these results with those of the white women in the nation therefore translates to an equally massive gap of a ten-point margin in gender. Even though the youth have continually favored the president, their support for him is said to vary with the areas of gender and race, ranging from 98% among Black women to 41% among White men. The president seemingly has been favored by the highly educated citizens more than others. It is also important to note that the factors mentioned above may not singly influence the president’s evaluation but have been the major influencing ones during decision making periods. The research will use the various poll results to ascertain the reality behind the hypotheses using analytical tools such as regression analysis. Hypotheses The main hypotheses for this study are as follows: • Hypothesis One: Respondents affiliated with the Democratic Party are more likely to positively influence the approval ratings of President Obama. • Hypothesis Two: Respondents from Hispanic and African American origin are likely to approve of the president’s record compared to their White counterparts. It is expected that respondents who support the president’s party will stand with him on most issues of decision making like the economy, healthcare, education among others and therefore positively evaluate his performance. Moreover, another expected outcome is that of the racial alignment where the Hispanic and African American origin respondents are bound to favor the president’s track record more than the Whites. These hypotheses are in line with the reviewed literature and the various polling statistics that have been published in the past. If these indications are anything to go by, it is evident that the Democratic Party members who have strongly opposed the president’s stance and attacked his performance record have an uphill task to convince this category of voters. Other hypotheses may include the indication that other variables are likely to positively influence the evaluation of the president’s performance record. Data and Methods The data employed for analysis in this paper was mainly acquired from the Gallup poll results on the various issues of evaluation in the period ranging from the last election of the year 2008 to the recently concluded elections. The sample size is 216 and the total numbers of variables involved are five as mentioned earlier. This survey is well suited for the purpose of determining the purpose of this paper because of various reasons. The major significance of this study is to provide the measures of support for the core dependent variables that play during decision making on the Election Day and before that. Moreover, this survey looks at the key issues of the general public welfare which form the basic issue of the society we live in and can be important for policy makers on either side of the political divide. Regression analysis is the main scientific method used in data evaluation. The dependent variable is Obama’s record of performance also referred to as the Obama thermometer. The independent variables are the five mentioned issue of economy, gender, race, education and party identity. Their relative influence on the independent variable shall be measured in terms of the coefficients and standard coefficients of variations among other valuation tools. There are a total of five dependent variables that have been used in this analysis. The first measures whether the respondents are mostly affiliated to the Democratic or Republican parties. This is a dichotomous variable, with a value of 0 signifying opposition to the association with the president’s political party and integers above zero signifying support for president Obama’s party ideologies. The second variable ascertains whether the respondents who positively rate the president are mostly male or female. This is a dichotomous variable, with a value of 0 signifying disapproval of the president’s ideals and performance whereas integers above zero signifying support for president Obama’s performance record by either gender. The same dichotomy is used in the third, fourth and fifth variables of the survey. The third variable measures the extent to which race has been a factor in the evaluation of the president’s performance record as adjudged by various economic and social issues of the general public’s interest as well as national issues. The fourth examines the extent to which the president’s records of dealing with economic issues have been viewed by the respondents. Finally, the fifth variable measures the how the respondents feel levels of formal education have either improved or otherwise. The first independent variable of focus indicates how the various respondents are aligned in relation to party affiliation either to the side of democrats or the side of republican political groupings. Respondents were asked whether they considered themselves as republicans or democrats. Their answers were coded from 0 to 10, with less than 0 or more closer to 0 than to 10 indicating that most respondents were affiliated to one party than the other. A more positive deviation indicates affiliation to the president’s party and the opposite means less people associate with the party or is likely to be associated with the Republican Party. Suppose the value is around, say 5.5 to 6.5, then it can be said that there is a split or an almost split by the respondents’ sentiments on the various issues of the evaluation of the track record of president Obama. The other variables were given the same treatment and assigned the same role in their different categories as was done with the first variable. The respondents who indicated their approval or reservations were ultimately grouped in their respective categories before their data was weighted against the constants and results produced in the respective categories. The analysis depended on regression analysis and the ‘Obama thermometer’ was used as the evaluation index for the different areas of interest in this paper. Against a sample of 216 respondents, the universal result was attained and presented in the tables. Results Table 1: number of variables and the number of cases used Number of Variables : 5 Number of Cases : 216 As stated earlier in this essay, the total number of variables was five that included the various categories of evaluation like the economy, party identity, gender, race and educational levels. The number of cases, N; was 216 that represents the sample size for the survey. Table 2 shows that the standard error of estimation is at 17.104 according to the method used to determine the effect of the independent variables on the dependent variables. This means that the results relayed have a margin of error that may at that level since the data relied on was from previous polls. The polls used were a collection of surveys done over the monthly periods that accumulated in the stated period of focus under the survey’s analysis. Table 2: Error of estimation Dependent Variable Obama thermometer N 216 Multiple R 0.857 Squared Multiple R 0.735 Adjusted Squared Multiple R 0.729 Standard Error of Estimate 17.104 The letter, ‘N’ presents the number of cases under survey. The level of error in estimation was therefore ascertained using the number with reference to the universal population. This is indicative of the number picked from the overall population but for the purposes of this survey, it did not significantly affect the overall outcome. The Obama thermometer is the measure of how the president has faired in on when the proposed variables are put into play as derived from the polls focused on by the survey. Table 3: The independent variables estimation Effect Coefficient Standard Error Std. Coefficient Tolerance t p-value CONSTANT 37.203 3.923 0.000 . 9.483 0.000 Do you consider yourself to be a republican or democrat? 23.926 2.893 0.364 0.651 8.269 0.000 What is your gender? 9.035 2.363 0.138 0.971 3.824 0.000 Would you describe your race as white or African-American? 18.358 3.296 0.222 0.796 5.570 0.000 Thinking about the economy in the country as a whole, would you say it has been good? -28.684 3.075 -0.433 0.586 -9.329 0.000 Level of formal Education 0.085 1.473 0.002 0.926 0.058 0.954 The results above demonstrate that a respondent’s level of approval towards the presidents’ evaluation on the various issues has been highly split to both negative and positives. The significant positive coefficient operating on most of the variables except that of the economy is indicative of the overall positive approval and therefore qualifies the variables as the major determinants of evaluation. Suppose other variables are held constant, respondents who are more positive to the presidents’ party and other issue of national interest gauged by the study exceed those who disapprove the performance record of president Obama with the gap at narrow levels. In addition, the significant positive coefficient operating on the president’s democratic party is and indication that when the other variables are held constant, most respondents approve the values and ideals of the republican party and are therefore proud to be associated with it by seeing themselves to be more democrats than republicans. The coefficient for economy is negative and significant, indicating that most respondents felt that the overall nation’s economy was not favorable to them for various reasons that may include income levels, taxes levied, prices of basic commodities and the availability of jobs among other indicators. The coefficient for level of education seems to be closer to the zero value, which maybe indicative of how the respondents were deeply divided on the issue. The tolerance level of the issue is however high which may indicate that the respondents were optimistic that the situation may change depending on other factors that they might have observed. This may be because of the various policy issues that may be affecting the respondents or that there are many issues that they feel need to be addressed. Gender also a reaches statistical significance, which indicates that women are more likely than men to support the policies of the president or positively evaluate the president’s record in several issues as opposed to their male counterparts who are more pessimistic. These results may be consistent with those of other surveys carried out by several pollsters in the United States that indicate a massive support for the president by women voters and the youth who collectively refer to themselves as ‘the league’. The percentage of males who are to the side of the president is significantly lower as compared to that of their female counterparts. This might be attributed to the background of the group that may be associated to their level of optimism that the president may be the best bet in tackling their issues as opposed to other leaders in the other political party’s side. The coefficients for African-American and whites are also statistically significant. In fact, it remains one of the highest when considering the relative value attached to other variables in the area of coefficients. This illustrates that these groups’ level of support is more positively related in terms of how they view the president’s performance and therefore they may contribute to the positive ratings of the Obama thermometer that is an evaluation index for the president. All the variables have remarkably positive standard coefficients except that of the economy. This is indicative of how the economy has been a major influencing factor in the evaluation of the president. It is almost certain that the two sides of the divide in overall agree that the nation’s economy needs improvement. In general, the analysis of the various variables indicates that when the variables are summed up universally, the president is still positively rated. However, analysis of the variables picked also show that they may not be individually said to be the determinants of the evaluation of the president and may also vary depending on other factors. The majority of the variables, that is, four out of the possible five in terms of relative coefficients, are positively stated. This shows that the respondents have a collective agreement when the whole issues of evaluation are summed up. Conclusion Assessment of the president depends on interplay of factors that may be of social, economic and cultural biding. In addition, there are various factors that come into focus during such analysis because the categories of respondents maybe in terms of political party diehards, progressives and realistic evaluators who look at all the factors. The latter means of evaluation is ideally the best form of evaluation that may relay the true picture of the reality in factual and scientific terms of how the president might be fairing on the various issues of national interest. Countless events have obviously influenced the answer to the question of evaluation like the conduct of opponent and the relative policy advocacy. The re-election cannot therefore mean that the president enjoys the exclusive confidence and therefore mandate of the people through high approval ratings. The findings of the survey reveal that the respondents almost agree on the issue of a staggering economy. This therefore requires the attention of the president and his advisers because the results may also reveal why the election was described as ‘too close to call’. The fact that the respondents have shown a highly negative coefficient in the analysis is clear evidence of the deeply rooted belief that the economy should still be better than it was during the time of the survey. It is also the major and single most career denting issue that the president therefore faces. Apart from the polls conducted by several organizations, there are other factors like history, electoral calendar, national trend among others that may influence how evaluation is going to be done and it is for this reason that the margin of error is relatively high in this survey. Another observation made is that the issues are rather a collective influencer of performance evaluation than being sole movers in the issue even though some issues like party identity and the economy may have more weight compared to others. It is therefore important that the findings of this survey be taken seriously. There are two obvious extensions to type of scientific survey presented in this paper. First, it can be applied to ascertain the evaluation criteria of other political leadership records like that of governors and senators in the different states and counties of the United States and therefore not only applicable to presidential candidates. Secondly, it would apply to other types of organizations in terms of how their leaders are evaluated using different variables like employee motivation, financial success, accountability and other factors that are determinants of their performance. It is therefore important to note that this survey may act as a model for other leadership areas. Works Cited Charles, Guy-Uriel, Gerken, Heather and Kang, Michael. Race, Reform and Regulation of the Electoral Process: Reccuring Puzzles in American Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print Gallup Poll. “Obama’s Evaluation in Various Issues.” Gallup, Inc., 2012. Web. 9th Dec 2012. http://www.gallup.com/poll/154559/us-presidential-election-center.aspx Newport, Frank. “The Gallup poll: Public Opinion 2010.” New York: Gallup Publications, 2011. Print Read More