Sam Abrams

Sam Abrams 5/20/01

Retrospective Voting Project Dr. Fiorina

Each time I've given the talk when I get to the analogy regressions I think
that this isn't the best way to look at the question of whether voters
still give as much credit to politicians for economic performance and
whether Gore got as much credit for the administration's performance as
previous candidates.

On reflection I think the 2-equation procedure I used in RV may be better.
Sam let's do three series of regressions:

1-2. Regress presidential approval (approve/disapprove) on the two party ID
dummies and the two economic performance dummies. This will indicate
whether there's been any erosion in people's linkage of economic
performance to the president. (do this series for everyone, then repeat
for voters only).

2. Then regress vote (two-party) on party ID and presidential approval
only. This will indicate whether Gore got as much credit for
administration performance as previous candidates.

Clinton has the lowest Presidential Performance “Approval” coefficient in the last 8 Presidential Elections
	Presidential Performance- Approval	Significance
1972	.562	.000
1976	.428	.000
1980	.424	.000
1984	.535	.000
1988	.366	.000
1992	.373	.000
1996	.462	.000
2000	.313	.000

Better Economic Conditions
	Complete Sample	Significance	Voters Only	Significance
1972	.004461	.888	.009828	.783
1976	.07509	.005	.06183	.057
1980	-.0537	.436	-.0626	.457
1984	.156	.000	.127	.000
1988	.09912	.000	.07880	.008
1992	.02536	.555	.02120	.671
1996	.136	.000	.148	.000
2000	.07574	.001	.08146	.002

Worse Economic Conditions
	Complete Sample	Significance	Voters Only	Significance
1972	-.125	.007	-.119	.028
1976	-.147	.000	-.157	.000
1980	-.229	.000	-.192	.000
1984	-.214	.000	-.219	.000
1988	-.150	.000	-.147	.000
1992	-.214	.000	-.199	.000
1996	-.177	.000	-.154	.000
2000	-.116	.000	-.102	.005