Although I generally stay away from domestic politics on this blog, I've been asked in several interviews and talks about the domestic ramifications of strategic manhunts. At ForeignPolicy.com, Scott Clement has an interesting analysis of the effect of strategic manhunts on Presidential popularity.
Clement finds that successful strategic manhunts (i.e. bin Laden, Saddam, Noriega) only produce a temporary rise in approval for Presidents, which quickly dissipates as the public moves on to other issues. The data also suggests that "Americans don't necessarily punish a president for failing to track down an archnemesis," citing George W. Bush being favored over John Kerry by more than 20 points in September 2004 when it came to trust on handling terrorism despite Senator Kerry's attempt to make Bush's failure to kill/capture Osama bin Laden a key theme of his presidential campaign. (I would be interested to see what the data on Clinton towards the end of the failed Aideed manhunt was . . . )
In the end, although killing bin Laden may inoculate President Obama somewhat by making Americans feel safer from terrorism, Clement concludes that "The Harsh reality of taking down bogeymen is that once they've been removed from action, Americans may turn to judge the president on other issues. As with Bush in 1992, Obama's 2012 fate hinges on how voters think he's handling the economy, not his vanquishing of America's most despised enemy."
No comments:
Post a Comment