OBAMA HEADING INTO SECOND STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS: AN ASSESSMENT

As Obama heads into his second state of the union address, we'd like to reflect on Obama's first two years as president and prejudge the tea-leaf-reading what will inevitably surround the State of the Union Address today.

Obama's first two years, from a polling perspective: According to Gallup, by far the best source for polling numbers more than a decade old, Obama's average job approval rating is 46% over the last three months. This is up from his quarterly nadir of 44.7% last quarter-in fact, Obama has recently been posting some of his best job approval rating since 2009, and Gallup's three-day rolling average has him at 51% approve / 42% disapprove as of Jan 17-19. Where does Obama's 46% average for the eighth quarter stack up against previous presidents over the same time period?

·         Ahead of Obama:Kennedy (75%), Eisenhower (65%), G. W. Bush, (64%), G. H. W. Bush, (63%), Nixon (55%), Carter (49%).

·         Behind Obama: Clinton (44%), Reagan (41%)

So Obama is behind the curve, as far as Gallup's numbers go. But does it mean anything? A couple points: 

1)      Everyone's a critic in the Information Age. Average eighth-quarter job approval for presidents before 1980 (the year CNN went on the air): 61%. Average eighth-quarter job approval of presidents since 1980: 52%.

2)      Second-year job approval numbers have no statistical relation to reelection. Average eighth-quarter job approval of presidents who won reelection: 54%. Average job approval of those who didn't: 56%. Notably, the two presidents with the worst eighth-quarter job approval rating (Clinton and Reagan) went on to win in relative walks, while only Eisenhower won handily of the three highest-rated that stood for reelection (the Bushes went 1-1, one of them going down big and the other winning in a dogfight). There's a lot of time between January 2011 and November 2012.

3)      High unemployment exacerbated Reagan's problems in his second year, and dropping unemployment rates boosted his reelection campaign. There are some potential parallels between Reagan and Obama in this data. The unemployment rate went from a high of 10.8% in December 1982 (the last month of Reagan's eighth quarter) down to 7.4% in October 1984, the month before he was reelected. The link between the economy and presidential reelection has been well explored in other places.

4)      As if we needed further evidence, polling is the body politic's drug du jour: In the first two years of every president's term since Eisenhower (not including Obama), Gallup conducted 197 polls, an average of 24.6 polls per president. George W. Bush was the most-polled president at 46 polls. In Obama's first two years? 347 polls, almost twice the other nine presidents combined over the same time span. Furthermore, organizations besides Gallup have released an additional 20 public polls of Obama's job performance since January 1, according to Pollster.com.

State of the Union polling: what does it all mean, if anything? The State of the Union is of course an important event that allows the President to set his agenda for the year in front of Congress and the American people. However, we can expect a barrage of polling and related coverage next week that overhypes and misinterprets the speech's impact. Here's what we really know about State of the Union speeches:

1)      There is typically no "State of the Union" bump. Again, Gallup has pretty good historical data, and it shows no real change in a President's job approval after the state of the union in almost every case. Over the last 31 years while Gallup has been tracking this data, the President's job approval has gone down an average of 0.03%--obviously well­ within the margin of error. The only notable exceptions are George W. Bush in 2005 (6 point improvement) and Clinton in 1996 (6 point improvement) and 1998 (10 point improvement).

2)      With that said, a substantial number of people tune in for the speech. Last year, the address averaged more than 48 million viewers-for comparison, about 125 million voters voted in the 2008 presidential election, with just under 67 million of them voting for Obama. Next Tuesday, President Obama will have one of the largest public audiences of his presidency-the speech's agenda-setting ability is far more important than its ability to boost the President's numbers.

3)      The public supports a physical as well as political crossing of the aisle during the speech. According to CNN, Americans strongly support Senator Mark Udall's (D-CO) idea to end the middle school dance  style seating of the State of the Union and make the Democrats and Republicans sit next to each other. Seventy two percent of voters think parties should sit next to each other (PDF) while only 22% think they should sit on opposite sides of the room. Most likely to support the separation: conservatives (36%), and Republicans (38%), Tea Party supporters (37%), and men (27%).

OTHER NEWS

Bodyguards for Congressmen: A recent CBS News poll found the public is split 48%-45% on whether members of Congress should be provided with bodyguards.

Voters not supportive of Republican policies, prefer Obama's direction: Pew finds voters generally unsupportive of the policies of Republicans in Congress 43%-34%. Independents disapprove by a 45%-30% margin. Voters also want to go in Obama's direction rather than the direction of Republicans in Congress 44%-35%.

Americans do not want to repeal the health care law: According a CBS/New York Times poll,By a 48%-40% margin Americans would rather keep the health care law than repeal it. Independents favor keeping it 45%-38%. Furthermore, only half of those voters who want repeal (20% of the electorate) want a full repeal of the bill, and only 52% of repeal supporters (21% of the electorate) want the bill repealed if it means insurers don't have to cover people with preexisting conditions, which was the case in the repeal bill Republicans passed through the House of Representatives last week.

So you thought Sarah Palin's numbers had nowhere to go but up: Sarah Palin's numbers are at an all-time low, according to CBS News and the New York Times-57% of voters are unfavorable towards her, compared with only 19% who are favorable towards her.

China now viewed as the most dangerous country to the United States: Pewalsofinds that voters are more worried about China than any othercountry. Twenty percent rate it the most dangerous nation to the US, putting it roughly even with North Korea (18%) and above Iran (12%) and all other nations. This is the first time since 9/11 that voters have told Pew China is our biggest threat. Unsurprisingly, people worry more about China due to its economic strength (60% of voters) than its military strength (27%). In fact, 47% of voters call China the world's leading economic power, compared to 27% who say the USA. The USA had a 41%-30% lead on the measure as recently as February, 2008. For reference, the USA has about 150% the GDP of China when measured by Purchasing Power Parity and 235% the GDP of China when measured by official exchange rates.

Asia more important to US voters than Europe: Perhaps due to this perceived threat from China, for the first time voters now see economic and military ties with Asian nations as more important to the US than they do the same ties with Europe by a 47%-37% plurality. In September 2001, Europe held a 44%-34% lead on the measure.