1.
Want
to disengage from world affairs
2.
Reluctant
to have the
3.
Oppose
multilateralism
4.
Do
not want to make altruistic sacrifices
1.
Support
for "active involvement” unchanged
2.
Belief
in multilateralism and UN strong
3.
Highly
supportive of foreign aid
1.
polls
are worthless
2.
I
don't believe it
3.
hypothetical
opinions differ from actual choices
1.
Congress
listens to the vocal public, not public opinion
2.
Activist
groups are still committed to other policies (vocal public)
3.
Intensity
of public not strong v. intensity of activists
4.
Media
sees Congress as 'mirror' of public opinion
5.
Bias
of anecdotal evidence
6.
Already
believe the public is ignorant
7.
Many
officials and FPIG hold different views that public
8.
Genuine
isolationists like the myth
1.
Conventional
wisdom: public opposition to high casualties led to the pullout
2.
While
the public favored withdrawals when administration & Congress did, they
continued to approve of the mission in general.
3.
Major
drops in support for the missions occurred before the
4.
1.
Public
is 'moody'
2.
Lacks
consistent or structured beliefs
1.
Volatile
public finding was incorrect
2.
Public
has consistent preferences; stable views; responsive in consistent ways
3.
Public
opinion is collectively stable, structured and responsive to information
Public
support was strong in 1965-67, with a majority favoring
But
support was equally strong to turn the ground war over to SV with: 71% favoring
this in Nov 1966, 73% in April 1967, 77%in Feb 1968
(after Tet Offensive)
A
majority did not favor immediate withdrawal.
1.
"Don't
Know's" are common
2.
Those
polled often lack basic facts:
In 1964, in
one poll, only 38% of people knew that the
In
1980s, it took almost 2 years before a majority of those polled knew that the
3.
Cognitive
Misers; no need to accumulate information
4.
Responds
to international changes:
After the
outbreak the Korean War in June 1950, a majority v. a minority of the public
favored rearming
5.
Take
cues from experts to form opinions
1.
JFK,
LBJ, RMN all developed increasingly extensive polling operations
2.
By
Nixon, over 233 private polls were conducted costing $3.9 million (1994
dollars)
3.
Evidence
of impact on policy is still mixed; little direct evidence that LBJ followed
polls as opposed to expert advise
1.
Once
Nixon began withdrawals, data shows that a 1% rise in opinion that withdrawal
was too slow yielded an increase (488 more) in troops witdrawn a month later.
2.
Study
of
For every
1% change in support for (or opposition to) increased spending there is about a
$0.33 billion increase (or decrease) in defense spending.
1.
Do
politicians ‘read’ public opinion? Does Congress create pressure on executive via
responses to ‘loud’ constituents
2.
Are
gov official responding to the same trends that
public observes (e.g., increase in Soviet defense spending prompted rise in US
spending)
3.
Matters
for understanding the CNN Effect:
-
is public interest generating gov.
response?
-
or is media generating public interest?
-
does media create public interest, or reflect what
public prefers?
-
is gov. anticipating change in
4. Little
evidence that CNN effect exists
- gov action precedes media coverage
-
media follows gov't role
-
public attention increases with media coverage, and
observers draw a spurious correlation
1.
Realists
believe that president had an obligation to lead the public in supporting
foreign policy endeavors.
2.
Without
such leadership, support for
3.
Example:
JFK sought to lead the public during his 1960 presidential campaign to support
foreign aid; used polls to assemble package of programs that public would
respond to favorably.
1.
In
1964, before the
2.
Only
7% of Americans supported
3.
69%
of the public opposed
1.
President's
job approval ratings tend to improve following a use of force
2.
Public
is "pretty prudent" about the use of force
*
One study looking at 38 uses of force and so-called displays of force between
1950 and 1988 found that the rally effect was stronger when the intervention was intended to deter or restrain
actions by another state than when the intervention was aimed at altering
internal conditions in another country.
*
The study found that when a use of force was reported on the front page of The
New York Times the presidential approval rating rose 6% more than when the
event was inside the paper.
*
The relatively slight effect was evidence that the public "pretty
prudent" about presidential uses of force.
*
An early study found that the higher a president's approval ratings, the more
likely the president was to use force.
*
Others found that poor economic indicators predict presidential use of force.
In the 1949-1994 period, Reps presidents were more likely
to use force when unemployment was high and Dems when
inflation was high. Other studies have confirmed the role of unemployment,
especially.
1.
Because
of information asymmetries and secrecy, president can withhold information or
mislead the public to gain support behind policies
2.
LBJ
fails to disclose all facts around the
3.
During the 1990-91 Gulf War, Bush adm
found that public was very concerned about possibility that
4.
Clinton
Administration twice used force timed near politically embarrassing events:
Aug
98 Airstrikes
Following
the
Dec.
98 Airstrikes