The Public Presidency and Disciplinary Presumptions

Abstract

The tendency of well-developed research fields to overtill is well known; a corresponding challenge is the tendency to misunderstand or misapply that research by scholars plowing different plots. The mistaken or incomplete interpretation of research on the public presidency presents a particularly egregious case of poor harvesting. Although political observers and scholars outside the public presidency field project "going public" as a highly influential weapon, scholars in the field converge on modest expectations in which presidential promotions have limited, selective, and conditional effects. This pattern is illustrated through content analyses of Barack Obama's speeches and the media's coverage of them. The findings correspond with the expectations of the public presidency field: Obama conducted extensive public promotions of his signature legislative accomplishment-health reform-and his efforts failed to move media coverage, public opinion, or the legislative process. As research on the public presidency expands its scope and reach, there is a growing opportunity to correct its misapplications and, more positively, to build an unusually diverse research community that spans political theory and the social sciences.

LordBryce's Curse: The Costs of Presidential Heroism and the Hope of Deliberative Incrementalism

“…The thrust of recent research on the effects of presidential promotions generally confirms their marginal effects and the limits of White House efforts to mold Americans to fit their needs (Jacobs ). George Edwards enjoys the distinction of both helping to launch the “public presidency” field () and documenting its ineffectiveness in manufacturing the public preferences or higher approval ratings that the White House seeks (, , ).…”

The Contested Politics of Public Value

“…President Obama made regular and extensive public promotions of health reform starting in 2009, but the media only reported a fraction of speeches on reform, and when they did, the information conveyed to Americans tended to avoid substance in favor of political maneuvering. When Obama's messages did reach Americans, they were effectively countered by those of his opponents (Jacobs ).…”

Opposition to the Theory ofPresidentialRepresentation:Federalists,Whigs, andRepublicans

“…Although students of the presidency have made tremendous headway in understanding presidential representation in partisan terms, there is still much work to be done. In a recent article published in Presidential Studies Quarterly , Lawrence Jacobs () surveyed the research on the linkage between the president and the public and concluded not only that the subject was still “undertilled” but also that its study would be enhanced by “cross‐field” research, particularly, but not exclusively, with reference to political theory.…”