Yes, the bully pulpit can shift public opinion
by David Atkins
There has been a debate raging among political science and academic circles over whether presidential rhetoric has any real power over public opinion. The new commonly held theory is that bully pulpit statements have no real effect on legislation or public opinion.
On the legislation point, I tend to agree. Interests in Congress tend to be so entrenched that presidential speeches urging Congress to do one thing or another don't make that much difference to how legislators will vote. The President could talk about the benefits of single-payer healthcare every single day and it probably wouldn't budge a single legislator from their previously held position.
But on public opinion, the picture is much less clear, but the recent shift in perceptions of marriage equality after Barack Obama's statements in favor of it do seem to indicate that poll numbers can be shifted by the power of presidnetial rhetoric. :Digby wrote earlier on this same subject, and I tend to strongly agree with her. The notion that the rhetoric of powerful and visible people doesn't influence opinion is too bizarre and flies in the face of thousands of years of recorded history. Still, the data isn't wholly conclusive for recent Presidnential history. Scott Lemieux of Lawyers, Guns and Money has a somewhat skeptical take:
Well, let’s consider this. The Post has the trends in the data online (Question 23). In terms of support for SSM, there’s…nothing. 53% support it after Obama’s interview; 52% in March; 51% in July 2011; 53% in March 2011. There’s no evidence of any effect at all. So as the headline suggests, the evidence for the power of the BULLY PULPIT would have to be in the reduced opposition, which did drop from 43% to 39% between March and May. But particularly given the longer-term trend — opposition was 55% in 2004, 50% as recently as 2010 — this is pretty weak evidence. The 4 point drop in opposition might reflect an effect from Obama’s speech, but it also might reflect statistical noise combined with longer-term trends favoring same-sex marriage. The fact that support didn’t increase is further reason to be skeptical.
Of course, this one data point hardly disproves the theory that Obama’s support will have some effect. It’s possible that this could, like foreign policy, be an exception to the rule that presidential rhetoric doesn’t influence public opinion. Since what matters here is the position-taking, at least believing that there will be some effects doesn’t require transparently implausible theories about the electorate paying close attention to the details of presidential speeches (when even professional BULLY PULPIT obsessives can’t remember the details of presidential speeches.) Nonetheless, as a general rule using the bully pulpit can’t sway public opinion, so I won’t believe that Obama’s interview will significantly increase support for same-sex marriage unless the data clearly shows otherwise. As of now, it doesn’t; hopefully Amanda and Digby will be proven right in the future.
In the comments there, David Mizner points out what I think will become obvious:
There’s polling evidence suggesting that President Obama’s position is swaying opinion among African-Americans.
The increase in support toward gay marriage was mainly fueled by increasing support for it among African Americans, who now narrowly support the issue 42 percent to 41 percent. In their November survey, Public Policy Polling found that black voters overwhelmingly opposed gay marriage 52 percent to 34 percent.
This change in support among black voters reflects similar findings in North Carolina. After President Barack Obama publicly announced his support of gay marriage, Public Policy Polling found that 27 percent of black voters supported gay marriage, up from 20 percent in a May 6 poll taken three days before President Obama made his announcement.
This is a pretty specific case for several reasons and could be an exception that proves the rule, but the movement seems to be real. He’s also inspired others — Colin Powell, Jim Clyburn, and Steny Hoyer — to come out of the closet. I wouldn’t be surprised if history books treated President Obama’s step as a Pivotal Event.
I don't see how it could be perceived otherwise.
.