[22nd General Election Research Series] Presidential Approval Ratings and the 22nd National Assembly Election

1. Introduction

The 22nd National Assembly election was held in the second year of President Yoon Suk-yeol's term, functioning as a mid-term election. Considering that the period for strong policy momentum for a president is typically limited to the first two to three years, securing a majority in the National Assembly was an essential primary goal for the ruling party to ensure the success of their administration. Under a National Assembly dominated by the opposition (yeoso-yadae), the Yoon Suk-yeol administration had failed to pass even one-third of the bills submitted to the National Assembly during its first two years (Kim Dong-won 2024). If the existing parliamentary structure persisted, the president could have faced the remainder of his term in a 'lame-duck' state.

Mid-term national elections carry a strong character of judgment on the government's performance over the preceding two years, placing the president and the ruling party in a disadvantageous position. This was particularly true as President Yoon Suk-yeol's approval ratings rarely exceeded 40% throughout his term. Consequently, the election concluded with the pro-government bloc securing 193 seats, resulting in a yeoso-yadae configuration.

However, empirical analysis seems necessary to determine if presidential approval ratings had an absolute impact on the election outcome. This is because other factors clearly had room to operate during the election campaign, beyond the 'judgment on the president' narrative. The opposition's candidate nomination process, negative perceptions of opposition leaders, and the strenuous efforts of the ruling party's interim leader, Han Dong-hoon, might have offset the impact of the judgment on the government. Furthermore, looking back at past elections, mid-term elections have not always resulted in unfavorable outcomes for the ruling party, necessitating an empirical examination of the extent of the president's approval rating's influence. Some evaluations suggest that the ruling party's candidate nominations or campaign strategies negatively impacted their seat acquisition.

Considering the various factors that may have influenced the election results, it is crucial to examine whether presidential approval ratings effectively impacted voters' choices in this general election, or if other factors during the campaign period were more significant. If presidential approval ratings independently influence voters' choices, even after accounting for party support and favorability towards key politicians, it would clearly indicate that voters' retrospective voting or their earnest desire for the president to change his policy direction was directly reflected in this election. However, this alone does not provide a specific understanding of voter preferences in this election. Therefore, it is necessary to examine which factors shaped the narrative of judgment concerning the president's policies.

This report will first examine the extent to which presidential approval ratings influenced voters' choices in this election. Additionally, it will further explore what voter attitudes are reflected in the presidential approval ratings. This includes not only negative national issues that became prominent during the election but also voters' evaluations of the president's attitude in his relationship with the National Assembly, as it is believed that evaluations of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration's governing style, in addition to specific issues, were reflected in the judgment narrative. These evaluations will help understand how the current administration should interpret the will of the voters expressed in this election and in what direction governance should change to increase positive evaluations and overcome the challenges of a yeoso-yadae during the remaining term.

2. Distribution of Presidential Approval Ratings

In the EAI 22nd General Election Survey, participants were asked to rate President Yoon Suk-yeol's job performance on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 represented 'very poorly' and 10 represented 'very well,' with 5 being 'average.' The results showed that 65.58% of respondents rated the performance as 'poor' (0-4 points), while only 22.12% rated it as 'good' (6-10 points), indicating that negative evaluations were three times more prevalent than positive ones. The average score was 3.18. A notable aspect of the response distribution was that the 'very poorly' (0 points) category had the highest proportion at 27.09%, and even among those who responded 'good,' the intensity of positive evaluation remained weak.

<Figure 1> Distribution of Presidential Approval Ratings (0=Very Poor, 10=Very Good)

These ratings for President Yoon Suk-yeol's performance can be compared with similar variables surveyed in the third year of the Moon Jae-in administration in 2020. In a survey of 2,500 individuals in 2020, the average score for President Moon Jae-in's job performance was 5.41. While 34.48% responded 'poorly,' 51.64% responded 'well' (Korean Political Science Association, 2020).[1]In comparison, President Yoon Suk-yeol's job performance ratings can be considered significantly low. Regarding the distribution, 10.04% of respondents rated President Moon Jae-in's performance as 'very poorly,' whereas 13.76% gave a score of 7, 13.04% gave 8, and 9.36% gave 10, showing a contrasting pattern. While these ratings may not be absolute scores for each administration's policies, considering voters' subjective evaluations, if presidential approval ratings had a significant impact on the mid-term election, they could serve as a crucial clue to understanding the contrasting outcomes for the ruling party in the 2020 and 2024 general elections.

<Figure 2> Ideological Groups and Presidential Approval Ratings (0=Very Poor, 10=Very Good)

When respondents are divided by ideological groups and party support groups, the current presidential approval ratings become clearer: individuals who identify as conservative or do not support the People Power Party are highly unlikely to evaluate the president's performance positively. Even considering the ideological and partisan biases reflected in voters' evaluations of the president, the opposition from groups that disagree with the president's policy direction is notably strong. Among supporters of the Cho Kuk Innovation Party, the average presidential approval rating (1.03 points) was lower than that among supporters of the Democratic Party of Korea (1.57 points), suggesting a potential concentration of opposition sentiment towards the president among Cho Kuk Innovation Party supporters. This indicates that the existence of the Cho Kuk Innovation Party, founded about a month before the general election, may have acted as a disadvantageous factor for the ruling party.

<Figure 3> Party Support and Presidential Approval Ratings (0=Very Poor, 10=Very Good)

While conservative voters and People Power Party supporters generally gave higher presidential approval ratings, the intensity of positive evaluations was not high compared to the opposition. Among conservative voters, the average job performance rating was 5.08 points, and among People Power Party supporters, it was 5.74 points. This implies that even within groups likely to be the president's support base, the average evaluation of the president's job performance was around 'average.' Considering that the average ratings among centrists and unaffiliated voters were 3.08 and 2.66 points, respectively, it is evident that even among groups not influenced by ideological or partisan biases, the evaluation of the president was quite harsh.

Overall, President Yoon Suk-yeol's job performance ratings showed significantly strong negative evaluations and weak positive evaluations. The stark contrast between the high negative ratings from those with different ideologies and party affiliations and the low positive ratings from those within the 'in-group' suggests that if presidential approval ratings significantly influenced voting choices, the People Power Party's chances of winning would have been considerably diminished. In a situation where 'opposition party judgment' was presented alongside 'government judgment,' examining the correlation between the response to the question 'Should we give strength to the Yoon Suk-yeol administration?' and 'Should we give strength to the opposition parties?' in relation to presidential approval ratings revealed a high correlation of 0.80 and -0.56, respectively. This indicates that the nature of this general election was inseparable from the accountability for the president's job performance.

3. Ideological Bloc Mobilization Through Timing of Voting Decisions and Participation

Election outcomes are significantly influenced by the mobilization or voting participation of ideological or partisan groups. When voters postpone their decision on which candidate and party to vote for until the last minute, it can lead to voter abstention. Conversely, a mobilization of voting intentions may occur in the latter half of the election campaign period in response to concerns about the election results or specific issues. Therefore, this analysis examines when voting decisions were made, categorized by the level of presidential performance evaluation and by ideological groups.

<Table 1> Timing of Constituency Vote Decision

<Table 2> Timing of Proportional Representation Vote Decision

Note: The above tables present the average of responses to the following question:

"When did you decide on the candidate you would vote for?" 1: More than 1 month before the election, 2: 2-4 weeks before the election, 3: 1 week before the election, 4: 1-3 days before the election, 5: On election day.

Examining the timing of voting decisions based on job performance ratings and ideological groups reveals a specific pattern: when ideological orientation and the evaluation of the conservative president's job performance align, voting decisions tend to be made earlier. Progressive voters who strongly believe President Yoon is performing very poorly tended to make their voting decisions earlier compared to other groups. Similarly, strongly conservative groups who positively evaluated his job performance also made their decisions relatively early. The data indicates that groups with relatively weak conservative leanings and negative job performance evaluations did not finalize their voting decisions until one to two weeks before the election. This suggests that conservative voters found it quite difficult to mobilize due to their evaluation of the president. A similar phenomenon is observed in groups with relatively weak progressive leanings and higher job performance ratings, where voters reported not having made their voting decisions until one week to three days before the election. However, further analysis is needed to determine which opposition party these voters considered when making their relatively late decisions.

<Figure 4> Presidential Approval Ratings and Probability of Voting Among Strongly Progressive Voters

A logistic regression analysis of voting participation by ideological group (<Table 3>) revealed that job performance ratings significantly impacted voting participation only among strongly progressive voters. Unlike weakly progressive, centrist, or conservative groups, presidential job performance ratings had a significant and strong impact on voting participation among strongly progressive voters. As shown in <Figure 4>, strongly progressive voters who gave negative evaluations of the president's job performance had a voting participation probability of over 80%, reaching nearly 100% for those who rated it as 'very poorly.' Considering that voters critical of the president's job performance are more likely to vote for the opposition than the ruling party, and that a majority of progressive voters rated the president's job performance as 'very poorly,' it can be inferred that opposition votes centered on the president's performance were significantly mobilized in this general election. In other words, a large proportion of progressive voters who negatively evaluated the president's governing style and performance likely participated in the election to express their dissatisfaction with the government.

<Table 3> Presidential Approval Ratings and Voting Participation Among Strongly Progressive Voters

Note: The dependent variable is 0 - Did not vote, 1 - Voted.

Standard errors are shown in parentheses for the logistic regression coefficients. ** < 0.05, *** < 0.01

4. Voting Choice Analysis

Considering the previous analysis, it is evident that the ruling party's victory would have been extremely difficult if this general election had been dominated by the narrative of 'judging the president.' Nevertheless, given that approximately 35% of respondents in this survey indicated that 'the Yoon Suk-yeol administration should be given strength,' the influence of presidential approval ratings could potentially be offset by factors such as party identification, favorability towards politicians, region of residence, and age. Therefore, an analysis was conducted to determine if presidential approval ratings had a significant impact on voting choices, while controlling for various other variables.

<Table 4> Constituency Vote Choice: Impact of Presidential Approval Ratings

Note: The dependent variable is 0: Democratic Party of Korea candidate choice, 1: People Power Party candidate choice.

Standard errors are shown in parentheses for the logistic regression coefficients. **<0.05, ***<0.01

<Table 4> presents the results of a logistic regression analysis where the choice between voting for a Democratic Party of Korea candidate or a People Power Party candidate in a constituency is the dependent variable, and presidential approval ratings, party affiliation, and favorability towards politicians are included as independent variables. The analysis shows that presidential approval ratings had a significant impact on constituency vote choice, even after controlling for other influencing factors such as party affiliation and favorability towards politicians. Considering that the presidential approval rating scale (0-10) is the same as the politician favorability scale, the impact of presidential approval ratings on voting choice probability is substantial.

The importance of the presidential approval rating variable is further confirmed by the graph in <Figure 5>. When all other variables are fixed at their average values, and only the impact of presidential approval ratings on the probability of voting for a People Power Party candidate is considered, the change in predicted voting probability from 'very poorly' (0) to 'very well' (10) ranges from approximately 30% to over 60 percentage points. The ability to alter the probability of voting for the ruling party candidate by more than 30 percentage points is significant, especially considering that 38 out of 254 constituencies nationwide were decided by less than a 5% point margin (Son Guk-hee 2024). While the probability of voting for a People Power Party candidate increases with more positive presidential approval ratings, realistically, given the average approval rating of 3.18, the probability of voting for the ruling party candidate does not even reach 40% based on the average approval rating alone. It can be inferred that at the average job performance rating level, if voters were not People Power Party supporters, or did not have high favorability towards President Yoon Suk-yeol or interim leader Han Dong-hoon, or if demographic characteristics such as age and region of residence did not favor the People Power Party, the probability of voting for the ruling party would not have exceeded fifty percent. In other words, the high negative presidential approval ratings in this election likely caused the ruling party to struggle significantly in constituency races.[2]

<Figure 5> Presidential Approval Ratings and Probability of Voting for People Power Party Candidates (Constituency)

5. Perceptions of Issues, Political Processes, and Presidential Approval Ratings

Given the significant impact of presidential approval ratings on voters' choices in this general election, the election can be viewed as a typical mid-term election. Therefore, this report further examines the factors that significantly influence President Yoon Suk-yeol's job performance ratings. During the election campaign, presidential approval ratings can be broadly understood in relation to the president's policy-making style in the president-National Assembly political process and the issues that gained prominence. Over the past two years, the administration, facing a heavily opposition-controlled National Assembly, had to find ways to break the deadlock. President Yoon Suk-yeol's approach was to bypass the legislative process or nullify decisions of the majority party by utilizing his presidential authority, rather than attempting to cooperate with the opposition.

The former refers to "decree politics," where the administration unilaterally pursues policies not agreed upon by the National Assembly majority by utilizing administrative legislative powers such as presidential decrees. The latter refers to the president exercising the veto power (right to request reconsideration) on bills that have passed the National Assembly's legislative process. While the president's administrative legislative powers and veto power are legitimate institutional policy tools, excessive use can be criticized as violating the principle of separation of powers. In the context of a strong confrontation between the president and the National Assembly, the president is increasingly inclined to consider methods outside the legislative process, and there are limitations to the National Assembly's control over these actions. Consequently, the democratic use of presidential authority relies on the president's normative restraint. In such a situation, the crucial, or ultimate, check on the exercise of presidential power lies in how citizens evaluate and hold the president accountable for his use of authority. Although the president may be able to realize desired policies to some extent, all these processes are subject to voter evaluation. If the president cannot persuade the voters, it can ultimately have a negative impact on his approval ratings and election results.

The EAI survey asks two questions: First, "The president should push forward with policies deemed necessary for the country, even if the National Assembly opposes them" (Agreement with the president's unilateral policy push). Second, "If the president opposes a bill passed by the opposition-led National Assembly, he should exercise his veto power" (Agreement with the president's exercise of veto power). The average presidential approval rating was examined based on the degree of agreement with these two statements.

As shown in <Table 5>, the average evaluation of President Yoon Suk-yeol's governing style varied significantly depending on the assessment of his policy-making approach. When respondents disagreed with the statement that the president should unilaterally push forward with policies, their approval ratings dropped significantly to below 2 points. Attitudes towards the president's exercise of veto power also showed a similar change. This suggests that voters evaluate President Yoon Suk-yeol's policy-making style and reflect this in their approval ratings based on how they agree with the president's use of authority.

<Table 5> Average Presidential Approval Ratings by Agreement with Presidential Policy-Making Style (Unit: Points)

<Table 6> Average Presidential Approval Ratings by Issue Importance (Unit: Points)

<Table 7> Factors Influencing Presidential Approval Ratings (Multiple Regression Analysis)

Note: The dependent variable is the presidential approval rating on a 0-10 scale.

Coefficients are shown in parentheses with standard errors for the OLS regression analysis. **<0.05, ***<0.01

In addition to the evaluation of the president's use of policy authority discussed in <Table 5>, the average presidential approval ratings were also examined based on attitudes towards key issues that became points of contention during the election campaign. The variables in <Table 6> address responses to the question, "How much did the following issues influence your voting decision in this general election?" Although the question pertains to the influence on voting decisions, it can be interpreted as a measure of how important the respondent considered each issue. The relationship between the variables was predicted based on the assumption that each issue negatively impacted the evaluation of President Yoon Suk-yeol. Accordingly, issues such as soaring inflation, the controversy surrounding First Lady Kim Keon-hee's luxury bag, the appointment of Lee Jong-sup as ambassador to Australia, and the controversial remarks by Hwang Sang-moo, Senior Secretary to the President for Civil Society, were found to have a negative impact on presidential approval ratings. In contrast, the evaluation of the president's medical reform initiative showed somewhat mixed results. This appears to be due to a conflict between agreement with the direction of medical reform and agreement with the speed and method of policy implementation.

Finally, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine whether perceptions of the president's policy-making style and the importance of issues significantly influenced President Yoon Suk-yeol's approval ratings (<Table 7>). The results indicate that each item significantly impacted presidential approval ratings. Among these, which factors were more important? <Figure 6> compares the magnitude of the coefficients. According to <Table 7> and <Figure 6>, among the issues that influenced President Yoon Suk-yeol's approval ratings during the general election campaign, economic issues like soaring inflation and the Kim Keon-hee matter were important, but the president's policy-making style also had an equally significant impact.

<Figure 6> Coefficients of Factors Influencing Presidential Approval Ratings

6. Conclusion

This report focused on the impact of President Yoon Suk-yeol's job performance ratings on voter choices in the 22nd National Assembly election. It examined the distribution of approval ratings, the mobilization of ideological groups through the timing of voting decisions and participation, and finally, the impact of approval ratings on constituency votes. The findings indicate that negative evaluations of President Yoon Suk-yeol's job performance were significantly strong, while positive evaluations were weak. High negative ratings appear to have mobilized 'opposition' voters against the president and the ruling party. This election was a typical mid-term assessment of the president's job performance, and it can be concluded that the remaining factors of the ruling party found it difficult to overcome the high negative presidential approval ratings.

The analysis in the latter part of this report regarding the factors influencing presidential approval ratings can provide insights for the president and the ruling party on how to accept the election results and identify areas for improvement in governance. In the newly formed 'steeply tilted' yeoso-yadae National Assembly, it is evident that the president will face similar challenges as in the previous term. To overcome this situation, the president has two main options. One is to continue utilizing presidential authority, as before, to bypass or confront the National Assembly in a manner that may appear unilateral or even dictatorial. The other path available to the president and the ruling party is to coordinate agendas with the 'grand opposition party' and attempt to pursue policies collaboratively through dialogue and consultation on areas of disagreement. While unilaterally pursuing the many challenges facing the president and the ruling party might seem efficient in the short term, it is important to consider that it could lead to excessive social costs in the long run. Richard Neustadt, a leading scholar of the presidency, famously stated that a president's power stems from the 'power to persuade' opponents. While refraining from unilaterally exercising presidential institutional authority and adhering to procedures of compromise may be an unfamiliar and sometimes arduous path, the results of this report suggest that voters are more likely to give higher marks to a president who attempts 'two-way' policy implementation and adheres to democratic norms. ■

References

Kim Dong-won. 2024. "The Meaning of the 29% Pass Rate for Bills Submitted by the Yoon Suk-yeol Administration [Kim Dong-won's Candid Criticism]." <Sisa Journal>, January 5.https://n.news.naver.com/mnews/article/586/0000070649?sid=100

Son, Guk-hee. 2024. “The Failure of the Opposition Bloc to Secure 200 Seats Was Due to Fierce Competition in '5%P Battlegrounds'... The People Power Party Won 42%.” <JoongAng Ilbo>, April 16.https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/25242819

■ Author: Sung, Ye-jin_ Research Fellow, Center for the Study of Good Democracy, Sungkyunkwan University

■ Editor: Kim, Sun-hee_ Senior Research Fellow, EAI

Inquiries: 02-2277-1683 (ext. 209), shkim@eai.or.kr

[1] An online survey conducted and administered by the Korean Political Science Association in 2020, with sampling conducted through stratified random sampling by region, gender, age, and education level.

[2] Similar results were confirmed when the same analytical model was applied to the proportional representation election.

f2e34dd1a320d063