{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03969754253308128, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022684310018903593, 'mean_word_length': 5.4573170731707314, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Error Correction, Attitude Persistence, and Executive Rewards and Punishments: A Behavioral Theory of Presidential Approval

Beginning with Mueller's (1970) seminal work, researchers have wrestled with explanations of the movement of presidential approval over time. In his initial argument, Mueller states that in tandem, the concepts underlying the coalition of minorities and rally round the flag variables predict that the president's popularity will continually decline over time and that international crises and similar events will explain short-term bumps and wiggles in this otherwise inexorable descent. (1970, 22) From this basis, Mueller posits “… a general downward trend in each president's popularity” (1970, 19) that is linear and deterministic over the course of a term. Others later moved away from arguments of linearity (e.g., Stimson 1976) and from the coalition of minorities concept (e.g., Kemell 1978), but these early characterizations of approval's time path, perpetuated in the “myth of the inexorable descent,” remain to this day.