Why a national crisis creates a sudden surge in leader approval

HostIt's a sight we have seen many times on the news. Something terrible happens, maybe a sudden attack or a massive threat from abroad, and you see two political rivals who usually can’t stand each other. They're standing side-by-side on a stage, looking solemn, while the president gives a speech. It's a weirdly quiet moment where all the usual shouting and arguing just stops. We have always wondered why that happens, and why it seems to make people suddenly love a leader they might have hated just the day before.

GuestIt's a real shift in how we think, and it has a name. Back in the seventies, a researcher called John Mueller started looking at this. He called it the Rally Round the Flag effect. He found that for this to happen, you need a few very specific things. It can’t just be any bad news. It has to be an event that involves the whole world, it has to hit the country directly, usually involving the military or a big threat, and it has to be sharp and sudden. Like a bolt of lightning. When that happens, something clicks in the public mind. The leader stops being seen as just another politician trying to win an election and starts being seen as the living face of the country itself. They become the vessel for who we're as a people.

HostSo it isn’t necessarily that we suddenly think the leader is doing a better job or that their personality changed overnight?

GuestNot at all. It has almost nothing to do with how good they're at their job. Look at George W. Bush after the September eleventh attacks. Before that happened, his approval was around fifty percent, which is pretty average. Right after the attacks, it shot up to ninety percent. That's almost everyone in the country. He didn't suddenly become twice as smart or twice as capable. It was an automatic change in how people felt. When the country feels like it's being attacked, we stop looking at the person in the office and start looking at the office itself. The person just happens to be the one sitting in the chair, so they get all that support.

HostBut wait, if this is about a big crisis, why don't we see this when the economy hits a wall? If everyone is losing their jobs, that's a huge crisis, but we usually end up hating the leader more, not less.

GuestThat's a great point because it shows how this is really about us versus them. We have this deep, old drive in our bodies to stick together when a threat comes from the outside. There's a whole area of study called Social Identity Theory that talks about this. Humans are built to live in groups. In normal times, a big country is actually just a bunch of smaller groups that fight each other for power, like political parties or different regions. But an outside threat, like a war or even a pandemic, gives us one big goal that everyone shares. It’s the goal of survival. This trigger in our brains shuts down the urge to fight with our neighbors so we can face the common enemy together. When the trouble is internal, like an economic crash or protests in the streets, it actually highlights our divisions. It makes us point fingers at each other. But when the threat is from the outside, criticizing the chief starts to feel like you’re betraying the whole tribe.

HostSo it's like our brains are hard-wired to stop complaining so we don't get eaten by the wolf at the door. But it can't just be our instincts, right? I mean, we also see the news and listen to what other leaders are saying.

GuestYou’re right, there's a big part of this that comes from the information we get. Right after a big shock, the people who usually spend all day criticizing the leader suddenly go quiet. The opposition party doesn't want to look mean or divisive while people are scared or mourning, so they stop the attacks. The news media does the same thing. They often self-censor because they want to appear patriotic. This creates a kind of vacuum where only one story is being told. For a short time, the public only hears the leader's plan. When all the experts and the rivals are standing behind the president and saying nothing, it sends a powerful signal to everyone else. It says there's only one path to safety and this person is leading us down it. It's hard to disagree when you don't hear anyone else offering a different view.

HostThat makes it sound like this new popularity is almost borrowed, or maybe even a bit of a trick of the light. Does it ever actually last?

GuestIt almost never lasts. That's the catch. This kind of high is very fragile. It starts to fade the moment the shock wears off and the actual work begins. Political scientists see this as a reaction to a shared tragedy, not a shared plan for the future. As soon as the government has to start making real choices, like how to spend money or what new laws to pass, the old fights come back. The moment the opposition starts talking again and offering a different way forward, the spell is broken. The leader's numbers usually head right back down to where they started. It's a surge of support that's given by the moment, not earned by the person, so it disappears as fast as the moment does.

GuestIn the end, we're still those same people looking for a way to feel safe when the world feels like it's falling apart, and for a few weeks, that leader is the only shield we have.

HostIt's fascinating that those bitter rivals standing together on stage are the signal that tells our brains to stop fighting and start following, even if we know it's only going to last until the dust settles.