No. of Recommendations: 2
What mean you by that?
Oh, it's a sports reference. Sometimes a team is having a terrible season, and the management feels like they need to make a significant change. So they fire the coach. They do that even if the reason the team is losing doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the coach. Sometimes the players don't perform, but it's the coach that gets fired, even though the losing record isn't attributable to anything the coach did or didn't do.
Anyway, the Presidency is like that in some respects. The President doesn't actually have a lot of direct control over how the economy performs, but voters care most about the economy in judging presidential performance. So the voters are really unhappy with the fact that the U.S. experienced some very high inflation, even though the President doesn't have a lot to do with creating (or fighting) inflation.
Biden certainly didn't help himself on that front, of course. But it's that kind of situation. The electorate is unhappy with what happened on Biden's watch, so they want to make a change (ie. fire the coach) because they can't affect the macroeconomic and longstanding regulatory frameworks that played a bigger role in the things they hate (ie. fire the players).
