Extant research suggests the primacy of economics over foreign policy in determining public evaluations of the president despite the higher degree of presidential responsibility for foreign, as opposed to economic, policy. Lack of good data on foreign policy attitudes has limited the incorporation of that aspect of public opinion in the study of presidential approval. In this article, I utilize both foreign and economic policy monthly approval times series that span the two terms of the Clinton administration to study the comparative impact of foreign and economic policy thinking on public approval. Results find, first, that the specific approval series granger cause general presidential approval. Second, economic and foreign policy approval seems to have similar impacts on general presidential approval. Implications for understanding public opinion toward the president and directions for future research are discussed.