| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper%25" |
|---|
| | | Introduction | |
<
< | In a presidential campaign, "experience" could mean any number of things and so it means precisely nothing; making it a winning word for politicians crafting a message the masses can support. It works because it's versatile. The word’s ambiguity prompts voters to interpret the candidates’ messages in a way most in concert with their own worldview. Mr. Obama uses the term “quarter century of experience” to denigrate old man McCain? and some American’s picture an aging Washington insider. Mrs. Clinton raises her own “experience” as a foil to newcomer Mr. Obama and many of those same Americans picture a young man not quite ready for oval office. In each case, the audience is left to define the word for themselves and, in each case, it is the speaker who benefits. During this campaign cycle, Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly attempted to harness the word’s power. As potential voters digest her message, they do so in uncontrolled and potentially destructive ways, particularly if Mr. Obama is the eventual nominee. | >
> | In politics, "experience" can mean any number of things and so it means precisely nothing, making it a winning word for politicians crafting a message the masses can support. It works because it's versatile. The word's ambiguity means the candidates' message will be interpreted in concert with the voter’s own worldview. Obama uses the term "quarter century of experience" to denigrate old man McCain? and Americans picture an aging Washington insider. Clinton raises her own "experience" as a foil to newcomer Obama and those same Americans picture a young man not quite ready for the oval office. Voters are allowed to define the word and they do so to the benefit of the speaker. During this campaign, Clinton has harnessed the power of "experience," casting an air of uncertainty around Obama. If he, nonetheless, prevails in the primary, that uncertainty will carry over to the general election, be compounded by McCain, and threaten his electability. | | | | |
<
< | Part 1: By speaking broadly about her experience, voters can attach their own meaning to the word. | >
> | Part 1: Speaking Broadly Lets Voters Assume the Best (and the Worst) | | | | |
<
< | When Clinton speaks about experience, she speaks in generalities. Her campaign does not provide a biographical sketch detailing her activities and accomplishments. Her campaign website glosses over the 15 years she spent at a major corporate law firm in a single sentence, giving it the same treatment as her one year part-time stint on the board of President Carter’s Legal Services Corporation. As a result, it is difficult to objectively analyze her experience. | >
> | When Clinton speaks about experience, she speaks in generalities. Her campaign website glosses over the 15 years she spent at a major corporate law firm in a single sentence, giving it the same treatment as her one year, part-time stint on the board of President Carter’s Legal Services Corporation. The average voter not deeply immersed in the campaign would have difficulty objectively analyzing her experience.
This is not an accident. Generalities allow Clinton to capitalize on voters' positive association with experience and, without details, voters can assume she has the right experience for the job. This is a particularly powerful tactic since Democratic voters associate George W. Bush with inexperience, blaming (among other things) his lack of preparation for the war in Iraq, crumbling economy, and mismanaged bureaucracy. | | | | |
<
< | This is not an accident. Clinton presents her experience in generalities because everyone values “experience,” but some may not think that her particular experience prepares her for the presidency. Instead, voters are invited to broadly associate her campaign with the word “experience” and fill in the gaps themselves. This is particularly powerful because Democratic voters associate George W. Bush with inexperience, blaming his lack of preparation for the current war in Iraq, the crumbling economy, and mismanagement of the bureaucracy. Without details, we can all assume that she has the right experience for the job. | | | Part 2: Obama the Foil | |
<
< | Clinton’s argument distinguishes her from Obama. As a result, she masks her own legislative shortcomings by raising his. The tactic is working. Despite losing almost every demographic in the recent Virginia primary, 94% of those voters citing experience as their top issue voted for her. | >
> | Clinton’s argument distinguishes her from Obama. The tactic is working, earning Clinton 94% of voters citing experience as their top issue. Since questions about Obama’s experience seek to stick, he has all but conceded the experience torch to Clinton, contrasting her “ready on day one” with his “right on day one.”
Obviously, there may be legitimate concerns about a one-term Congressmen and former state senator assuming the presidency (don’t tell Lincoln), but, given the media’s treatment of the Edwards campaign, other factors seem to be contributing to this characterization. Despite their remarkably similar background (both were single term senators and lawyers) Clinton can claim that Obama has not done enough to be president, but couldn’t make similar charges stick against Edwards. Perhaps Edwards’s eight additional years on this planet granted him immunity from the experience argument. There is certainly something in Clintons “35 years of change” that implies more is better. Maybe, Edwards’s prior run for the presidency cemented him as a candidate in voters’ mind and maybe, had Edwards achieved frontrunner stature, the criticism might have stuck to him as well. It is also possible that the charge of inexperience sticks to Obama because of his race. In a nation with embarrassingly few African Americans in government and backlash against affirmative action engrained into the psyche of white America, it is harder to picture an experienced black man than an experienced white man. Passionate, energetic, intelligent, and well-spoken, maybe, but, experienced, likely not. Either way, as the primary season draws to a close, the electorate is left with lingering questions about Mr. Obama’s readiness to assume the presidency and, if he is the nominee, those doubts will carry into the general election. | | | | |
<
< | Despite their remarkably similar background, the commentators who question Obama’s experience rarely questioned that of John Edwards. Both candidates were lawyers in the public interest and single term senators. Yet Clinton could claim that Obama has not done enough to be president, but couldn’t make similar charges stick against Mr. Edwards. Perhaps Edwards’s 8 additional years on this planet grant him immunity from the experience argument. There is certainly something in Clintons “35 years of change” argument that implies more is better and Edwards has eight more years than Obama. It is also possible that, had Edwards achieved frontrunner statute, the criticism might have stuck to him as well. It is also possible that the charge of inexperience stuck to Obama because of his race. In a national with embarrassingly few black leaders in government and backlash against affirmative action engrained into the psyche of white America, it is harder to picture an experienced black man than an experienced white man. Passionate, energetic, intelligent, and well-spoken, maybe, but experienced likely not. Either way, as the primary season draws to a close, the electorate is left with lingering questions about Mr. Obama’s readiness to assume the presidency and, if he is the nominee, those doubts will carry into the general election. | | | Part 3: Experience, the General Election, and Race | |
<
< | The State of Obama After the Primaries | >
> | Obama After the Primaries | | | | |
<
< | “Obamamania,” the media tells us, is beginning to wane. After months of questions about Obama’s experience, the voters, apparently, are beginning to demand more substance. Ignoring the fact that his stump speech includes more specific policy talking points than his rivals, there is a growing sense that washing into the white house on a wave of exuberance is not how one should become president. While Obama has laid rightful claim to the mantle of hope, it appears that a general election campaign woulr require an equal part substance. | >
> | “Obamamania,” the media tells us, is beginning to wane. After months of questions about Obama’s experience, there is a growing sense that washing into the white house on a wave of exuberance is not how one should become president. While Obama has laid rightful claim to the mantle of hope, it appears that a general election campaign will require an equal part substance. Since Clinton’s campaign highlighted her experience, and, by contrast, his inexperience, this will be a challenge for Obama. The voter’s have made meaning of Clinton’s words and will move into the general election with a vision of Obama’s inexperience ingrained in their heads. | | | McCain's Capitalization on Experience | |
<
< | The RNC recently released talking points for the general election. The Republicans plan to pick up where Clinton left off, hammering Obama on experience and questioning his readiness to serve as commander and chief.
-
- Conservative elements in this country will not vote for a black man. By carrying the "experience" argument into the election, McCain can can raise the race issue without having to do so explicitly
| >
> | The RNC recently released talking points for the general election. The Republicans plan to pick up where Clinton left off, hammering Obama on experience and questioning his readiness to serve as commander and chief. While these claims didn’t slow Obama down in the primary, McCain? has more “experience” than Clinton and, after another nine months of raising the issue, it is possible that enough traction will be generated to make a dent in Obama’s popularity. | | | Racism Wil Hurt Obama's Ability to Fight Back Effectively | |
<
< | In order to win, the electorate will have to believe that Obama is ready to lead. … I want to say that people will less likely to believe he can lead because he is black and they are reminded of that/riled up about that every time the experience issue is raised … I just can’t figure out how to say it convincingly … Argh! | >
> | The best politicians are able to reshape voters’ reality. Carl Rove convinced half the American people that there was a pre-war connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Saxby Chambliss convinced voters that Max Cleland, a triple amputee and decorated veteran was unpatriotic. All the skilled politician needs is a willing public, a little bit of truth, and a readiness to put political goals above common decency.
The American people’s resistance to the war was eroded by misinformation, a crackdown on dissent, and honest fear generated by the attack on the world trade center. Those same factors … | | | | |
>
> | To fight back … | | | | |
<
< |
- The media continues to play up the race issue to a point where it is near central to the campaign.
- Highlighting Obama's inexperience can be likened to calling him a "boy" and the underpinnings of racism will make it harder for him to defeat the argument
| >
> | Harder for Obama because an “inexperienced black man” being ready for the presidency is tough to swallow … | | | Conclusion |
|