Raising Race

-- By AdamCarlis - 18 Feb 2008

Introduction

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: Speaking Broadly Lets Voters Assume the Best (and the Worst)

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.

Part 2: Obama the Foil

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.

Part 3: Experience, the General Election, and Race

Obama After the Primaries

“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. 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

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 …

Harder for Obama because an “inexperienced black man” being ready for the presidency is tough to swallow …

Conclusion

# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, AdamCarlis