Obama's Experience Problem

-- By AdamCarlis - 29 Feb 2008

Introduction

Clinton has raised questions about Obama's experience that will be amplified by McCain during the general election. Given Obama's actual experience, age, and race, it will be difficult for him to assuage voters' concerns about his readiness to govern; potentially costing him crucial votes what will likely be a close race.

The Experience Argument

The Meaning of "Experience"

"Experience" can mean any number of things and so it means precisely nothing. Therefore, it is a winning word for politicians crafting a message the masses can support. It works because it's vague. Its ambiguity allows voters to interpret the candidates' message according to their 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 Obama and those same Americans picture a young man not quite ready for the oval office. Voters are allowed to define the word and the speaker benefits. Unfortunately for Obama, the experience mantle is being carried by Clinton and McCain, leaving him as the inexperienced ying to their "ready on day one" yang.

The Liability of Inexperience

In any election cycle, being the inexperienced candidate is a handicap. Because of the perceived inexperience and subsequent failure of the Bush administration, that reality is heightened during this campaign. Security concerns drummed up since September 11 and a crumbling economy only heighten the public's desire for an "experienced" candidate. Being seen otherwise will cost votes. Unfortunately for Obama, voters see both Clinton and McCain as more experienced.

Experience in the General Election

While Clinton's attacks couldn't prevent Obama from claiming frontrunner status in the Democratic primary, McCain’s lengthy time in Congress, popular military service, and nine additional months to hammer away give him an advantage Clinton lacked. Unlike Clinton, whose own experience has been questioned (and Here and Here), McCain, with nearly 30 years of Congressional experience, is assumed to be ready for the job. Also, his "maverick" persona allows him to acquire experience without being portrayed as a Washington insider or party crony. Finally, as a white male, he fits the mold of every former president. As a result, portraying Obama as inexperienced will be easier for McCain that it was for Clinton.

Additionally, as Karl Rove has shown, all it takes to make a charge stick is a little bit of truth, a willingness to obscure the issue, and a disciplined attack. Just as the Republicans questioned Max Cleland's patriotism, convinced the American public that there was a pre-war link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, and turned John Kerry into a waffling opportunist, they will exploit the public perception of Obama's readiness for the job.

Barriers to Overcoming the Criticism

Obama's Inexperience

Obama's record is too thin for him to tackle the issue head on. Instead, his campaign has tried to shift the argument from "experience" to "judgment." While perhaps "masquing treason," the voters, thus far, have given him the benefit of the doubt. However, if the long campaign prevents him from dodging the issue altogether, even his best defense (a comparison to Lincoln) acknowledges his inexperience and could cost him votes. Unlike during the Democratic primary, where real questions could be raised about Clinton's readiness, a head to head resume battle clearly favors McCain and could be Obama's undoing.

Obama's Age

When the generation that votes in this country was at Woodstock, Obama was eight years old. It is hard to convince people you are ready to lead when you are younger than their little brother. While voters have looked beyond years in past elections, both John F. Kennedy Jr. and Bill Clinton had longer resumes than Obama when they were elected. However, because of questions about his own age, McCain will have to deemphasize the issue as much as he emphasizes experience. Voter focus on age, while an impediment to Obama during the Democratic primary, will likely be at least a draw during the general election (the issue's ability to entrench the perception of Obama as inexperience is balanced by voters’ hesitancy to elect a 72 year old president).

Obama's 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, intelligent, and well-spoken, maybe, but, experienced, likely not. Assuming he has to face the experience issue head on, race will make it harder for Obama to convince voters that he is ready to lead.

Additionally, voting on "experience" provides cover for people unwilling to vote for a black man. While most people who vote based on race wouldn't support Obama's policies in the first place, there are some Democrats and Independents searching for a socially acceptable reason to justify their anti-Obama vote. Whether they are the elderly white voters highlighted by the Times or the say one thing, vote the other way racists present in every election that pits a person of color against a white, these voters can use the experience issue to justify their discriminatory vote.

Conclusion

Obama can plausibly argue that good judgment trumps lengthy experience and point to popular presidents who were his age (or younger) when elected. However, on race, to borrow from Ghandi, he is the change he wants to see in the world. As a result, it will be next to impossible to convince some voters that he is ready and capable until he does it and does it well. Until then, Obama will be waging an uphill battle to shed the cloud of inexperience that follows his campaign.

While he was able to stay afloat during the primary season, given the shifting demographics in the general election and the strengths of the McCain? campaign, overcoming the experience question may prove too high a hurdle.

• • I am worried that I am no longer saying anything interesting in this essay ...

- I think this might be moving in a better direction than your last paper. I think part of the danger with your topic is making it seem as if candidates are conspiring to put forth a racist argument. Obviously that's not only an inelegant summary of your point, but, well, not a summary of your point, since you make clear that you don't think any of this is (probably) some sort of evil master plan to play the race card. In any case, what I'm trying to say is that I think your paper rests on safer ground when it looks at what the voters are hearing, not what the candidates are trying to make the voters hear. Do other people agree?

Also, interesting sidenote: Clinton's "ready on day one" spiel? Allegedly stolen from McCain? 's website. -Amanda

• I really appreciate it, Amanda ... what do you think of the new draft? -- AdamCarlis 26 Feb 2008

# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, AdamCarlis