Week II: Barack Obama (Part One)

It is undeniable that the current sitting President during an election has substantial influence on the results of the Presidential election. In some cases, this influence is minimal beyond the endorsement of a candidate or the expected effect they hold on the political climate. For Barack Obama, his celebrity status (especially among millennials), as well as the polarizing nature of his term as President, influenced the election outcome in ways we may not have expected and he may not have intended.

Before I truly begin, I'd like to address the "3rd term curse". For those of you who don't know, this "curse" basically states that, in modern politics, the American people are reluctant to give a party a 3rd consecutive term in the White House. Personally, this was something I had believed was real, and ultimately thought would greatly affect Hillary Clinton's chances in 2016. After a little bit of research, I discovered this "curse" is really more like a myth, and there's a lot of evidence that disproves it. I don't have the time or space to include it in this post, but I would recommend looking at this article from The Daily Beast, which spells out the flaws in the argument.

Albeit the "3rd term curse" may not have affected Hillary in the ways I thought it had, Barack Obama still held significant influence over Clinton's campaign. To begin, we'll discuss the positives.

Barack Obama's approval ratings hit an all time low of 41% in 2014, but had been steadily increasing again by the fall of 2016. To the left is a chart from Gallup which reflects this. Although compared to the beginning these numbers seem low, the recent increase in approval was important for Clinton. Gerald F. Seib, the Wall Street Journal Washington Bureau Chief, explains that an increase in approval ratings of predecessors correlates to an increase the likelihood of victory for the successor. In this video, he goes into detail about how Obama's approval, in addition to his presence within the Clinton campaign, creates a positive "Obama factor" that could assist Clinton in November.

Part of the reason these approval ratings might help Clinton is because she is perceived as the "successor" to Barack Obama, so his positive job ratings could be helpful in presuming that Clinton could do just as well. Being Barack's successor was something I initially assigned as a positive effect. She could ride the coattails of his charisma, the creation of the Affordable Care Act, and his success in furthering social justice. But as I furthered my research, I realized this wasn't necessarily as helpful as I had assumed, or as Hillary may have needed.

The social justice element was likely helpful in furthering her support from the LGBT community and minorities, but those weren't voters she needed to win from Trump. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act is still pretty controversial. According to Gallup, around the end of 2015, Americans were still split on whether or not they approved of Obamacare. Hillary could certainly benefit from the success the Affordable Care Act allowed for in increasing the number of insured Americans and so on, but there wasn't nearly as much ground as I had expected. Additionally, the scandals of the Obama administration riddled Clinton's general election campaign. I am continuing on with this more so in next week's post on emails, but it's important to note that issues within Obama's legacy reflected negatively on Hillary and may have cost her some voters.

Ultimately, Obama's charisma and connection to millennials was the most detrimental to Hillary's campaign. Obama won 2008 in a landslide because his revolutionary grassroots campaign strategy brought young people and minorities to voting booths in massive numbers. His personal charisma, his speaking style, and his optimistic attitude for change created an unprecedented personal connection many still value to this day. But, this potentially hurt Clinton in a lot of ways. Rather than transferring this charisma, Clinton's stark difference in style may have alienated voters who were looking for someone they felt a connection with, like Barack. Time Magazine writer Charlotte Alter explores this effect in her article, "How the Obama Revolution Could Hurt Hillary Clinton". Perhaps just as important is to note that Senator Bernie Sanders, her opponent, did have this charisma. Millennials that sought this charisma voted for Sanders in the primaries, and established a large part of the Bernie or Bust group that Hillary needed to win. Hillary wasn't as charismatic as her predecessor and opponent, and that ultimately made it more difficult to get the millennial votes she needed to win the same way Obama had in 2008.

Unfortunately, I'm far over my word limit, so I'm going to stop my analysis here for today. But I will follow up with how Barack Obama affected Trump in the near future. For now, happy reading! Please leave a comment and let me know if you have any questions.