Unleashing Presidential Power: The Politics of Pets in theWhite House
نویسنده
چکیده
In this article, we use a multimethod approach to shed light on the strategic use of presidential pets.We draw on primary source materials to demonstrate that pets are an important power center in theWhite House. Then we turn to presidents’ strategic use of their pets in public.We present a theoretical framework and statistical evidence to explore the conditions under which presidents are most likely to trot out their four-legged friends. We show that presidents carefully gauge the best and worst times to conduct a dog and pony show. In times of war or scandal, dogs are welcome public companions, but not so in periods of economic hardship. In Presidential Power, Richard Neustadt argued that a president’s “public prestige” was shaped not by marketing or attempts to boost his image, but rather by external events largely beyond his control (1991, 83). Nevertheless, American presidents continually try to mold their public reputations, particularly as elections approach. The 2012 campaign will be no exception. Although the state of the economy will powerfully influence president Barack Obama’s reelection prospects, the president will likely seize any opportunity to improve his image in what is shaping up to be a real dog fight. It is therefore no surprise that President Obama’s campaign staff would jump on an issue that goes to the heart of the character of his Republican rival: how he treats his dog. After New York Times columnist Gail Collins (2007) hammered former governor Mitt Romney for driving to Canada for his family’s summer vacation with his crated dog strapped to the roof of the car, David Axelrod, a top official in the president’s reelection campaign, tweeted a photo of Obama in the presidential limousine with his dog, Bo, captioned “How loving owners transport their dogs” (Axelrod 2012). The Times also featured Bo in a front-page article about Obama’s attempts to be seen as an “everyman” in the campaign (Leibovich 2012). Such anecdotal evidence, backed not only by systematic analysis of voting behavior (Mutz 2010) but also by a voluminous library of compelling insider accounts (e.g., Millie 1990; Socks 1993), provides powerful evidence that the First Family’s four-legged members are an important political force. Political scientists, however, have been slow to get the message.1 Consider the vast international relations literature on diversionary war. When presidents facing tough times try to distract the public by waging war, we call it the “wag-the-dog” effect, after the 1997 movie in which a president concocts a fictional war to distract attention from a sex scandal. The diversionary war literature has bred divergent theoretical positions and empirical findings (Fravel 2010). The entire literature suffers, however, from an obvious, yet unappreciated, deficiency: “wag-the-dog” theory inexplicably ignores dogs. It seems that wag-the-dog theorists have been barking up the wrong tree. Such theoretical and empirical gaps speak to a larger disciplinary failing: dogs (and pets more generally) feature little in serious political science research. As a preeminent pet researcher lamented in her seminal work highlighting the advantage that Republican candidate John McCain held over Obama in the dog-owner vote, “Despite their high profile once in office, there is little empirical evidence as towhether orwhy dogsmatter either to electoral prospects or to a president’s success once in office” (Mutz 2010, 707). ForrestMaltzman is professor of political science atThe GeorgeWashington University.He owns aPortuguesewater dognamedMoxie.He canbe reached at [email protected]. James H. Lebovic is professor of political science and international affairs at The GeorgeWashington University. He is owned by a standard poodle named Softly and three cats (Jellybean, Bessie, andWoody). He can be reached at [email protected]. Elizabeth N. Saunders is assistant professor of political science and international affairs atThe GeorgeWashington University. She remains petless. She can be reached at
منابع مشابه
The Role of Internet in Elections (A case study of the Presidential Election of the USA in 2008)
Internet has found an increasing role in the politics, during the last decade. Today, terms like digital democracy, Internet elections, Internet advertisements (propaganda, social- political Web logging in the internet has become common terms. Internet is getting replaced for the traditional media in politics. The interactive characteristic of this media has changed it to an unrivaled instrume...
متن کاملFraming Political Change: Can a Left Populism Disrupt the Rise of the Reactionary Right?; Comment on “Politics, Power, Poverty and Global Health: Systems and Frames”
Solomon Benatar offers an important critique of the limited frame that sets the boundaries of much of what is referred to as ‘global health.’ In placing his comments within a criticism of increasing poverty (or certainly income and wealth inequalities) and the decline in our environmental commons, he locates our health inequities within the pathology of our present global economy. In that respe...
متن کاملThe Keys to the White House: A Preliminary Forecast for 2012
The Keys to the White House are an index-based prediction system that retrospectively account for the popular-vote winners of every US presidential election from 1860 to 1980 and prospectively forecast the winners of every presidential election from 1984 through 2008. The Keys demonstrate that American presidential elections do not turn on events of the campaign, but rather on the performance o...
متن کاملAiding and Abetting the President: Agency Responsiveness to Presidential Electoral Interests
Do presidents use federal agencies as campaign resources? Scholars of distributive politics have long argued that political elites use public policy outcomes for electoral benefit. Of late, researchers have focused more closely on the president’s role in this process. However, little work examines how differences across agencies condition agency responsiveness to presidential electoral preferen...
متن کاملDino P. Christenson
Previous scholarship argues that House members’ partisan relationship to the president is among the most important determinants of the share of federal dollars they bring home to their constituents. Do presidential politics also shape distributive outcomes in the Senate? Analyzing the allocation of more than $8.5 trillion of federal grants across the states from 1984 to 2008, we show that presi...
متن کامل