A few years back Eddie Murphy did a film called “The Distinguished Gentleman”. Okay, maybe it was more than a few years ago… “few” is relative when it comes to years. Anyway, in the film he played the part of a Florida con man named Thomas Jefferson Johnson. When the Congressman from his district running for re-election dies suddenly from a heart attack, the con man realizes that the dead legislator’s name, Jeff Johnson, is remarkably similar to his own. He drops his first name, shortens his middle name to “Jeff”, and enters the race under the slogan “The name you know!”. Unlike most politicians, he avoids the camera, uses the dead Congressman’s worthless campaign materials, and launches a low budget campaign that succeeds because low information voters vote more on the basis of name recognition than issues or familiarity with the candidate. Once in Washington, he realizes government is the biggest con of all.
Name recognition clearly plays a role in American politics. While one might understand John Quincy Adams following in his founding father’s footsteps to the presidency, what are the odds that both Roosevelt cousins would join that elite club? Or that two recent Presidents would need to be differentiated by their numbers because father and son shared the name “George Bush”? And then look at the near misses that have run for the office; two Romneys, a second Clinton, how many Kennedys? Get into Congressional elections, and name recognition becomes even more important.
Few would argue that Hillary Clinton would have become a contender in 2008, Secretary of State, or the presumptive Democratic candidate for 2016 had she not been married to Bill… and “Clinton” is a pretty good name for politics anyway. Name recognition is not always a blessing though. It may be quite some time still before anyone named “Nixon” or even “Hoover” will have an easy road to the Whitehouse. The same could be said for Jeb Bush. In other circumstances, like if W. hadn’t been President, Jeb would likely be the establishment pick for the GOP in 2016. As it is, even if W. wasn’t so unpopular, three presidents from one family might be more than the voters would go for unless it was one fantastic family.
Another GOP candidate both benefiting and suffering from sharing a last name with a famous father is Rand Paul. He is of course the heir apparent to his dad’s Libertarian legacy. That is proving to be both a blessing and a curse. Rand is a better politician than Ron ever was, and far more diplomatic in pursuing his agenda. I never got the feeling that Ron Paul thought he could actually be President, or even wanted to be; Rand is another story, and is acting accordingly. Unfortunately for Rand, the rough edges of the old man are being projected on the son, and it remains to be seen if he can clear the hurdle of being palatable to more than just hardcore Libertarians.
For the Dems, Hillary has made the most out of her familiar name. For voters who remember the Clinton presidency with fondness, she was the “Co-President”. For those who were rightly embarrassed by Bill’s behavior, and still amenable to a Democratic candidate, Hillary is a sympathetic character, not responsible for Bill’s foibles, and at the same time experienced and familiar. Despite her loss to Barack Obama, she parlayed her status into a highly successful Secretary of State stint, where she often seemed more like President than the President did. The one blemish on her record was Benghazi, and she seems to have made the best out of that, with the President and Susan Rice taking most of the heat… another scandal not of her making that she was caught in the middle of; familiar territory.
Not saying I like much of what Hillary stands for, but she’s going to be a tough candidate to beat. So tough that there really aren’t too many other candidates even being mentioned for the Dems. That could be a problem for them if Hillary decides against a run, she makes the rest of the Democratic field look small. I guess the next possibility would be our own Andrew Cuomo, Mario’s son.
Of course I suppose Americans could dispense with political families and go with an unfamiliar name. This is more likely to happen with Republicans than Democrats, who seem to value fame and celebrity a little higher. An intelligent and reasonable candidate like Ben Carson might have a shot if voters are finally completely disgusted with politics as usual. It’s a little hard to figure out what Carson is trying to do though. He spoke at CPAC (the Conservative forum), and says he’d be more than willing to speak at a Democratic function as well. He identifies as a registered independent, and has steadfastly refused to identify with Republicans, though his positions are more right than left. He is obviously testing the waters, but the question is whether he is being coy to court independents, or if he is engineering a third party run… he’ll have to make his intentions clearer before too long.
IMHO: As with most of life, a family name can be a blessing or a curse. Whether it gives you a head-start or a handicap, a name is not enough to entirely make or break the individual. Often there is more to a name than just a name; honor and ability can be passed through generations, as can deceitfulness and a lust for power. All in all, the voters seem to be swayed more by name than heritage, so look for the usual suspects going forward… Bushes, Clintons, Pauls, Cuomos, Romneys, Kennedys. Some will deserve the attention their name garners, most will not. I’m looking for a candidate who can make a name for themselves… that will be a name worth knowing!
