How much experience have first-time presidential candidates had during the past half-century? On average, 20.9 years. Vice-presidential candidates, 16.6 years. The current 2008 field of 12 Democrats seems to fit right in, with an average experience level of exactly 22 years.
But the three leading 2008 contenders—Clinton, Obama, and Edwards--have an average 8.7 years each, less experience than the other nine candidates—and less than that of any Democratic nominee since 1952.
The first two weeks of the primary season, as currently scheduled, features four one-state contests:
Monday, January 14, 2008 - Iowa
Saturday, January 19, 2008 - Nevada
Tuesday, January 22, 2008 - New Hampshire
Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - South Carolina
How much will experience matter in 2008? We should know by January 30. Obama has more governmental experience than either Clinton or Edwards, but he lacks national campaign experience. Read more to review the quality and amount of experience each candidate brings to the race.
Most of the 12 Democrats would break new ground of some kind.
- Clinton would be the first woman
- Obama would be the first African-American—and, with Kucinich, the first child of an immigrant.
- Richardson would be the first Hispanic
- Clark would be the first Democrat without any previous elective experience.
- Gravel would be the oldest
- Edwards, Clinton or Obama would be the first Democrat with less than 14 years experience.
- Gore, Kerry, or Clark would be the first Vietnam veteran.
Hillary Clinton currently leads in the Democratic polls for the nomination. By 2008, she will have eight years experience as a U.S. Senator.
If she can convince the American people to make history by electing the first woman president, the experience issue may be an easy one. Women, in particular, will be sympathetic to the argument that her years as first lady of Arkansas and first lady of the United States should be added to her total.
Personally, I think she deserves the Navy and Marine Corps Medal, like JFK, because being married to Bill Clinton has to be at least as hard as towing a rubber boat across shark-infested wartime waters with a rope between your teeth.
Kennedy won in part because prejudice subsided a bit since 1928 when Al Smith lost because of his ethnicity and religion and for no other reason. But the greater part of Kennedy’s victory came because more people voted for him because he was Catholic than voted against him for the same reason.
Hillary will also win if more people vote for her because she is a woman than do the opposite.
Hillary’s biggest problem will be convincing voters that she can be commander-in-chief. Excepting only Gore, Kerry, and Clark, her claims are exactly as valid as those of any of the other candidates. She is probably better prepared in this respect than her husband was, and unquestionably better prepared than Bush. But lots of people are prejudiced against women, and that’s just the fact, Jack.
For example, we hear frequently about Bill Clinton’s Rhodes Scholarship, as is reasonable. But how many people know that his wife was valedictorian at an Ivy League college and that she achieved a even more impressive record at Yale Law than her brilliant husband?
You may not like Hillary’s politics or her personality, but no fair hiring manager could deny that her resume shows an extraordinarily talented job candidate.
Obama, too, will make history if elected. He served eight years in the IL state legislature before his election to the Senate. The keynote speaker at the 2004 convention, he rocketed into second place in the polls as soon as his name was mentioned.
Since he is far more qualified on paper than George Bush was, he and his supporters would be justified in regarding attacks on his experience as code word attacks on his skin color and son-of-an-immigrant status. Thinking like a Human Resources director, would you hire George Bush with his lackluster academic record and six years of relevant occupational experience, or Barrack Obama, with his magna cum laude Harvard Law Review education and 12 years of experience?
Like Clinton, Obama will face millions of haters who would not vote for him if he walked across Lake Michigan to ask for their vote. But if nominated, he will get some additional votes from professional African-Americans who usually vote Republican, and his candidacy will goose overall black turnout significantly, never a bad thing. But to say that Hillary will lose because of prejudice and that Obama will win in spite of it is to say more than I know.
Obama’s resume could be a lot stronger. It is light both in quantity and quality, and no candidate, except Robert Kennedy, has ever walked out of an unfinished first term in the U.S. Senate to seek the presidency.
But Obama’s biggest single obstacle is time. Unlike Clinton, Kerry, Gore, Edwards or Clark, he has never done this before, and he’s starting late. There are only three tickets out of Iowa. Clinton almost certainly has one, and so does John Edwards. Fighting for that third spot against this field will not be easy. John Kerry, to mention only candidate, will be formidable in Iowa, especially in a fight for third place. He won nearly 40% of the vote in 2004 and only needs to retain a fraction of that to be a contender.
The best case for Obama would be if Kerry and Gore decide not to run. Still, that leaves Clark, who not only has more campaign experience than Obama but also a better story to tell in the commander-in-chief department. Against a softer field, Obama would already be the frontrunner. Facing competitors who have already been around the Iowa track does not make his job easy.
John Edwards, another top-tier contender, has only a total of six years in elected office and no possibility of increasing that number because he is now a full-time contender. This is actually a potential advantage since the long list of senators interested in the job—Clinton, Obama, Kerry, Biden and Dodd—do have to show up for work once in a while during the campaign season.
Iowa is especially time-intensive. Edwards almost won last time, and he hasn’t been very far away from the state since. Hillary could just about lock up the nomination by winning here, but I Edwards will give her all she can handle. He is in a beautiful position because he looks like the underdog, but he has to be way ahead of her in organization in IA.
Edwards, in one sense, has no business running for president. He served a single term as a U.S. Senator and spent the rest of his life making money. But he was almost chosen by Al Gore and was chosen by John Kerry to be vice president, both of whom investigated his past very thoroughly. To that extent, the question of his qualifications to be president has already been asked and answered.
Like Clinton and Obama, Edwards is an extraordinary person, a headhunter’s dream. His "lack of experience" will be a problem for him only if his opponents can make it a problem—and he learned enough on the campaign trail as a candidate for president and vice-president to deflect those attacks with grace and good humor.
Gore, Kerry, and Clark
These three candidates have experience to burn although none of Clark’s is in elective office. Faced with a McCain-Guiliani ticket, and a country worried about terrorism, we might well be glad to have at least one, if not two, of this trio of Vietnam Vets on the ticket.
In addition to direct military experience, all three have very significant diplomatic and foreign policy knowledge and experience. Clark’s amazing triumph in Kosovo—which looks better and better by comparison to current events—was as much a political and diplomatic as it was a military achievement.
Kerry’s campaign in 2004 was a good one. First, let’s not forget, he destroyed all the other Democrats some of us now say would have run stronger against Bush. Yes, perhaps they were all better candidates than Kerry, but why then didn’t they beat him?
Second, most candidates who challenge incumbent presidents lose. Kerry’s percentage of the vote was significantly higher than that of Stevenson, Goldwater, McGovern, Mondale or Dole, all of whom tried to cut a two-term presidency short. He faced a president who started the year above 60% approval in the middle of a shooting war. Bush’s popularity level dropped during 2004, but never to the toilet bowl levels of, for example, Carter in 1980.
True, Kerry could have dealt with the Swift Boat attacks more effectively, knowing what he now knows. But that’s just the point. Maybe the best way to learn how to run for president is by doing it.
The 2008 field is very, very strong. It is not surprising that many very able and promising candidates, from Gov. Warner and senators Feingold and Bayh have decided that the competition is just too tough. President Clinton’s prestige continues to rise, and candidates have to ask if it’s a good career move to challenge his wife, who would be formidable enough if she were simply New York Senator Rodham. Edwards looks very strong nationwide, but particularly in the early primary states of NH and SC. And Obama’s good looks and rhetorical fire bring a rock-star thrill to the race.
Iowa is the first stop, and it would be a mistake to dismiss the chances of the next three candidates, all of whom have campaigned there before and know many of the caucus participants by name. Gore, Kerry and Clark have not only very strong governmental resumes, but also presidential campaign experience—something even the best consultants in the country can’t give newcomers.
Kucinich and Gravel are in the race not to win, but to make noise, and they will have some chance to do that. Vilsack, Richardson, Dodd and Biden would like to win, but it is hard to see how any of these will break through. IA is a must-win for Vilsack, and even that might not be easy.
It would be easier for a long-shot candidate to hold on if the multi-state primaries began earlier, but the single state contests in IA, NH, NV and SC will leave all but three people scrambling very hard for traction on the following day.
Experience does count, especially experience running for president. The reason RFK was able to jump in so late was that he had run a campaign for his brother 8 years before and had been preparing to do so again five years before. After a day of telephone calls, he had an entire organization in place.
There are only three tickets out of Iowa, and five experienced candidates—Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Edwards and Clark—will make it tough for anyone else, even Obama, to find running room.
The field will narrow, perhaps to one, by January 30. At that point, the fitness of the surviving candidate to serve as president will be severely examined by press and public. Gore, Edwards and Kerry, having already survived this ritual beating, would have the easiest time of it. When Obama visited NH last week, 150 reporters trailed behind in the hope of being the first to find something discreditable to write about him. Vilsack will face similar scrutiny if he breaks through in NH.
A fresh face is always tempting, but it’s important to try to visualize how that face will look after it’s been pushed in the Karl Rove pie.