It's Thanksgiving week and along with the focus on food (and black friday shopping and football...) Thanksgiving is often connected with family. The first family is often a fascination of many Americans. The Kennedy administration was often referred to as Camelot, due to the hope and optimism paid to the Kennedys and the first family, along the lines of European royalty. Jaqueline Kennedy along affected culture and style across the country and many first ladies have had direct connections to particular policy areas (none more so that Hillary Clinton, who helped design a health care reform bill). First Lady Michelle Obama, an accomplished lawyer and former boss to her husband, has her own
official office and policy areas including the Let's Move campaign. She also has a
huge following (also see
here) and
approval rating substanitally higher than her husband. The children of presidents have also recieved a lot of attention but are often kep out of the spotlight (see Clinton, Chelsea, and Obama, Sasha and Malia).
- What role does the first family (or more specifically the first lady) play in our understand of, or connection to the president?
- What role, if any, should the first family play in a president's image and/or campaign?
Enjoy your thanksgiving everyone!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs a self professed traditionalist, I feel the image of the president's family is meant to project the caring, homely, everyday family man. The president's family, I feel provides most of this during the campaign, when a large part of the president's place in the polls is largely contingent upon the presidents public perception and image. For Obama's campaign this has been prevelant with the ads that say "join us" with a picture of Michelle and Barack. I do not feel however, that the president should actively use his family during the campaign. Obama was criticized for sending his kids to private school and said his critics should leave them out of it yet continued to use his kids in the campaign. Even if the president doesn't actively use his family, photos of the president with his family help further his image as a caring human and to help voters see the parallels between him and and strengthen the connection between chief executive and average civillian.
ReplyDeleteHistorically, first ladies had an agenda in which they would advocate for reforms to protect mothers and children. They would also go out to promote policies in which a motherly figure would be more effective. Nancy Reagan was an integral part of the "Say No to Drugs" campaign. In general, the first lady serves as an extension of her husband, many times being his representative to different demographics, some of whom are more receptive to a woman.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the impact of the first family on the presidents image, Jordan said it right. Jordan said "photos of the president with his family help further his image as a caring human and to help voters see the parallels between him and and strengthen the connection between chief executive and average civilian." Photos of the president with his children portray him as a regular man, a father. If the president is advocating for policies in which he wants to be viewed as a father figure, pictures of him with his family are perfect. However, once children are used to help the president and his campaign or policies, I do not think that the president can then claim that they are off limits. If they were used to further is policies, they then remain an integral part of the policies.
I agree with everyone that one's public image matters. The role of the president's family should be a means of portraying him as relatable public figure and an ordinary individual with his family. Most specifically, that the president is a human. Even though, he is holds the highest office of public service, that does not mean that he doesn’t understand what families are enduring in this tough economic crisis. The president includes his family in the campaign to show that he cares about morals, values, and FAMILY VALUES. He incorporates his family in campaign to show that he possess compassion and love. He wants to show that he loves his country just as much as his country.
ReplyDeleteThe only role of the family should be keeping a low-porfile becuase one blunder can mean major damage control for the president. The family should just smile, support their father's policies, and tell the media that they love him.
The role of the first lady should be assisting her husband in minor matters of his presidency such as overseeing petitions, education reform, and distribution of basic necessities to poor countries. Most Importantly, The first lady should always support her husband's policies for better or for worse.
I completely agree with what Jordan said about the first family. The president portraying himself as a father/average civilian is similar to the many things that the President does to relate to the masses. For example, his NCAA bracket or going shopping on black friday with his daughters. It is apart of the Presidents rhetoric, that he tries to appeal to the citizens of the US. Coming off as a good father and husband is just apart of the job. The president is the face of the country, and to have someone that portrays a good hearted family man is something that citizens look for when they are given the chance to vote on who they want to run the country. In my opinion, the first family and the first lady are completely unimportant; all they are is a prop in a big political game. I find it funny that they can sway the public in one way or another when they really have absolutely nothing to do with the job we are electing the president to do. As much as the first family may play a role in how we perceive the president or think of him as a person, we as the public really have no idea how he is a father or husband. We know nothing about what happens behind closed doors. If you are the president, you are smart enough to realize that how you act with your family publicly will influence the nation, so you cant believe anything you see.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that the first family should play that much of a role within the presidents campaign. When looking at the blind profiles in class of the GOP candidates I was more apt to choose a candidate who was married to the same spouse for many years because it showed commitment and implied the ability to compromise, but past the blind profile I don't think the Presidents children should play a role. I agree with Jonathan because I don't think the children should be politicized by the administration, nor do I think they should be attacked by the press. The children should be allowed to keep a low profile and stay out of the spotlight as much as possible. As for the first lady, she should be allowed to choose her own involvement within the administration because she like her children are just passengers. If she should choose to be active that's her own prerogative, but she and the children were not elected so they shouldn't have to bear the scrutiny of the press. I don't think people should read into what the first family is or is not doing, and should instead focus on the President himself.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone who said that the photos of the president and his family help the voters view the president as a common man. It instills in them that he is just as human as the rest of us, just like how we commoners have family pictures so too does the president and his family. Also I agree with Eddie when he says that the first ladies agenda is to advocate for reforms to protect mothers and children. It comes as no surprise that the role of the first lady is to reach out to children and mothers across our country, as women in general are viewed as the loving caring individual within a family.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to see how high Michelle Obama’s approval rating are relative to her husbands.The first lady reaches out to families who are going through a tough time and ensures them that she is feeling there pain, in addition to thanking them for all the sacrifices they have made for the country. I think the first lady can be compared to the role of a mother in a family. Just like a mother to her family, the first lady will naturally take on more social projects then political projects. Therefore her expectations are not high and her approval rating will be high relative to the presidents.
Moreover, I believe that the role of the first family should play no role in policy and are attitude towards the president. The first family should not be taken into consideration when evaluating the president. The president’s evaluation should be based on his performance and what he does to improve the state of the country. Citizens should not get caught up in the pictures they see of Michelle Obama in people magazine.
As we learned in class that the president has to display a certain image and I believe that one image is that of a family man. I can't picture this country electing a president that does not have a loving wife and kids. The role of the first family is to be there for the president and to show his true colors. In a way it can be unfair to the presidents wife and especially kids for always being in the spotlight. However, the first lady does play an important role to the president and to the country. Her goal is to become the ideal woman. Whether that mean being the countries most famous house wife or a smiling face that stands strongly next to her husband. The president's family to me defines the kind of man the president is. His family shows what the cameras and press can not. Therefore though may sometimes be unethical, the presidents family should play some part in the presidential campaigns, because it shows the true man that you may vote for.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nathan that its important for the president to display a certain image, and that portraying himself as a "family man" can be helpful. However, I don't agree that the first lady's goal is to "become the ideal woman," or anything of the sort. I wouldn't even say that she (or the rest of the First Family should necessarily be defined by anything in particular. Some First Ladies have taken a more prominent role and public face, while others have not. I don't think that either way is correct, not do I believe that the First Family necessarily "shows the true man you may vote for". I do, however, believe that projecting themselves a happy family is beneficial to the President.
ReplyDeleteit's not that I believe they should be viewed as an "Ideal woman", but they are for sure seen as role model to average female. And how can you say the first family doesn't show the true man that you are voting for? A family shows a mans character, strengths, weaknesses, priorities, passions, ect. A mans' family defines him.
ReplyDeleteI think it is interesting that, unless I haven't read the previous comments carefully enough, nobody has brought up the most obvious impact that the first family has on the president - they're his family! More than political props or even policy initiators, his first family is - well, his family. When he's not being "POTUS", he plays with his kids, has lunch with his wife, etc. They were with him before his candidacy and they will remain with him, one presumes, after his term(s) are over. In other words, the family plays a very direct role on the president as a husband and father. In this regard, it is important to include the president's parents, siblings and so forth, even if they are not part of the first family.
ReplyDeleteIn today's media age, I'd agree with everyone above that the first family ought to play a very visible role, so that they humanize the president. I remember during the Democratic Party's Convention, Michelle said something along the lines of watching him adjust a rear view mirror on his way to work. This is very relatable - so relatable, in fact, that even today, years later, when I'm adjusting a rear view mirror it occurs to me that Obama used to do exactly that. The first family can be an important and effective tool for the rhetorical presidency.
Although the president does represent Americans politically he has developed the role of an image and a figure head. The majority of Americans have structured families with relatively stable relationships. And even if a voter does not have experience with a healthy family he can put his trust in a person who raises a healthy, functional family. The President needs to relate to the people in as many ways as he can and the all american family is one those primary avenues. The fact that the president has a healthy marriage is a topic for some reason, high on the mental register of pundits', critiques' and more importantly, voter's minds. Having this aspect as part of his life is necessary but certainly not sufficient. A good father or husband does not mean a good politician (perhaps the opposite). But knowing what the American family demands prior to entering the office is crucial for knowing what Americans want! Since he is acting on their behalf in the modern presidency, this is information crucial for him to know to enable him to relate to us. And the only way the American people can put their trust in a potential president and trust a current one is knowing that he can relate to the people.
ReplyDeleteSimply put, the first family is one of the subtle mechanisms that helps us Americans connect with our president. We have learned about the origination of the presidency and how its designers wanted to prevent a monarchy. One quick glance at the Royal Family in England shows us how different we are from them. Seeing Pres. Obama taking a drag of his cigarette or walking with his family on the White House lawn is comforting to Americans because it normalizes and "de-superheroes" the presidency. Specifically the role of the first lady should be a leader for all women and should exemplify the quintessential role model for all wives. In addition to seeing the strength of the president during times of trouble, it is important to see his family strong by his side. This unified strength shows any american how to react to smaller personal problems- as a unified family.
ReplyDeleteThe first family should play this aforementioned role, because it adds a calming presence to the always stressful American Presidency.
I realize that I will probably repeat many things said earlier and I take this opportunity to say I agree with their views.
ReplyDeleteThe role of the president’s family is a bit complicated. On the one hand they are in a unique position to coordinate and advocate for/with a multitude of interests groups (generally non-profit domestic policies and the like) and they are also help the president’s public image appeal to the common American. However, it can be argued that the role of the president’s family in federal policy should be minimal. After all, we did not vote the First Family into office. Their skills and political ideals or personality are not what we chose to lead our nation. And if they do impact our policies in a manner we do not approve or in a manner that contrasts with the actions or statements of the president it could lead to huge scandal and not only would the president be extremely compromised and have to attempt to control the damage, but we as a nation would lose international respect and this could result in our being placed in a less favorable position at any future negotiations we may take part in
Only six presidents had no children and one had no wife. I think that tells us something- Americans view a President with a family to be more qualified for the job, for various obvious but not exclusive reasons. Whether it's right or wrong people judge a person on the spouse he chose and the children he raised. In many senses the president is the father of our nation and therefore the way the president conducts himself with his family is a good indicator of how he will father us...at least that's what we think.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that a president should ever be elected on the basis of their family. Family is important but your family's ability to look pretty in a picture doesn't mean you can make good policy. I think that lots of the time the president uses his family as a tactic to win over many hearts of the Americans, and I think this may work for majority of them. But not because it's the right equation(nice family=good president), but rather because many of the population is ignorant to the politics involving the President. Having approval ratings for the First Lady is irrelevant for policy but another plus for the Presidents that have bad policy...and good wives.
Posted for Zack G (on time):
ReplyDelete1.I do not believe that the “First Family” should play integral role within the president’s campaign. The President’s children should not be scrutinized by the media. Furthermore, the media should not put the spot light on the children. I agree with Noam, that the children deserve the right to keep a low profile and maintain their privacy. As for the first lady, she should be allowed to choose her own personal involvement within the administration because she is not the president. The American people need to be more focus on the President and not his family. If she chooses to be pro- active on issues that she finds to be of importance; as well as promoting her own political agenda, that is her own decision. However, I agree with Jonathan that the role of the president's family should be a means of portraying him as a suitable candidate as well as an ordinary person. If the President has strong family values, then average people will have an easier time connecting with him.
2.I found Silver's article to be very interesting. I think Silver does an excellent job of addressing some important issues. Silver’s case studies are enlightening and maybe even have some truth to some extent. However, the article suggests that President Obama has a good chance of winning against every candidate except for Romney. I agree with David, that Silver does not examine the issues of foreign policy and the unpopularity of the Republican Party within his case studies. Likewise, he disregard’s other core issues such as, illegal immigration and Middle East policy. With a fluctuating economy, the 2012 election will go down to the wire. If the economy improves over the next 12 months, Obama has a great chance of being re-elected.
Posted for David (on time):
ReplyDeleteI think we can all agree that the First Lady does have some role in our connection to the president. There have been different degrees and variations of this role over the years, from the Kennedy "Camelot" to Hilary Clinton's health care reform. Whatever else they may accomplish, First Ladies, through influencing national fashion or attempting to improve societal ills for example, allow the American people to form some idea of the president's values and goals (whether that idea is false is not the issue here), thereby allowing the people to understand the president. In addition, those methods of influencing society (ex: fashion, reform) more directly (or rather openly) affects the daily lives of individual Americans, which creates a closer connection to the First Lady and by extension the president.
The role First Ladies play in presidential campaigns is both more complex and straightforward. This role is historically to reinforce or create an image of the president as a "family man" who has stable and usually traditional values. They may also contribute to the campaign by using methods similar to those described in the previous paragraph. For example, the current First Lady's "Let's Move" campaign and her "Joining Forces" initiative could (in addition to being elements of our understanding and connection to the president) be seen as attempts to gain the favor and goodwill of certain (if not all) segments of the American (voting) population, a valuable asset during an election and something that the president himself may not be able to do.
As to whether the First Lady should or shouldn't have such a role during a campaign or in regard to the president's image I think that there are alredy unnofficial guidelines for the existence and degree of this role. That they have such a role is nearly indisputable. Every president (especially since the media revolution) has utilized the First Lady in such a role. However, from Hilary's failed health care reform we see that this role is limited ,perhaps to the relatively successful (though limited in terms of broad effect) types of campaigns and initiatives of the current First Lady,
Posted for Joshua (on time):
ReplyDeleteThe role of the first family is to support the president. Anything that they do will affect how the American People view the president. If the president can keep a stable household and his family is involved in public policy, then people will view him in a positive light.
The role of the first lady is to be the hostess of the White House. In fact, the first lady even has her own office, which is an entity that is considered as a branch of the office of the president.
The first lady is supposed to attend functions and ceremonies along with her husband. She is also in charge of organizing functions in the white house such as state dinners where she hosts foreign dignitaries and heads of state.
In the event that the president is unable to attend certain functions, it is her duty to take his place.
First ladies have also pursued certain public policy issues or charity work.
She is married to the president, and as a result, everything that she does will affect not only how the public views her as a person, but also how the public views the president.