1 post tagged “presidential experience”

question: is political experience an indicator of presidential success?
understanding this question: "washington is a tough place - only the tried and true have the experience to weather the storm"
overstanding this question: political experience historically has not been an indicator of future presidential success. this correlation may exist in the future, but it does not today.
-------------------------------------------------

common argument 1: sen. mccain's political experience makes him a stronger candidate than either of the potential democratic opponents
common argument 2: sen. clinton's political experience will enable her to more effectively serve as president on day 1 vs. sen. obama

a few points to address first:
1st: we can all agree that sen. mccain is the most politically experienced - this is fact
2nd: whether sen. clinton or sen. obama is more experienced politcally, is up for debate. in terms of time in elected office, sen. clinton has 7 years and sen. obama has 11 years. the tipping point is whether you include sen. clinton's time as first lady of the United States (8 years) and first lady of arkansas (12 years) with her 7 years as a US senator from new york. experience appears to tell us little.

these issues aside:
experience-based arguments are contingent on the premise that political experience prior to one becoming president is a predictive factor of success as a a president.

the deepest look:
for the deepest look, check out this analysis at http://www.electoral-vote.com. it is an excellent piece, with plenty of data.

comparing presidents:
while an intuitive argument to some, a proper examination reveals at best that political experience is a shaky indicator of presidential success. on this basis, would you be willing to argue that james buchanan (30.25 years experience) was a greater president than woodrow wilson (2) years? or that james garfield (23 yrs) was a more successful and effective president than abraham lincoln (10 yrs)? obviously not. to be fair, some of our greatest presidents -- george washington, 24.5 yrs and thomas jefferson 13.25 yrs -- entered office with experience, and has successful presidencies.

other factors to note:
additionally, there are many factors that a president is faced with when he enters office that could potentially influence his success. for brevity, i've listed three obvious questions:
- is the president's supporting party in majority or minority in congress?
- what is state of the economy?
- is the country facing war?

charts don't lie:
lastly, i think its important to look at the entire universe of past presidents, their experience and their "success". i concede that success is a subjective measure. the chart following uses these presidential ranks, which are a compilation of 12 "expert" surveys conducted between 1948 and 2005, as detailed in the wikipedia link in above. the chart below illustrates the absence of correlation between years of political experience and presidential success.