Surrogate Speakers Can Help And Hurt A Campaign
Candidates running for a national office spreads themselves thinly as they must confront many time issues. They have to travel all over the country in order to appeal to a great number of demographics. A candidate must also prepare for debates, give speeches, and if he or she is running as an incumbent for re-election they still must maintain all of their official duties of the position. With all of these demands it is impossible for a candidate to be doing everything by his or herself. As a means of alleviating some of these pressures candidates will often have surrogate speakers to go out and speak on behalf of them.
In comparison to Obama, one of Hilary’s strongest advantages is her impressive resume. And while she may have a number of large supporters, including the former President out campaigning on her behalf, Obama’s list of supporters is ‘explosive.’ Not only does he have strong support from veteran political figures such as Senator John Kerry, and Senator Edward Kennedy, but a number of celebrities, such as Oprah Winfrey, as well. Surrogate’s may be able to convey the feelings or beliefs of a candidate to certain demographics who may not feel connected to them. The two nominees need surrogates to help bridge the gaps, especially in terms of women, and African-Americans.
In a recent interview, a surrogate speaker for Barack Obama, Texas Senator Kirk Watson, “botched,” a recent interview on MSNBC. He was asked to name a major political accomplishment of Obama’s and he could not. This was extremely disappointing for the Obama campaign to have a surrogate mess up on that sort of question. One of Obama’s biggest obstacles in his campaign is proving that while he is a fairly young and inexperienced politician, he is a capable leader. The Clinton campaign certainly did not let this error slide; Hillary addressed it in a recent interview. While this error was not extremely detrimental to Obama’s campaign, in a race this close no one can afford any mistakes. After watching the video clip, you almost feel embarrassed for Watson as he stumbles for words.
Surrogate speakers are often family members, friends, or other large supporters such as large contributors or celebrities. It is beneficial for a candidate to have surrogates because they can attack or address a situation or another person when the candidate cannot. Surrogates are crucial in terms of raising support and awareness for a candidate. Equally, surrogate speakers can cause problems and damage the campaign if they do their job poorly.
In comparison to Obama, one of Hilary’s strongest advantages is her impressive resume. And while she may have a number of large supporters, including the former President out campaigning on her behalf, Obama’s list of supporters is ‘explosive.’ Not only does he have strong support from veteran political figures such as Senator John Kerry, and Senator Edward Kennedy, but a number of celebrities, such as Oprah Winfrey, as well. Surrogate’s may be able to convey the feelings or beliefs of a candidate to certain demographics who may not feel connected to them. The two nominees need surrogates to help bridge the gaps, especially in terms of women, and African-Americans.
In a recent interview, a surrogate speaker for Barack Obama, Texas Senator Kirk Watson, “botched,” a recent interview on MSNBC. He was asked to name a major political accomplishment of Obama’s and he could not. This was extremely disappointing for the Obama campaign to have a surrogate mess up on that sort of question. One of Obama’s biggest obstacles in his campaign is proving that while he is a fairly young and inexperienced politician, he is a capable leader. The Clinton campaign certainly did not let this error slide; Hillary addressed it in a recent interview. While this error was not extremely detrimental to Obama’s campaign, in a race this close no one can afford any mistakes. After watching the video clip, you almost feel embarrassed for Watson as he stumbles for words.
Surrogate speakers are often family members, friends, or other large supporters such as large contributors or celebrities. It is beneficial for a candidate to have surrogates because they can attack or address a situation or another person when the candidate cannot. Surrogates are crucial in terms of raising support and awareness for a candidate. Equally, surrogate speakers can cause problems and damage the campaign if they do their job poorly.
posted by Leah | 3:42 PM
7 Comments:
I checked out the Oprah clip and wow! She really got that crowd going, which seemed to be a crowd of mostly women. Obama having, Oprah as a surrogate is powerful because she is so appealing to women and taking these women from Hilary will be particularly damaging to her efforts. Oprah addresses that she is not voting on race or gender she is voting because Obama is "Brilliant."
I definitely agree that surrogates are capable of being extremely influential in the election process. Even with representing simple products such as shampoos and lip glosses, celebrities and other prominent public figures have a big role most notably in the eyes of the less-informed, on-the-fence voters. That being said, mess-ups from these surrogate speakers can prove to be just as detrimental to a close race as they would be beneficial when executed properly.
It seems as though Obama's Surrogates are being put under more scruitny then Hillary's most powerful surrogate speaker, her daughter. They have kept her out of the spot light for a long time, but she is advocating for her mom and had become a strong surrogate speaker. Will the clintons be able to keep her from being interviewed and her speaking put under a microscope? only time will be able to tell, but it doesn't seem fair to how my emphasis they put on Obama's surrogates and not Hillary's.
While Chelsea is an important surrogate, she is just now starting to make an impact worthy of debate. But I don't feel that she is the most important surrogate, which is Bill. Bill, while controversial, is still well-liked by many in the Democratic and Independent circles. Surrogates can make or break. In the case of Oprah, it may be dangerous, because who knows whether people will vote for Obama because he stands up for what they believe in, or just because Oprah likes him, or people who vote for Hillary because they like Madeline Albright, who is supporting Hillary.
I don't think it is fair for Hillary to be scrutinized in each category more than Obama, and I don't think Chelsea is the prominent surrogate for her either. Bill is clearly the leading surrogate and as far as politics are concerned--blows Oprah out of the water. I didn't see Chelsea covered by the media as a surrogate until she spoke for Hillary in Hawaii. This shadow over Chelsea could be done by "the power of the Clintons" or just because the media still loves Bill. Only time will tell.
I recommend that everyone check out the Watson interview link in Leah's post. It's very entertaining, as well as a bit uncomfortable to watch. What a blunder. Regarding Chelsea, as mentioned in class, she is the Hillary surrogate who most results in increased approval for Hillary. Which is why we probably won't see Chelsea sitting down with Chris Matthews any time soon.
I think having surrogates is great, but it is interesting to see how people respond to the celebrities. Oprah has endorsed Obama, and Ellen supports Clinton. These two talk show hosts are very popular, likable and influence a lot of the public, especially women. What I wonder though is if people are voting for a candidate because of they like them better than the other, or because their favorite celebrity is endorsing them. I thought of this when Obama was in Iowa and Oprah introduced him. The arena they were in was completely sold out and a rally goer admitted that she didn't know a whole lot about Obama, but loved Oprah so thats why she was really there. On the other hand, having a surrogate could really sway undecided voters one way or the other. That one particular woman who didn't know a lot about Obama could have been completely decided after leaving the rally, for all we know.
Post a Comment
<< Home