Do celebrity endorsements help or hurt presidential candidates?
The success of US presidential candidates is due, in surprisingly large part, to their name recognition and star power. Even though there's been considerable resentment towards "Hollywood elites" foisting their political opinions on the American electorate, the fact that politicians court celebrity endorsements and tout them when received points to a perceived net benefit.
John Q. Public
Yes, they do help. Respected personalities bring attention to candidates among people who don't follow politics.
Joe Schmoe
Celebrity endorsement don't help presidential candidates. Americans resent entertainers weighing in too heavily into the political process, and it causes a backlash.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
My feeling is this: only half of Americans vote at all, and probably a substantial number of them are not terribly well-versed in the candidates positions. An endorsement from someone they recognize and respect might be enough to make them recall a candidate in the voting booth. Remember, Oprah is the one who got America reading again. A political endorsement from her could sway millions. In fact, a study by University of Maryland economists Craig Garthwaite and Timothy Moore estimates that Oprah's endorsement and active campaigning helped Obama to the tune of approximately 1 million votes in the Democratic primaries and caucuses.
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
I agree with you that a substantial portion of our country is completely disengaged with our democratic process and never bother to vote. But I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of those who do manage to vote have their own personal reasons to support a candidate. And while people might appreciate Oprah's advice about a relatively non-personal decision like what book to read next, she might be overplaying her influence by telling people who their leader should be. And while it's entirely possible that Oprah helped Obama in the primaries, she might have hurt him in the general election.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
I think celebrities can endorse a candidate without it coming off as heavy-handed. Either the celebrity resonates with someone, in which case their endorsement is a positive one, or it doesn't resonate, in which case it's pretty much ignored. If Angelina Jolie endorses Obama, it will be a net-positive gain for Obama among her fans; people who think she's an idiot but support Obama will not necessarily abandon their candidate, and even so, it's probably a very small group.
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
I think that group that's at risk of getting annoyed into defecting to another camp is bigger than you might think. For the general election, Independents are often the swing-group that's on the fence until something pushes them to choose a side. Independents are a...well...pretty independent bunch, not kowtowing to either the Republicans or the Democrats. They're going to get pissed off by an arrogant Hollywood actor telling them they really need to vote for the Democrat. And, I want to say here, that Democrats, not Republicans, stand much more to lose by having celebrity endorsements.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
I disagree. There are conservative activists in Hollywood (Sylvester Stallone, Bo Derek, Chuck Norris), who've come out to support John McCain, but they're vastly outnumbered by Democratic supporters, such as Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand, Sean Penn, Janeane Garofalo and Ben Affleck. Most younger people, who are less politically aware to begin with, are also more attuned to the private lives of Hollywood personalities--they're very likely to take cues, either consciously or unconsciously, from them. Think about how much Hollywood sets trends in clothing, gadgets, and cars!
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
Keep in mind that Sylvester Stallone and Chuck Norris are considered "regular guys", not tainted with the snobbery that the Hollywood elite are commonly associated with. A politician endorsed by Streisand will likely motivate plenty of people who think she's a self-righteous witch to get out to the polls and vote for the other guy. (Her stunts in New York lambasting Bush were talked about heavily in conservative circles) And, again, the influence of Hollywood activists is limited when it comes to Generation Y, who don't care to vote and don't care about Baby Boomer actors like Alec Baldwin and Sean Penn.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
Sean Penn is a baby boomer? More like Generation X, but I understand. I still think there is something to be said for having a recognized name, respected for at least something, on the list of endorsers. Now, today's political candidates are more cautious than ever before, with almost everything they announce being poll-tested beforehand. If a celebrity's endorsement was more of a liability than a boon, then wouldn't they be more reluctant to promote that?
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
Are you talking about those clever Democratic presidential candidates...that lost the last 2 elections? I think most of the politicians are friends with the celebrities that endorse them, so for the sake of friendship, maybe they're not going to downplay a free endorsement anyway. But there are plenty of things that seem to be good on the surface, but reveal themselves to be curses once you scratch past the surface. Did you hear about the UK Guardian's letter-writing campaign ("Operation Clark County") to undecided Ohio voters? Here's a link.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
I won't disagree with you there - foreign influence in a national election can be well-meaning but it often backfires. We'll probably never know the extent of the impact of Operation Clark County, but I hope you're not suggesting that (American) entertainers endorsing candidates is the same thing!
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
In a way, yes. Both Europeans and Hollywood are, in some ways, perceived the same way by middle-of-the-road Americans: meddlesome, and arrogant enough to think their opinion matters more than it does. The Democratic elite, with their constant insulting of the Right for being "stupid", comes off sounding pompous. With their millions of dollars and jet-setting lifestyle, they're considered out of touch with the realities of normal people.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
There are plenty of examples to the contrary. Bruce Springsteen, Willie Nelson, Jon Bon Jovi, and Dave Matthews come to mind as "average Joes" who support the Democratic party. There are others. And while their criticism of the Republican party can sometimes sound extreme, actors like George Clooney, Alec Baldwin and Martin Sheen are not immediately associated with espresso-sipping snoots. And, at least at this point, many of their "extreme" views are agreed with by the majority of Americans who have seen nothing but failure come out of the White House in recent years.
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
Keep in mind that savvy Republicans are doing a good job of distancing themselves from the failures of George W. Bush, and they're not being supported by moneyed, politically-correct Hollywood liberals and their "friends" in the mass media. Don't forget that this meme is so prevalent now that it's rattled off without a second thought.
600 characters left
John Q. Public
You've reminded me of something that will probably become glaringly obvious to voters in November: just exactly who is supporting the Republicans? Hollywood, with a very few set of exceptions, does not. Poll after poll puts Republican support at new lows. Europeans can rile up Americans with their opinions, but pretty much the entire planet dislikes George W. Bush and the Republicans. You would have to be a true rebel--or, rather, a petulant child--to support a party that has been discredited by just about everyone.
600 characters left
Joe Schmoe
Just a few more months until the election - that's actually a long time in the world of politics. A lot of things can happen. At any rate, getting back to the matter of celebrity endorsements, I'll leave this as my final thought (and I look forward to reading your response): George Clooney, long active in supporting Democratic candidates, had seemed to favor Barack Obama earlier in 2007. However, he chose to keep his support relatively low-profile.
Why? His words: "You know, my father ran for Congress two years ago. But … everything was categorized as Hollywood versus the heartland, and I actually hurt him, as he was running as a Democrat in Kentucky. I could do damage to Obama. So, I don't necessarily know [that] saying I back him is helpful." In fact, he chose to extend a $1 million bounty to anyone who could prove that he had anything more than one phone conversation over the last year and a half.
(Thank you, John: this has been an interesting exchange!)
600 characters left
John Q. Public
Thank you, Joe; it's been great to "dyalogue" with you about this.
Regarding Clooney's quote: we're in a different era. The deliberate framing of "Hollywood vs Heartland" by the Republicans has probably lost its luster as have so many of their other practices and policies. A lot of what Hollywood actors and musicians have been saying have been vindicated as Iraq has been termed a colossal failure. There's probably something to be said for celebrities taking care to not look condescending, but I still believe that high-profile endorsements on a national level are net-positive for candidates. If they weren't, you'd see far less touting of them by the candidates than you do.
600 characters left
600 characters left