The Presidential Name Game: Bush, Clinton and Paul

For many of us, it’s natural to support or oppose presidential candidates because we like or dislike their relatives who’ve previously served in office. But should we?

Perhaps the better play is to take a step back and evaluate these gut reactions before we solidify our opinions.

Many consider former President Bill Clinton one of the greatest presidents of this era. In addition to his policy achievements, he is widely admired for his amazing ability to connect to people as individuals. He charms those who talk to him, focuses entirely on the individual and seems to make every person feel as if they are the most important person in the world. He lives life big and enjoys the pleasures life offers. Does anyone view Hillary Clinton that way? 

Why would we judge a potential Hillary Clinton presidency by her husband’s, other than the experience she gained during and since then? Secretary Clinton is certainly substantive, but she lacks her husband’s big personality and exceptionally engaging manner. And while I suspect he is energized by crowds, I wonder if she needs more quiet and alone time. And why shouldn’t she? Mrs. Clinton is a different person than her husband and should be evaluated afresh.

The same can be said of the Bush family. President George H.W. Bush had an impressive resume, but served only one unexceptional term in the Oval Office. His son President George W. Bush likely benefited from residual good will toward his father when he was first elected. “W” united us after 9/11, but then used this equity to get us into a war in Iraq under what proved to be false pretenses. Some think the Iraq War had more to do with finishing what his father did not do as president than any real strategic interest.

In any case, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush did not get us into Iraq, and by all accounts is different from his older brother and father. He benefits from the name recognition of his family, but is also judged as though he shares their style and ideology. Yet, he’s considered more thoughtful but less sociable than his brother or father.

And consider Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, who is also running for the Republican nomination for president. His opponents seek to diminish him by lumping him in with his eccentric libertarian father, former Rep. Ron Paul, who also ran for president.

Critics say Sen. Paul is unlikely to win the primary as a libertarian, but it’s possible he’ll surprise people, as his appeal to disaffected Democrats, Republicans, youths and leaders of the medical and tech communities may give him a real shot at winning the Republican nomination. His father has a history of controversial views – on issues ranging from abolishing the federal income tax to legalizing drugs – but Ron’s sometimes provocative statements should not be credited to or diminish Rand.

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, a prospective Democratic candidate for president, perfectly articulated a bipartisan concern when he said recently, “The presidency of the United States is not some crown to be passed between two families.” In so doing, he reinforced this idea that 2016 presidential candidates must be judged by the actions of their families. I urge us to resist that oversimplification, as Jeb Bush’s and Hillary Clinton’s leadership, management, judgment, political views and likely success as president have scant connection with their family members who served.

It may be comforting to know this is not a uniquely American issue. In May, Jean-Marie Le Pen, founder of France’s controversial National Front was suspended from the party by its leader – his daughter – Marine Le Pen. In turn, Marine seems to be trying to move the party away from its anti-Semitic, xenophobic roots to the center so it has a chance at winning more seats. In response, the elder Le Pen is resisting and publicly challenging his daughter. The result is an internecine mess that may be amusing to some but reflects the challenge of any politician trying to benefit from the family predecessor’s name while distancing himself from the baggage associated with his name.

My point is simply this: Like or dislike these candidates as you see fit, but try to judge them as individuals. We have elected presidents good and bad without regard to their relatives. Former President Jimmy Carter had his troubled brother Billy. President John F. Kennedy’s father was suspected of engineering and possibly buying the 1960 Kennedy election.

Americans should judge candidates on their beliefs, not their bloodlines. As we enter this presidential-election cycle, let the games, not the names, begin.

Article originally published on Medium.

Gary Shapiro is president and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA)?, the U.S. trade association representing more than 2,000 consumer electronics companies, and author of the New York Times best-selling books Ninja Innovation: The Ten Killer Strategies of the World's Most Successful Businesses and The Comeback: How Innovation Will Restore the American Dream. His views are his own. Connect with him on Twitter: @GaryShapiro.