Political Image

“Having lost his image in a presidential campaign years ago, Dean has become the laughing stock among many political communities and the general public… an outburst of raw and true emotions during a rally…Howard Dean was scorned for acting the way he did, but he was merely showing his enthusiasm and vigor for the presidential race.”— From Howard Dean is human by UWP 101 Saelee



Howard Dean’s demonstration of raw emotion during a 2004 presidential campaign speech may have seemed unprofessional, but the general public and political community rejection of Dean was in response to his display of his own quirkiness. Dean’s conduct was considered different; he was too dissimilar. His enthusiasm caused him to seem unrelatable—perhaps somehow how unreliable. I guess no one wanted to go to New Hampshire, South Carolina, Oklahoma...or Washington D.C. to take back the White House with Howard Dean.

Unlike Dean, Bill Clinton’s eccentricity was welcomed by the public. He has charm and charisma—enough to entice white house interns. Although different from standard politicians, he was accepted and was considered a president that was identifiable to many Americans. During the current presidential campaign, Bill Clinton came to Davis on behalf of his wife, Hillary Clinton. As one UC Davis student confessed, he was there merely in support of Bill—although he was not running for any political position—like many, he came to see and hear a former president.

Conversely, some individuals reject presidential candidates who are void of personality. Candidates generally worry about their image in the public eye, careful not to stray from behavior that is conventional, or exemplify behavior, which may seem too illustratory of their personality—vulnerable to rejection. In this year’s democratic campaign, Hillary Clinton, unlike her competitor, Barack Obama, came off as rigid and awkward. Attempts of changing this conception of her failed, as she seemed uncomfortable, impersonable, unfriendly, and even two-faced. Her attempts to integrate with certain ethnic and social groups and the American public were not seen as genuine. She was criticized for changing her personality among certain people in order to fit in.



Pre-Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore was known as a boring presidential candidate in the 2000 elections—attributes such as his monotonous voice and stiffness in the media highlighted this conception of him. Had he not “fallen out of love” with politics, joined the 2008 election, he would received positive feedback from the public. Why the sudden change? Gore hasn’t; just his interests. Is what we see really what we get? Does the media portray the candidates in a certain light, emphasizing misconceptions? Are our views of people skewed because we follow popular consensus?