# Experience and "character" don't mean jack to voters, so it's really issues? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 14, 2017, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099 "2017-01-14T08:23:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Drum\_God](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drum_god/32/44_2.png) [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/21 "2017-01-14T21:41:10Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](#): > > I disagree. The UK voted in Margaret Thatcher 3 times, the Germans about the same number of times with Angela Merkel. Both are examples of strong women. I can virtually guarantee Americans as a whole do not have substantially different views on strong women as Germans or Brits. Those are parliamentary systems. The general public didn’t vote for them. They voted for their MP, who voted for them. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/22 "2017-01-14T22:44:48Z")
> [@Drum\_God](#): > > Those are parliamentary systems. **The general public didn’t vote for them.** **They voted for their MP,** who voted for them. This is very debatable. In fact not only debatable but probably as wrong as can be whilst being technically correct. I suggest you have no idea why UK voters voted the way they did. The best political scientists cannot answer \*the why \*with any certainty so I don’t expect internet forum users to know either. That said, it’s no coincidence that Party’s led by poor leaders fare poorly in UK elections. Michael Foot’s Labour Party didn’t fail so spectacularly in 1983 because of an influx of poor local prospective Parliamentary candidates. It was a mixture of reasons; one being the leadership qualities of the two major Prime Ministerial options. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/23 "2017-01-15T01:17:30Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t understand this need to reduce the result of this election down to one and only one cause. Not only is it much more likely that there are multiple causes, but it’s also likely that this suite of causes is not the same every elections cycle. There are probably common themes (it IS the economy, stupid) that run through most elections, be each cycle brings its own unique dynamic. A dynamic that is not independent of the particular folks running, too. Not to mention a certain amount of luck. Yeah, I think Hillary suffered from being attached to Bill and the perception of his record (too pro-gay for some on the cultural right, too tied to big banks & to Wal-Mart for the economic left, was impeached), and from a recent economy in the Midwest that was going to favor outsiders and challengers (this is a known predictor). And she \*still \*got more votes than Trump. Take out Bubba’s legacy, have better economic preconditions, and Hillary probably ekes out a win. I think her problem wasn’t _really_ image, in the superficial sense, at all. Elite men flatter themselves if they think they aren’t hated as much as elite women. It was the sense that she and Bill had nothing to offer the geographic middle of the country but more cops and more Wal-Mart. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/24 "2017-01-15T05:38:11Z")
> [@Uniqueorn](#): > > Or it’s even simpler in that the person making the biggest promises wins. Worked in high school! ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/25 "2017-01-15T06:09:26Z")
It’s not issues either. Unless the issue is “I hate liberals.” Obama was a communist for proposing infrastructure projects. Trump’s a savior to the working class for proposing infrastructure projects. Deficits were the worst thing you could do in America under Obama, but were fine under Bush, and will be higher under Trump than they would have been under Clinton. I think guns and abortion are probably the only things that actually matter. Literally every other issue the Republicans like are just rooting for their team rather than something they support on merit. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/26 "2017-01-15T07:22:15Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > No it’s apparently neither experience nor character nor issues: it’s about successfully pushing emotional buttons in people. And most especially in those people whose votes count more than others. And that’s what Trump did. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/27 "2017-01-15T08:06:21Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Literally every other issue the Republicans like are just rooting for their team rather than something they support on merit. Similar to Democrats. Anyone who cared more about policy than party wouldn’t classify himself as being a part of, affiliated with, or caring the least about a political party. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 9:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/28 "2017-01-15T09:33:33Z")
> [@Drum\_God](#): > > Those are parliamentary systems. The general public didn’t vote for them. They voted for their MP, who voted for them. I can assure you very very few British voters vote for their MP, other than technically. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/29 "2017-01-15T13:01:30Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **Snarky Kong** : > > I think guns and abortion are probably the only things that actually matter. Literally every other issue the Republicans like are just rooting for their team rather than something they support on merit. I don’t think even the most hardcore Trump supporters were deluded into thinking he cared about abortion, and I have no idea what his gun views are. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/30 "2017-01-15T15:16:10Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > … > I think guns and abortion are probably the only things that actually matter. Literally every other issue the Republicans like are just rooting for their team rather than something they support on merit. > [@Chronos](#): > > I don’t think even the most hardcore Trump supporters were deluded into thinking he cared about abortion, and I have no idea what his gun views are. The abortion issue is all about the next Supreme Court justice(s), not about Trump himself. Trump doesn’t care about anything except Trump and the illusion of being popular. ---
**Author:** ![Anny\_Middon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bc79bd/32.png) [@Anny\_Middon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anny_Middon)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/31 "2017-01-15T19:41:59Z")
I don’t remember if it was the 2000 election or the 2004 one, but some reporter or someone (gee, I really do \*\*not \*\*have a memory) opined that the election is won by the person whom most would like to sit down and have a beer. I think that’s largely true. Many American vote for POTUS using about the same criteria they used to vote for student council president in high school. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/32 "2017-01-15T19:56:25Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Anyone who cared more about policy than party wouldn’t classify himself as being a part of, affiliated with, or caring the least about a political party. Disagree. There are two parties in the US with the power to do anything. Forming a coalition with people that think more like you than the other one is perfectly reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/33 "2017-01-15T20:00:56Z")
> [@Anny\_Middon](#): > > I don’t remember if it was the 2000 election or the 2004 one, but some reporter or someone (gee, I really do \*\*not \*\*have a memory) opined that the election is won by the person whom most would like to sit down and have a beer. > > I think that’s largely true. Many American vote for POTUS using about the same criteria they used to vote for student council president in high school. That narrative was certainly around in the 2000 election. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/34 "2017-01-15T21:13:58Z")
Just to add to the OP’s data points, Obama never had a plan about the economy other than “give money to the people that caused the problem” but Americans didn’t care. There have been a lot of studies on what Americans want. At work, they want their boss to listen to them. With businesses, they want customer service to listen to them. In school, they want their teacher to listen to them. In a relationship, they want the other party to listen to them. Having the issue resolved is secondary to validating the person’s feelings. Bill Clinton because he listened to people’s concerns and spoke to them - Bush Sr. did not. Obama won because he listened to people’s concerns and spoke to them - McCain & Romney did not. Trump won because he listened to people’s concerns and spoke to them - Clinton did not. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/35 "2017-01-15T21:18:55Z")
“Character” has always been a problem with ‘the other guy’, it’s a convenient hook for saying ‘I won’t vote for the guy I oppose anyway because he’s a womanizer’, but in reality whatever your guy does ends up being irrelevant or explained away. If people cared about character more, Democrats would have taken issue with Bill Clinton having sex with a subordinate, while Republicans would stop with the unending stream of cheating divorcees. “Experience” is often somewhat relevant, but people tend to grossly exaggerate the relevance of experience for their candidate and dismiss that of the other one. Also, just being in some government position isn’t always an advantage - doing a bad or ineffective job is worse than having no experience. In this election, for example, a lot of Democrats talked about Hillary’s experience (as part of the ‘qualifications’ meme), but for someone who’s been a major political figure for decades she really hasn’t accomplished that much. (If you disagree, what things did she do that resonate with Americans in general? Not just ‘oh, she held position X for Y years’, but programs or policies she made happen. There just isn’t a lot of substance, and some of what she accomplished looks really bad now, like the ‘super predators’ crime bill in the 90s and her support for the Iraq war. So while she has more government experience than Trump, it’s not really much of an asset in general, and is a drawback when a lot of the electorate was looking for something non-establishment. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/36 "2017-01-15T22:30:15Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Disagree. There are two parties in the US with the power to do anything. Forming a coalition with people that think more like you than the other one is perfectly reasonable. As necessary, per issue, certainly. But I think you will find few who don’t _identify_ as one party or the other. What does “using bombs instead of boots on the ground” and “approval of universal health care” and “support for marijuana” all have to do with one another from any sort of philosophical level? These are all just randomly pulled from a bag and widely endorsed as a whole out of nothing more than team spirit and blindness to logic. Why is there a coalition around that arrangement of bits? If you made everyone forget everything about the world, but leave the laws in place, you’d end up with vastly different groups with an equally arbitrary grab bag of positions, and everyone would be rooting for those subsets just as vociferously, even if 2/3rds of the positions were the opposite from what they had been before the memory wipe. That’s not “strength in numbers”, that’s a failure to think for oneself and act rationally. We should have 20 or 30 coalitions and everyone should be a member of 10-15 of them. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/37 "2017-01-15T22:43:27Z")
All kinds of things matter to all kinds of people. Most of us would agree that experience and character are valuable assets, but most of us would vote for an inexperienced jerk who’s a member of our group than an experienced paragon of virtue who isn’t. What determines our group? It CAN be shared opinions on the issues, it CAN be shared ethnicity or religion, or any number of other things. Sometimes our votes are irrational, based on the way a candidate makes us FEEL, rather than on his actual platform. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/38 "2017-01-15T23:24:19Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > ``` > ... In this election, for example, a lot of Democrats talked about Hillary's experience (as part of the 'qualifications' meme), but for someone who's been a major political figure for decades she really hasn't accomplished that much. (If you disagree, what things did she do that resonate with Americans in general? Not just 'oh, she held position X for Y years', but programs or policies she made happen. There just isn't a lot of substance, ... > > ``` If you applied this standard to everyone actually elected to the Presidency in, say, the last fifty years—what lists of accomplishments do you come up with? What are the things “that resonate with Americans in general” that Nixon racked up before his election? Carter? Reagan? G.H W. Bush? Clinton? G.W. Bush? Obama? ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/39 "2017-01-15T23:25:34Z")
I think partisanship and narratives are what people identify with now. Narratives are like what George Lakoff talks about, the narrative of the conservative side and the narrative of the liberal side. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2017, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099/40 "2017-01-16T00:15:28Z")
> [@Anny\_Middon](#): > > I don’t remember if it was the 2000 election or the 2004 one, but some reporter or someone (gee, I really do \*\*not \*\*have a memory) opined that the election is won by the person whom most would like to sit down and have a beer. > > I think that’s largely true. Many American vote for POTUS using about the same criteria they used to vote for student council president in high school. Which, when you consider that W Bush was a recovering alcoholic, is implicitly _sadistic._ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/experience-and-character-dont-mean-jack-to-voters-so-its-really-issues/777099.md?page=3)