President Obama campaigned on the ideas of hope and change. Americans elected him to the presidency because of the image he constructed, his policies, and the countless promises that were made. However, two years after taking office, the disconnect between the President and the public has never been wider.
According to Richard Waterman, author of Image is Everything Presidency, “Candidates for office made more generous promises in order to get elected, which encouraged the public to expect more action from its presidents, which in turn encouraged presidents to promise more action, which further encouraged the public to expect more from their presidents” (37). This quote exemplifies the idea that more often than not presidents made lofty and empty promises that are difficult for them to keep.
For instance, throughout the campaign of 2008 as well as the past two years, Obama has made promises to bring about change in regards to certain salient issues such as the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the current state of the economy, and the unemployment rate. Frequently, Americans listen to President Obama speak eloquently and passionately about a specific issue and turn the television off and expect change just to occur. Unfortunately it is not that easy and change cannot occur overnight. As a result of this, the expectation gap transpires.
The expectation gap is “the idea that there is a gap between what the public expects of its presidents and what presidents actually can accomplish (Waterman 5). Two years after taking office, President Obama is receiving heat from all directions on his inability to stay true to what he campaigned on and promised to change. In an article, “Disappointed Supporters Question Obama,” published in the New York Times by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, many Obama supporters expressed their dissatisfaction with the past two years. One African-American woman said, “I’m exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for. I’ve been told that I voted for a man who was going to change things in a meaning way for the middle class and I’m waiting sir, I’m waiting. I still don’t feel it yet.” This woman illustrates the expectation gap because she was anticipating fulfilled promises and change for the middle class and she has yet to feel that change. Many people in America can relate to this feeling. Several people voted for Obama because of what he stood for and as time goes on, many feel that he is moving further and further away from those original views and values.
The main problem with promises and expectations is that this almost always sets the president up for inevitable failure. In the New York Times article, Obama states, “my goal here is not to convince you that everything is where it needs to be,” the president said, “but what I am saying is that we are moving in the right direction.” This quote illustrates the cycle of rising expectations, which occurs because the public expects more than the president can deliver. The president is set up to fail before he even steps into office because the public has this idealistic notion that “the man in the white house can do something about everything” (Waterman 6).
The cycle of rising expectations occurs within an administration because presidents make too many promises in an effort to get elected. Once elected, the president is unable to deliver on all of his promises and in turn the public becomes disappointed with the candidate. President Obama is currently facing the expectation gap where the public expects more than he can deliver. The American public needs to be patient, we are moving in the right direction and eventually change will come.
Stolberg, Sheryl G. "Disappointed Supporters Question Obama." The New York Times. 20 Sept. 2010. Web. 20 Sept. 2010. .
ReplyDeleteIn response to Meghan’s post, I agree with her and fell that same way about how our president is selected. More often than not individuals choose based on the Presidents image. It is a tactic that has been rising since the media started to come into effect more during political events. With the past elections involving President Obama and Senator McCain a large amount of their campaigning involved the internet. Obamas campaign largely used the internet, using sites such as facebook to create groups for individuals to join.
ReplyDeleteThe internet was a leading factor as to why Obama was selected to be our nations President because by him using these social networking sites it showed he was a younger more socially inclined person. Many younger individuals didn’t care what he really stood for they cared that he was on facebook or he looked like a cool guy to have beer with in a bar. Instead of looking at his views and how he was going to work toward accomplishing his goals they were more worried about the social media aspect of everything.
In addition to Meghan’s quote she used I went to the page and continued reading the paragraph where she found the quote. It goes on to say “This cycle of rising expectations created the conditions for inevitable failure. One of the key problems with the activist presidential model and the master politician image, then, is that the presidents eventually were hard-pressed to assuage the public’s ever increasing demands for action.”(Waterman, 37). This is saying that we build up these candidates so much when in the long run we know that some of them are going to fail.
I liked this quote that she chose and also the topic that she talks about because Obama did express hope and change in his campaign, and if we look at what he has done up until now, well to me he has fail miserably. Most people felt he could help our country when in turn he has really found a way to say things that deceived us all. My opinion on why Obama was selected president is basically because he is a colored individual, and he seemed like he was “in” with this day and age with the increasing uses of the internet. People wanted to see history and in turn it has cost our entire country.
Meghan wrote that the main problem with promises and expectations is that it sets the president up for failure. Waterman writes that, "presidential scholars have gone so far to argue that since Lyndon Johnson's election to presidency there has been a consistent pattern of failure (8)." Why is this? We've learned how important image is in a presidency and "going public" plays a large role in that.
ReplyDeleteTo summarize Laracy, going public is basically how the president communicates to the public and what he says to them. Laracey explains how many presidents in the nineteenth century used a norm against going public and were very successful president. For example Abraham Lincoln did not address public policy until the day of his inaugaration. "Lincoln's personal correspondence indicates that his refusal to speak on specific issues of the day at the beginning of his presidency had nothing to do with the supposed influence of any norm. That reticence was due to the strategic calculation that his opponents would inevitably use anything he said against him (103)." Laracey contrasts Lincoln's style of going public with his predecessor, Andrew Johnson. "One historian describes Johnson as a 'tireless campaigner, able to endure long hours of traveling over wretched roads to speak or debate at town after town, day after day'...Johnson quickly compunded his problems by antagonizing the Radical Republicans, who controlled Congress, had resisted Lincoln's renominations, and wanted to control the presidency (113)."
I understand now president's and candidates cannot avoid addressing the issues (although they can around them in debates) but the different styles of Lincoln and Johnson show us that image and going public mean everything in a presidency.
Interesting blog Megan, I too feel the same discontent that the woman quoted from the “Disappointed Supporters Question Obama” article feels. I’m tired of having to “defend” the candidate I voted for because people are not seeing immediate results. But, I too hold the same optimism that you do; eventually change will come (or at least be quantifiable) and over all our country is heading in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I find it difficult not to become discouraged as the expectation gap is noticeably growing as you suggest in your blog. But, I believe that the public is more at fault for this than the president himself. We now live in a society of instant gratification, and we expect our government to move at the same pace as we do. Our government was designed to function slowly so that only the most pressing and vital reforms are made to ensure a stable government. The public however, will consistently refuse to acknowledge this and continue to blame the President for change they feel is coming too slow.
In The Image is Everything Presidency Waterman states that “President Carter was at least partly to blame for continued high inflation, high energy prices, and gasoline shortages (Cronin 1980:15) despite the fact that he inherited each of these problems from his predecessors” (8). Sound familiar? Hopefully this “Carter-esque” image of Obama that is currently being portrayed of him will not stick. Luckily, According to Waterman “image is disposable” (11) and if a public figure does not like the way their image being portrayed they can simply get a new one.
I think that another huge problem with the expectation gap is that we live in a society where everything is instantaneous and convenient. We can acquire a fast food meal in a matter of minutes or choose almost any movie to watch immediately on Netflix. Internet and cell phones constantly boast ever-increasing speeds, meaning faster access to the things you're looking for. In fact, these days we get frustrated if it takes more than 30 seconds for a YouTube video to buffer, and it seems we've all forgotten about the days of waiting 10-15 minutes to watch a one- or two-minute video clip over a dialup Internet connection.
ReplyDeleteIf something so insignificant as a slow Internet connection is enough to ruin our day, imagine how frustrating it is when something that actually does matter doesn't happen immediately. At this point, I feel as though Americans have lost their concept of time, and more importantly, patience. That being said, I think that the "expectation gap" has become so wide because Americans have come to expect IMMEDIATE results in addition to the fulfillment of grandiose, unlikely promises. And as Waterman has stated, these expectations can set up even the most hardworking president for "inevitable failure" (Waterman 37).
Jamieson discusses the great lengths presidents have gone through in the past to make sure they are reaching the widest audience possible, especially during their campaigns. As the media evolve, so do presidential campaigns. Nowadays, campaigns have actually become so effective by the use of the media that it actually HURTS their presidency once elected. This is because, of course, when you're given x amount of hours on the television screens in Americans' homes, obviously you have to have something to say to them. This makes room for more speeches, more empty promises, and therefore, ever-expanding expectation gaps.
Laracey discusses the use of pen names in past presidencies and campaigns, wherein Presidents could write letters about their own policies without ever identifying themselves. Granted, Laracey points out that many people saw past pen names, but the point is that this was a much simpler time in the media. Americans likely did not feel any sort of media overload, and so something like an anonymous letter could more easily resonate through the population. If a president were to try and do that now, it is likely that, instead of any of us ever actually reading his anonymous letter from its original source, we would here about it from 15+ different news sources and listen to other people's opinions on the matter. Then, by the time we ever got around to reading the letter, we'd (a) already know it was the president who wrote it, which defeats the point of the letter, and (b) we would have already formed our positive or negative opinions about it. So another important factor in the expectation gap is that of media overload, because it creates too much opportunity for skewed perceptions, and many times we hear people's opinions about a matter before we've ever heard about the matter directly from its source. Like a game of telephone, this can cause distorted ideas about presidential promises and, ultimately, make the expectation gap even wider.
I completely agree with the issues discussed in Meghan's blog. Sometimes I too feel like I was hypnotized during the 2008 Presidential Campaign. Obama's promises of hope and change seemed to speak to me. In reality I was simply a young naive voter who didn't fully understand political dynamics.
ReplyDeleteIt is funny (well, not really funny) to understand the fundamental principles on which this country was founded. In today's society anyone over the age of 18 is eligible to vote. Regardless if the individual never voted for the "right" candidate, he or she will not loose the right to vote. In the book "Packaging the Presidency" we learn that several colonies enforced strict guidelines as to who could vote. In short, only white, male, property owning Protestants were eligible to vote(Jamieson 4).
Once more we adopted this idea of Political Parties and more colonists earned the right to vote, the more you saw political advertising. The campaign between Andrew Jackson and John Quincy Adams almost foreshadows the dirty politics that are relatively normal by today's standards (6).
Meghan's blog made me think about the events that transpired over the past two years. To say that Americans are disappointed with President Obama is an understatement. I was so caught up in Obama's plans for change in 2008 that I never really took the time to research John McCain's campaign or any other candidate for that matter. Obama knew what would sell with young, inexperienced voters. That tactic may have worked, but we are all still waiting for the hope and change that our President promised us two years ago.
The disgruntled African-American woman Meghan discussed in her blogs was actually show on Monday night's Daily Show. The woman is a former veteran, and a working middle class mother. Jon Stewart hilariously called her "Obama's Kryptonite."
The Obama administration is in charge of a country that is seemingly becoming more desperate each and every day. The expectation gap is something that very few Presidents have been able to overcome. Even Presidents that were popular such as Reagan and Clinton still struggled to overcome peoples hopes and dreams. President Obama however faces a much different problem: Americans are really stepping up to the plate this time. Voters for the first time in a long time are educating themselves, and voting for who they think will be a successful representative of their views.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama did what Waterman describes on page 37 "Candidates for office made more generous promises in order to get elected, which encouraged the public to expect more action from its presidents, which in turn encouraged presidents to promise more action, which further encouraged the public to expect more from their presidents” (37). The messages of hope and change that were brought to us were broad based ideals that people fell in love with. The campaign staff did an incredible job of convincing the public that Superman would be living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But now unemployment is stagnant, most Americans agree with Arizona with the Obama administration suing them, and a number of other things that have frustrated the middle class. This gap that Waterman talks about has become more and more prominent with the midterm elections.
The next Presidential election is going to get awfully interesting. I think we are beginning to see people demanding real concrete answers, not just hope and change. The gap is slowly becoming a ravine which may turn into a canyon with no bridge unless the President and his team can get things turned around.
I think that Megan makes a valid point about our sentiments as a society on what compels us to vote for a candidate. More importantly then the repercussions of that when our hopes grow too high and suddenly, the clock strikes midnight, the promises turn into pumpkins and without warning the American people are our President are Cinderella and her mice left without a coach. These promises made during campaigns are essentially the bar we set for each presidential term, and it certainly isn’t being lowered for anyone.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the problem is two-fold and we have to be realistic, and take some responsibility. As the citizens of this country, I think we expect a lot, and I’m sure many people would argue that we’re supposed to expect a lot. But I think these’s a very apparent line between what we hope one man can do in four years and what is tangible change.
Waterman speaks of this within the first pages of The Image is Everything Presidency. Additionally, some responsibility also lies within the hands of the candidates, and their platforms filled with promises that are bound to cause the gap mentioned in Waterman. At this point, what it all boils down to is this notion that the presidency has had ground into it that direct communication, and directly promising the people, is essential in winning and maintaining the presidency. In our reading from Presidents and the People: The Partisan Story of Going Public for this week, an overview of Presidential news papers was presented, and of how each president from 1836 to 1860 used the press and speeches to convey what they hoped for, thought about and planned to do while in office to the American people. However, going public, like Laracey continues to discuss might just be the wrong approach to platforms. And maybe it doesn’t take buying out newspapers and having then repeatedly side with you to boost approval ratings.
Keeping this in mind, Lincoln was on of our countries most recognized of the countries notable presidents and didn’t believe in buying out his audience or approval ratings. In Lincoln’s case, he was very careful about how he chose to go public. He made many speeches while in office, however, he was careful to choose his topics and words, and always made sure to not jump the gun before an issue came up. Lincoln only discussed important issues when they were most relevant and vital to bring to the American people. “…It was too early for him to being making such pronouncements. Thus, the first reason is that Lincoln did not yet know enough about the situation to speak wisely and authoritative. Second, Lincoln expressed the hope that problems might ‘work themselves out’ without his involvement. And third, Lincoln wanted to wait until he was sure he was right because he would not easily be able to change positions” (Laracey 101)
Lincoln understood better than any president what the words he spoke to the people mean to us. He knows that whatever he said would be in our eyes, a goal to be obtained. Lincoln wanted the American’s to believe in him, universally. He wasn’t going to potentially ruin our respect for him by ranting and raving about issues that weren’t of the highest priority. Lincoln took it one step at a time, and I think that’s what’s missing from candidates and presidents today. Regardless of the fact that times are different, the essence of the presidency is still the same, and we should realign ourselves with it’s purpose and not the promises on the pedestals so many are pushing toward the public.
In 2008 President Obama casted a campaign based on hope and change. These two simple words motivated crowds of voters from all over the country. Voters were in awe over this articulate, youthful man that had the ability to captivate crowds and to get out and vote for him. President Obama based his campaign on unrealistic promises that he is unable to fulfill. People are seeing that he cannot accomplish all that he said he would. This is considered an expectations gap. But in my opinion, the reason the expectation gap is so large is because Obama created the majority of these expectations for himself. Since he created so many unrealistic promises he is having a hard time doing so and this is leading the American public to be very disappointed. According to the Rasmussen Reports, Obama is suffering a low approval rating of 44%. But did he set himself up for this by making promises that he cannot keep and control? Perhaps if the objectives Obama set for himself during the 2008 campaign were more realistic and attainable, the American people would not be finding themselves so disappointed with Obama’s current performance.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Meghan that Obama is an eloquent and passionate speaker. He has the ability to motivate the American public but with the current state of our country, he needs to inspire by actions not just words. Obama entered office when times were tough but he promised more jobs and a better economy. Presently, unemployment rates are high and the country is experiencing an economic recession. What about this provides Americans with hope? At some point we cannot just rely on hope, we need to be realistic and put action into play.
In his book, “Presidents and the People,” Mel Laracey discussed the concept of going public. Obama found public support throughout his campaign, but once he did not fulfill his promises, he lost a lot of that support. Obama continues to talk, but he is not maintaining or gaining the support that he was able to use in order to be elected. He technically was able to go public by utilizing media sources but his recent going public attempts are not working in his favor. Laracey discussed President Abraham Lincoln’s ability to deliver successful speeches and his ability to admit when he was unsure of something. Laracey said, Lincoln would reply that he “did not yet know enough about the situation to speak wisely and authoritatively” (101). To me this is very admirable. This is a good example of going public because Lincoln was able to be honest with the public and gain their support and later come back with an answer once he had one. I find it much more respectable for the President of the United States to evaluate the situation as a whole and look into aspects rather than stalling and making promises that cannot be kept.
Obama was strategic by using inspiration and targeting individual’s emotions in his 2008 campaign. He knew how to captivate audiences and he provided an alternative to a continuation of the Bush Administration that many people were looking to separate from. Voters found themselves enthusiastic but their excitement faded fast when Obama did not meet the American public’s expectations. We have learned that after a president is elected it is natural for approval ratings to somewhat fall, but for approval ratings to have drastically fallen so much it shows that Americans are unhappy with Obama’s performance.
As a Quinnipiac Polling Institute employee, I can verify LOTS of people feel this way-- too many. Even Obama supporters voice the fact, that while they respect the leader of our country, "change" is something they haven't experienced yet in his term.
ReplyDeleteI am sympathetic towards Obama's drive and what he delivered in speeches. He is a positive man, and truly wants the best for the country, without the heavy opposition I am confident more 'change' could have happened. I feel badly that clearly he was no anticipating the extent of opposition he would be facing.
Catie I also found a very interesting correlation with Meghans post and Laracey's section on President Lincoln. We have learned campaigning and media has a humongous effect on the vote, but the type of campaigning as undoubtedly changed. Lincoln felt it was important to speak on matters of public importance after his inauguration, which I feel is very wise because clearly Obama's hopes were given a reality check once in office.
Even Lincoln however faced opposition with the Republican party when they critiqued his published speeches. The letter he wrote made me laugh, because of it's similarities to Obama's recent "I say the sky is blue. They say no." If Obama had no made such grandiose promises, and stayed true to what he knew and his values I still feel he would be the best candidate for office, because he is doing as best he can, just not as great as he thought he could-- an innocent mistake.
The expectations gap as mentioned in the Waterman reading can be found in any presidency in American history. A campaign trail is full of promises to its constituents. However, because elections are voted on, often the public official running brings forth the best possible outcome if they are elected. There are constant promises of change and how much better life will be if they are elected.
ReplyDeleteThe fact of the matter though is that often these promises cannot be completely met. Sometimes unforeseen factors contribute to the politician’s inability to deliver. However, more often than not, the promises made on the campaign trail are empty and impossible to accomplish.
Take for example as Meghan Moore mentioned the Obama administration. Here is a president who had an amazing campaign run. Obama was able to attract crowds like no American politician before him. The crowds were energized and rallied around his message of "hope" and "change".
Once Obama was elected though Americans started to question his campaign message. Where and how could the hope and change be found? Also after taking office there was the recession which took place and instead of a positive situation it seemed that change was occurring but more in a negative light.
As time progressed his change seemed not immediate and Americans started losing hope. Ultimately his message had completely backfired on him. It is important to point out that this doesn’t mean that change wasn’t happening, but rather that it wasn't effecting Americans in a quick and sure enough manner. Approval rating started to drop, and as midterm elections rapidly approach we see members of the Democratic Party distancing themselves with the very politician they coat tailed on to win the previous elections.
Not only has the public turned on Obama we also seen the media doing the same. For example Letterman, who is better known for supporting the left, made his first stab at Obama a few weeks ago regarding his vacation schedule. Also currently just breaking into the headlines is the new Woodward book which strongly criticizes Obama and his administration.
With approval ratings where the stand, it demonstrates that Obama has a very large and present expectations gap. In order for him to win the next election he is going to have to prove himself to the American people and be careful what further promises he makes to the American public. Maybe it will be beneficial if he looks towards the past for insight and approaches the media slowly as Lincoln did pointed out by Laracey. Either way, if drastic changes do not occur in his policies and campaign strategies it will be difficult for him to win back some of the expectations gap and ultimately the presidency.
With the way American society is today, the expectations gap continues to grow and grow. Because the people of America already believe that "the man in the white house can do something about everything"(Waterman 5), the President has even more pressure put on him because of the way our society has started to function. Why the take the time to make ourselves a dinner when we can pay somebody else to get us in less than 5 minutes? When Americans want something they want it right away and have become so impatient that all they can do is complain about it.
ReplyDeleteDuring Obama's campaign, he had promised the American people so much and so might say so little has happened so far but I agree with Meghan and some of my other classmates in thinking that change will come and we must realize that not everything can happen right away even if we may want it to. With the way things work in the present day, people just expect more out of the President. During Lincoln's run for presidency in the 1860's, his campaign strategy was a bit different that Obama's or any other present day presidential candidate for that matter. Although one may think otherwise he did give many speeches throughout his presidential run. Before his inauguration however, he spoke very little about issues. Larecy discusses them in chapter 4 or Presidents and the People. Lincoln spoke little about issues he thought he might not have the authoritative power to speak about and that it was too early for him to make such pronouncements. Even though it was a different time, Lincoln faced little of the expectations and hardships that Obama has been facing during this term. Maybe this would be a good strategy for Presidents to follow in the future or maybe it is inevitable to try and ask for a smaller expectations gap. With all of the new technology and speediness of American society it may be unavoidable. If a President says they will do something, people will want results. Just like in the 5th grade student council presidential run if you promise a soda machine and you don't deliver, people will be upset.
After I read this I felt the urge to research some of the campaign promises that Obama has made in comparison to ones he kept or hasn't kept. The expectation gap discussed in the class readings and this blog post is certainly a reality, but I personally feel that misinformation and irrationality is the main cause of public discontent and his lowering approval rating (as well as the inherited recession). The major promises during the '08 campaign were health care reform, U.S. departure from Iraq, and energy reform as well as several others. According to politifact.com, a pulitzer prize winning website, Obama made roughly 500 campaign promises. At this point 122 have been kept, 39 resulted in compromise, 22 were broken, 82 have been stalled, and 238 are still in the works; keep in mind that some promises were based on timetables and although they have not yet been accomplished, can be in the future.
ReplyDeleteI found this website to be very telling in respect to his approval rating. While there is still much to be done, he has faced a great amount of opposition from congress and the abysmal state of the economy forced him to make that a pivotal issue. This caused many of the promises he hoped to fulfill to take a backseat.
We must remember that health care reform was passed, we we removed combat troops from Iraq 2 weeks ahead of his timetable, and we are currently on schedule for the withdraw in Afghanistan. Although it may not feel like we are headed in the right direction, economists stated as recently as yesterday that the recession had in fact ended, quite possibly as long as a year ago.
It will be some time until we see the affects of these decisions, and the expectation gap may not afford the president the time he needs. With midterm elections looming it appears as though he will soon face even greater opposition in congress.
I thought Meghan brought up an interesting fact when she stated: "For instance, throughout the campaign of 2008 as well as the past two years, Obama has made promises to bring about change in regards to certain salient issues such as the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the current state of the economy, and the unemployment rate."
While the withdrawal of combat troops is largely symbolic (since the U.S. has a history of never truly leaving any country they have occupied) it is a fulfillment of a major promise that McCain had no intention of fulfilling. It seems as though patience is running so thin among Americans even accomplishments are being overshadowed by certain unavoidable failures and the easiest thing to do is blame the man in charge. The expectation gap is certainly there, but is his approval rating merely an affect of Americans being angry purely for the sake of it?