Allison Good Columnist

There is no shortage of spousal support on the campaign trail. Bill Clinton, no newcomer to this political game, frequently woos crowds of his wife’s supporters. Michelle Obama, just beginning her career as the wife of a politician in the spotlight, has recently emerged as a very likable partner on the campaign tral. But the Democratic spouses aid their partners’ campaigns differently in their individual tones and approaches; one is clearly more effective than the other.

This, of course, has everything to do with Bill’s high-profile presidency and Michelle’s newbie status. Bill is an overly hands-on ex-figurehead of the United States government, whereas Michelle has a fresh face and a blunt attitude that can be both sarcastic and sleek. Citizens’ opinions of the candidates are definitely influenced by the support that spouses lend their partners in the presidential race.

Bill is everywhere, speaking in almost every state where there has been a primary. I almost feel as if he were the one running for president. As a presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton is allowed only a tasteful amount of subtle mudslinging, but Bill is always ready to bite, always prepared to defend his wife by making jabs at Barack Obama.

The ideal candidate’s spouse is more focused on the offense, leaving no room for criticism of his or her personality. Bill’s aggresive actions create the appearance of a friendly campaign, allowing Hillary to avoid making negative attacks on her opponents. However, this illusion is one that can only last for so long.

This interest in petty fights has also been inconvenient. On Jan. 21 of this year, he criticized Barack for insinuating that Ronald Reagan’s presidency was more successful than the Clinton presidency. Really, are we five years old? Bill is only drawing negative attention to his wife’s campaign, and if he knows what’s good for that campaign, he will distance himself from it for a while.

Bill is incapable of keeping his aggressive temper at bay, even during this crucial time in his wife’s career. His in-your-face attitude discredits what good he may have done in the past, and for most, this demeanor is a turn-off.

When Bill makes accusations, it draws attention away from Hillary’s campaign and her great ideas. Moreover, both of the Clintons have aggressive personalities that together may intimidate American voters.

Hillary is a very strong candidate and has always defied the gender divide in this country, but if she wants to win, she needs to ask Bill to take the backseat.

Meanwhile, Michelle’s value to her husband’s campaign lies in the fact that she is not a politician. She does not use verbal assaults, and, unlike Bill, does not have a personal desire for the presidency. The back-and-forth game of personal attacks is not something that interests her, and she has therefore come into her own under the media spotlight.

The New York Times has called Michelle “outspoken, strong-willed, funny, gutsy and sometimes sarcastic.” When questioned about Hillary, Michelle’s responses are generally friendly and well-spoken, sharply contrasting Bill’s approach towards Barack. Michelle’s qualities ensure that her occasional speeches are eloquent, to the point, and free of blunt anti-Hillary propaganda. She is confident instead of being aggressive and overly offensive.

Perhaps what keeps Michelle so grounded is that she is responsible for the care of two young children. Or perhaps it is her experience of growing up in the south side of Chicago and then overcoming low expectations with degrees from Princeton and Harvard Universities.

Michelle has honed the invaluable skill of knowing what to say, when to say it, and when to say nothing; the same Times article quoted her as saying, “What I’ve learned is that my humor doesn’t translate to print all the time.” Certainly her approach to her husband’s opponent is courteous, at the very least, and promotes a healthy atmosphere.

It’s hard to measure the effect that spouses have on campaigns. In Bill’s case, he could have helped Hillary more in the realm of strategies and logistics—a better use of his experience than speeches that bring out negative aspects in both his personality and Hillary’s presidential campaign. It could have resulted in more primary wins, but unfortunately he is reversing all of the progress that she has made. If only he could learn from Michelle. She is poised, has a presence that does not aggravate, and seems to have more people skills than Bill does even after eight years of being president.

It is very important that the spouse's personality complements the candidate's personality. In the case of the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary are aggressive, which does not work in her favor. She can seem hawkish at times, and intimidation never wins people over, especially when the feeling is reinforced by Bill. Bill alienates; Michelle convinces by way of approachability. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks, but Bill would do well to take a page from Michelle’s book.

—Allison Good ’11 is writing a weekly column about American politics, focusing on the 2008 presidential election and the primary process.