With President's Day upon us (tomorrow), and an upcoming election this fall, I figured I'd take a look at some of the interesting statistics regarding past Presidents and what impact, subconscious or known, it might have on the forthcoming election.
I won't get into political positions, topical issues of the nation, or any other debatable historical issues. I plan to keep it simple, since, frankly, who has the time to impartially weigh every candidate's position? And therefore judgments expectantly defer, in part, to psychological influence. Like what name sounds more presidential.
I also won't get into the obvious pattern of an all-male Chief Executive since our country's birth. Or the fact that only one race was represented since the last election. But I would suggest that there is an interesting rarity to our current President's name, one that may have in fact helped his cause by complementing both the new physical identity he represented in the White House as well as his bold message of change. For if the same candidate was named Eric Smith and ran on those grounds, perhaps the national reception would not have been as grand.
It's not unusual to conclude that the Presidency, by name, has been branded. People are comforted by brands, and that's a large reason we return to ones that we love, or ditch ones that we don't. It certainly sounds superficial, but the truth is how many times do names become synonymous with a feeling, and strongly so? Look at Steven Spielberg. If you were to hear of another person named Spielberg you might, subconsciously, become more attune to listening openly for a good story or advice even. Even though the person may have nothing to do with the famous director. Or look at Hitler. One name says it all. Chances are it will be difficult for any person, worldwide, to ever come to power with a name like that, or Adolph for that matter.
With the U.S.A, the preeminent precedent is George Washington. A simple yet bold name with a first name of a British monarch (perhaps something that may have helped propel him to leadership). In fact, 17 of the 44 Presidents elected have first names that correspond to British or Scottish royalty. A disproportionate percentage (39%) of the population based on 1990's census statistics of male first names (11.5% of population went by William, Richard, John, George, or James that year). There would certainly be some difference in name popularity over time, but this example clearly shows a pattern that would be difficult to normalize in any historical election snapshot.
Then you can consider the repetition of a given name. 18 out of 44 (41%) first names have been repeated. 5 of 44 (11%) last names have been repeated. Sometimes the repeat is due to familial relation, but this reinforces the mindset of the voter particularly in cases where there is no relation. Instinct or not, people associate others by their names, so if another President had the same name, and they weren't named Nixon, chances are that there would be a favorable connotation of inherent leadership. Again, looking at 1990 census statistics, take the most popular last name "Smith". It occurs in almost 1 out of every 100 people. If you were to take just 2 people at random to name president, you would have a 1 out of 1,000 chance they'd both be a Smith. But even if you had one already named Smith, it would take you, statistically, 11 election cycles to reach the 11% repetitive frequency seen in Presidential last names. And the Presidents would still have slightly better odds of repeating than this most popular last name.
Back to our initial President Washington, there is another pattern in simply the last 2 letters of his name. 11 out of 44 (25%) of all Presidents have this "-on" ending in common, the latest being Bill Clinton. Bill is anomaly, himself, with Presidential branding all over him in his formal name of William Jefferson Clinton. Interestingly, he was born William Jefferson Blythe III but changed his surname to Clinton after his stepfather when he was 15. The name "Clinton" first appeared in U.S. executive power as early as 1804 as the 4th Vice President of the United States (George Clinton VP to Thomas Jefferson). Not well known in history, but still a bit that could have been learned at a young age by voters then later registered, subconsciously, during Bill's elections.
While these stats are basic in their methods, and could be refined to look more closely at other leaders, such as Representatives, Senators, and Vice Presidents, there appear to be at least some patterns that are worth acknowledging for there influence on the minds of voters. Also, familiarity, in general, is the common theme and this is also evidenced by the large number of re-elections (this study just focused on changes in command). A staggering 20 of 44 (45%) of U.S. Presidents have been re-elected (this is counting Grover Cleveland as 2 of the U.S. Presidents since his terms were split and he is recognized as the 22nd and 24th President, respectively, the only person with two such designations).
But the number 45 is symbolic as you wonder if we will see a 45th President this year or if the 45% will hold and Obama will be re-elected. Interestingly, the conservative Republican party primaries are experiencing a shift in it's top candidate from Mitt Romney to the more conservative sounding, and historical name, Richard (Rick) Santorum. And while his last name does not end in "-0n", phonetically it is close. This would certainly make for an interesting election if Mr. Santorum, and naming history, were pitted against Mr. Obama, and re-election history.
