Monday, March 5, 2007

Celebrities and Politics: Should They Mix?

According to a recent CBS News poll, President Bush, pictured giving the state of the union address, has seen an all time low approval rating. With only 28% of those polled finding satisfaction with the current administration, the race for the presidential office in 2008 has taken on new importance. With so many issues receiving attention in the news, the possibilities are seemingly endless for the candidates who have officially thrown their hats into the ring. With the nation at war, the environment in decline, health care reform, social security collapse, educational restructuring, religion, and abortion being just a few of the issues dividing the nation as well as the major political parties, one wonders what will become the leading hot button issue in the upcoming presidential race? However, much of this will depend upon the candidates chosen to represent their parties. Already political heavyweights are announcing their plans to run for election. With such announcements come the inevitable endorsements of celebrities, and campaign fundraisers. But is the majority of the voting public fed-up with celebrity involvement in politics; especially given the current political state of the nation?

One poll suggests just that, showing a reversal in public opinion. During the 2004 election the majority of the public supported celebrities becoming involved with political campaigns, some even giving speeches during the campaign trail. Now however, public opinion is that celebrities should not become involved in politics, particularly campaigns. And it’s not hard to understand voter’s frustration with celebrity activism; one need only examine the results of the last election, along with reaction to the current war with Iraq. During the 2004 presidential race, celebrity involvement caused more division along party lines among moderate voters, mostly due to comments concerning the War on Terror. But with the majority of Americans now disapproving of both the administration and the war, will celebrity involvement be as influential a factor as it was in the 2004 election?

At the forefront of the candidates is Illinois senator Barak Obama, scene giving a speech on the right. Recently, he has gained a significant amount of support with the help of some extremely powerful friends, namely Oprah Winfrey. Besides being Forbes Magazines third most powerful person in Hollywood, the media mogul possesses access to her television show, magazine, website, Production Company, and nearly 226 million dollars, not to mention countless business contacts. Obama is already taking advantage of Winfrey influential business partners, having just had a Hollywood fundraiser hosted by Steven Spielberg, tickets went for $2,300 dollars a head. But Obama isn’t the only candidate receiving support from Spielberg, Hillary Clinton is also hoping for some celebrity help in her bid for office. Help like that of Martha Stewart for instance, who announced at a luncheon that she would be supporting Clinton in 2008. David Beckham was also tapped by Clinton representatives for his endorsement, though as a British citizen he’ll be ineligible to vote in the election.

Despite a drop in public opinion, Republicans such as John McCain and Rudy Giuliani have also announced their intentions on running for presidency in 2008, though celebrity support for the GOP is less than A-List. In fact, during the 2004 election democrats boasted celebrity endorsements from the likes of Ben Affleck, Leonardo DiCaprio, Lenny Kravitz, Bruce Springsteen and The Dixie Chicks. And yet, even with republicans being forced to rely on celebrities with far less star power, they managed to win the election. Which begs the question, just how much will celebrity involvement play a part in the upcoming presidential election?

With much of the public feeling disillusioned towards celebrity involvement in politics, mostly due to their lack of knowledge of the issues dividing the nation. Celebrity involvement reached its’ peak in the 2000 election between Gore and Bush, but the issues facing the nation then seem mild compared to the current issues. Thus, the majority of Americans have grown weary of celebrities speaking on the campaign trail, particularly during this time of war when speakers like Michael Moore, seen after delivering his infamous academy award acceptance speech, are more apt to anger voters than draw party support. So what will be the role celebrities play in this election? Funding; and when it comes to campaign funding both parties are on an equal footing. While democrats may lay claim to more A-Listers, republican generate nearly identical amounts of campaign funding through celebrity benefits. This means that potentially Hollywood may play the smallest role in the 2008 election, than it has since the Reagan administration.

No comments: