Exploiting Inherited Wars of Choice

• Author: James D. Boys
• Published date: 01 September 2014
• Date: 01 September 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X13515901
• Subject Matter: Articles

American Politics Research

2014, Vol. 42(5) 815 –840

© The Author(s) 2013

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X13515901

apr.sagepub.com

Article

Exploiting Inherited

Wars of Choice: Obama’s

Use of Nixonian Methods

to Secure the Presidency

James D. Boys1

Abstract

Despite a slogan advocating a change from practices of the past, Barack Obama’s

presidential campaign of 2008 had an intriguing similarity to that of Richard

Nixon in 1968. Like Nixon, Obama benefited from and secured victory partly

due to his opposition to a contentious “war of choice.” The wars in Vietnam

and Iraq provided the political and cultural circumstances that made Nixon and

Obama credible candidates in 1968 and 2008, respectively. The wars weakened

support for the incumbent party and caused divisions within the country and

in their own parties that both men exploited to neutralize political rivals in

the primary season and defeat their opponent in the general election. This

article examines the manner in which Obama, like Nixon, benefited directly

from conflict by promoting his opposition and apparent solutions to gain public

confidence, neutralize political opponents, and secure the presidency.

Keywords

Obama, Nixon, Kennedy, Iraq, Vietnam

As widely noted (Frame, 2012; Rich, 2008; Sherwell, 2008; Stuckey, Curry,

& Barnes, 2010), Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign drew repeated

1King’s College London, UK

2Richmond University, London, UK

Corresponding Author:

James D. Boys, Middle East and Mediterranean Studies, King’s College London, Virginia Woolf

Building, 22 Kingsway, London WC2B 6NR, UK.

Email: james.boys@kcl.ac.uk

515901APRXXX10.1177/1532673X13515901American Politics ResearchBoys

research-article2013

816 American Politics Research 42(5)

comparisons with John F. Kennedy’s (JFK’s) presidential bid of 1960 due in

part to its emphasis on a call for a change in national direction and on the

candidate’s youthful appeal. The political and emotional implications of this

resonated further when Obama received the endorsement of the Kennedy

family. As Kennedy (2008) wrote,

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my

father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who

could be that president—not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.

(p. A18)

In this article, however, I argue that such an orthodox contrast is inadequate,

as it focuses on concepts of style and not of substance. The contrast reduces

the candidates to caricatures and fails to address far more substantive issues

such as their campaign strategy and approach to conflict. Rather than paral-

leling Kennedy’s bid for office in 1960, Barack Obama’s exploitation of a

contentious “war of choice” in Iraq during his campaign to win the White

House in 2008 more closely resembled the efforts of Richard Nixon to exploit

the Vietnam War in 1968. Both campaigns sought to exploit opposition to the

wars, first, in an effort to secure their party’s nomination, and then the presi-

dency in the general election. The successful exploitation of the Vietnam and

Iraq Wars by Nixon and Obama, respectively, proved to be central to both

men’s campaigns. The wars contributed directly to the defeat of their political

opponents and aided their eventual electoral successes in 1968 and 2008,

respectively.

The Obama/Nixon comparison is more credible and distinctive than that

with JFK as it produces a far more useful means of appreciating Obama’s

electoral strategy and his political use of conflict in the 2008 campaign. In

this article, I utilize “discourse analysis” to consider campaign speeches and

official documents to examine the ways the Obama campaign mirrored

Nixon’s earlier efforts to benefit politically from a contentious war: first to

neutralize political rivals in the primaries and then to help defeat his oppo-

nent in the general election. A deconstruction approach has been selected in

an effort to provide a more accurate analysis of Obama’s use of the Iraq War

during the 2008 campaign. This approach has been adopted partly due to

availability of sources and through a desire to draw upon candidates’ own

words rather than on third-party interpretations. This enables the analysis to

provide a more accurate understanding of both the rhetoric and strategy. As a

result, in this article, I find that a misleading comparison between Kennedy

and Obama was constructed in the 2008 election. An appreciation of Obama’s

Nixonian use of an inherited “war of choice” as an election year tool sheds