Mary Anne Marsh is a Democratic strategist and director of the Dewey Square Group. She is on Twitter.
Political dynasties are as old as America. The Adams, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Bush, and Clinton have all held many positions, including that of president.
Although a famous name can attract people’s attention, open eyes, doors and wallets, it is not a guarantee of success. Ultimately, every election is a matter of trust. And you have to earn it. Voters want you to be empowered and champion your cause to gain their trust and their vote. The 2016 election is no different in this regard.
With public confidence at an all-time low, voting for someone who knows the business well can be an advantage in 2016.
But it’s with others. Voters may have the option of choosing between two dynasties. If Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton run for president and win their respective parties’ nominations, voters will have the choice of individuals who know what it’s like to be president but never hold the office.
That alone could be an advantage in this election. With public confidence in institutions at an all-time low, voting for someone who knows the job well can be an advantage in 2016. Voters will not focus on the dynastic aspect of their candidacies, but rather on the direction they want. for the country and who they trust to do the job. Like any other election.
Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton know that their name is no guarantee of success. They have both lost elections before. If the 2016 election is Bush versus Clinton, one of them will know what it’s like to lose again — and that doesn’t make a difference between a dynasty and any other candidate.
Join Opinion on Facebook and follow updates on twitter.com/roomfordebate.