With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Michael Schaffer: Obama is Lincoln? No, Reagan. No, ...

[Michael Schaffer is working on a book about the pet industry.]

There's a challenge in writing about the overuse of analogy in contemporary political journalism: There's no perfect analogy for the device. Are analogies the new adjectives? (It's hard to describe anything without them.) Are they the office-seeker's version of the Social Security number? (Without one, it's hard to prove you exist.) Are they the narratives of our time? (Control it, and you control the campaign). Whatever you compare political analogies to, this much is clear: We sure seem to use a lot of 'em. Just like computers! (Or did I mean toothbrushes?)

Analogies have always been with us. For the past eight years, though, it was easy to believe we had arrived at the golden age of political analogy--or, should I say, the analogists' equivalent of Elizabethan England. With history-bookworm Karl Rove in charge of President Bush's image, the 43rd chief executive was variously described as the 21st century's Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, Harry Truman, and (most reverently) Ronald Reagan, to name just a few.

But even with Rove bounced from his role as--analogy alert!-- modern America's Mark Hanna, the comparisons keep coming. In fact, 2008's analogy-crafters may someday be remembered as, well, the 1927 Yankees of the form. With a political newcomer leading the race for president, and a broad consensus that a three-decade political era is ending, the terrain is wide open. And there's no better was to make sense of the year's big questions--Just who is this Barack Obama? Just what will replace the age of Reagan?--than via some easy-to-grasp historical analogy.

The best thing about the year in analogy is how diverse the comparisons have been. Almost simultaneously, Obama has been described as 2008's version of 49-state winner Ronald Reagan as well as its incarnation of 49-state loser George McGovern--in fact, he's been compared to every presidential candidate since World War II. A vote for John McCain has been likened to both a third term of George Bush as well as a first victory for the unelected Gerald Ford. The comparisons also don't end at the border: Obama critics have derided him as the second coming of Canada's Pierre Elliot Trudeau; McCain's admirers see British titan Benjamin Disraeli when they gaze at the Arizona Senator. Meanwhile, the campaign they're fighting gets equated with struggles as varied as the elections of crisis-afflicted 1860 and prosperity-tinged 1996. Prominent pundits at different points have managed to compare Obama to both parties' candidates in the 1980s election.

Confused? It's enough to make you analogize both of the candidates to James Stockdale, Ross Perot's hapless 1992 running mate and the man most famous for asking: "Who am I? What am I doing here?" In the interest of clarity--those desperate for a chance to vote for Al Smith's modern doppelganger ought to know which candidate to support--here's a rough guide to the season's political analogies:...
Read entire article at New Republic