Hyperlink Legend · E-mail story · Comments · iPod friendly version · Print friendly version

Does having pets really matter in an election?
by Cathy Woolridge
Sunday, August 24, 2008

More Info

When the time is right for the Barack Obama and his family to get a dog, the American Kennel Club, has some suggestions.

The AKC solicited votes from the public for a potential pet for the Obamas. Since one of the candidate’s daughter has allergies, the AKC offered a list of breeds that don’t shed as much for voters to choose. On the last check, the poodle is edging out the soft coated Wheaten Terrier, 26 to 25 percent.

Presidents and their pets

Leroy Chihuahua has an opinion about presidential candidate Barack Obama not having pets and shares it in his column on Petthevote.com.

According to the diminutive doggie, “... As much as I appreciate a human who loves pets as much as my humans do, I gotta say I hope people don’t decide who to vote for based on the number of pets that candidate has. That’s a pretty silly reason to elect someone as President, if you ask me!”

We all know that little Leroy isn’t really the author of the column on the Web site (his human had a hand in that), but the statement strikes a serious chord.

After all, very few of this country’s past presidents were petless. Republican candidate John McCain has a menagerie of pets, including dogs, a cat, fish, turtles and a ferret. Democrat Obama has none, although he has promised his daughters a dog if he wins the election.

“Pet ownership should not even be an issue,” says Marilyn McFarlin, an animal lover from Overland Park, Kan.

But, there are people who won’t consider voting for a petless presidential candidate.

In a recent Associated Press-Yahoo news poll, pet owners preferred McCain over Obama 42 percent to 37 percent (Obama did score higher among non-pet owners, 48 to 34 percent). Dog owners really preferred McCain over Obama 43 to 34 percent (the margin narrowed for cat owners. It was McCain over Obama, 41 to 38 percent).

“... From an image standpoint, nothing humanizes a candidate more than seeing him loving dote on his pet,” notes Lisa Peterson, American Kennel Club spokesperson.

If you think those poll numbers don’t matter, consider this: 63 percent of American homes have a pet, according to The American Pet Product Manufacturers Association.

But what does having a pet really tell you about another person?

“There’s nothing about pet ownership that tells you how a person will behave,” says Dr. Stephanie LaFarge, senior director of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) Counseling Services and an expert on the human-animal bond.

Dr. LaFarge, who holds a doctorate from Teachers College, Columbia University, says that it is our culture that fuels the idea that having a pet somehow makes a person more caring, more responsible and, perhaps for a politician, more electable. Having a pet is seen as a positive trait by pet owners. And for the politician who has a pet, it offers a link to the voter, the “he’s one of us” perception.

“If your dog likes you, if your dog trusts you, you must be a good person,” Dr. LaFarge says.

That response, she points out, is a purely emotional one. Dr. LaFarge explains that, to help a us relate to another person, we seek out the familiar. For animal lovers, that would be a pet.

“It’s a sign that we know something about you,” she says.

By discovering that familiar link, we don’t have to step out of our comfort zone and look at other issues that we may be reluctant to explore, she says.

While some pet owners bemoan the lack of a pet by a candidate, others may see that petless politician differently.

“It makes him (Obama) a very responsible non-pet owner,” says Sharon Berry of Atchison, Kan., author of “The Cats, Max and Me” and development director for the Humane Society of Atchison.

Dr. LaFarge and the ASPCA agree. People with hectic schedules may not have time to give a pet the love and care it needs.

“It’s a big responsibility,” Ms. Berry says. “It’s just like a child.”

In the case of Obama, Dr. LaFarge notes that the politician never said he doesn’t like animals or would never have a pet.

“We admire a family that can say 'not now,’” Dr. LaFarge says in her role as an ASPCA spokesperson. She adds, that “it’s wonderful that he’s listening to his children say 'we want a pet.’”

Of course, having a pet or not having a pet really doesn’t define who a person is or what their values are, Dr. LaFarge says. The founder of the ASPCA, she adds, wasn’t a pet owner.

So, doggone, perhaps Leroy Chihuahua is right. A candidate should be elected on the issues not on how many furry feet greet him at the door when he returns home.

Lifestyles reporter Cathy Woolridge can be reached at cathyw@npgco.com

Comments
This story has 1 comment. Click here to join in on the discussion.
Story Tools
Hyperlink Legend
E-mail story
Print friendly version
iPod friendly version

Today's Top Headlines
Smurfit-Stone workers strike
Law enforcement officers discount 'Mexican mafia initiation'
Stabbing details come to light
Number of homeless students on the rise
Longtime Christmas tree salesman remembered
Posted by MichaelH on August 24, 2008 at 10:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Only if you're campaigning the ignorant. (In response to the title - I won't even bother reading this nonsense)


Post a comment

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them.

Rules: We don't allow comments that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability. Epithets, abusive language and obscene comments will not be tolerated... nor will defamation. Brief quotes are okay as long as the source is given. Blatent cutting and pasting is not acceptable.

Robust, even heated debate we like. Straying off-topic or flaming, we don't. Please read our user agreement.

Requires free stjoenews.net registration
.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:


Business
Location


Iframe Content