The Republican Party will have added two new presidential candidates to its already crowded field by the end of the week. But South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry share one trait that sets them apart from the other candidates storming the early primary states: They have military experience.
Presidential candidates with military experience have only recently become an endangered species. The 2012 presidential election, which pitted Mitt Romney against Barack Obama, marked the first time in 80 years neither major party’s ticket included a veteran.
Unless Perry or Graham — who collectively garner the support of fewer than 4 percent of voters in RealClearPolitics’ average of national polls — steals the nomination, a new pattern will begin to emerge.
In 2016, former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, a Marine Corps veteran appointed secretary of the Navy by President Ronald Reagan, would serve as the Democratic Party’s only candidate with any military experience.
The Pew Research Center regularly polls voters about the traits they would prefer to see in their commander in chief. The center’s most recent data, released in May 2014, shows that voters from both major parties viewed the “served in military” trait most positively, including 58 percent of Republicans and 31 percent of Democrats.
Alec Tyson, a senior researcher at Pew, told the Washington Examiner that Pew conducted this survey so far in advance of Election Day to get a neutral read of the characteristics when they do not function as proxy terms for individual candidates (i.e. “woman” representing Hillary Clinton).
Tyson noted that the public’s highly favorable view of the military exceeds other institutions of government, which could cause candidates to emphasize their military experience.
“I think the challenge for all of these candidates is if they’ve been well known as political leaders, as senators, as governors, is making their military background well known to the public,” Tyson said. “How well known it is to the public that Rick Perry or Lindsey Graham have prior military experience, that’s hard to know. To the extent that they’re seen as politicians or long-term senators or long-term governors, they only receive the benefit of prior military experience if that’s a fact that’s well known to voters and well known to the public.”
Perry intends to leave little doubt that he’s a red-blooded G.I. Joe when he makes his announcement about his plans for 2016. When Perry, a former Air Force pilot, speaks on Thursday in Addison, Texas, six retired or active Navy SEALs and a retired Marine will join him.
Taya Kyle, the widow of the “American Sniper” Navy SEAL Chris Kyle, has also endorsed Perry and will attend on Thursday. In a statement distributed by RickPAC, Perry’s political action committee, Kyle solicited others to join her in Texas and called the governor “one of the great leaders this state and country have ever produced.”
“I tend to keep my political opinions to myself — the only candidate I ever endorsed was in a race for county sheriff — but this is different,” Kyle said. “I got to know Rick and Anita Perry outside of the public eye, where I’ve had an up-close view of their humility and commitment to doing the right thing for people regardless of who gets the credit. Believe me, they are a breath of fresh air in a political system full of people playing games and twisting the truth.”
Graham, who announced his presidential campaign in his hometown of Central, S.C., on Monday, has also emphasized his military experience. In a fundraising pitch issued moments after Graham announced his candidacy, his campaign touted his 33-year career in the military in the Air Force, National Guard, and Reserves.
But candidates with military experience, such as Graham and Perry, will not be able to take veterans’ votes for granted. Pete Hegseth, the CEO of Concerned Veterans for America, told the Examiner that military leaders have made excellent presidents, but that prior service “is not a litmus test, shouldn’t be a litmus test, and doesn’t mean that that person will be a very good commander-in-chief or president.”
Hegseth said his organization is intent on making the scandals at the Department of Veterans Affairs a central part of the presidential campaign. He said he wants to see candidates address the lack of accountability, transparency and choice in the system rather than talk about increasing funding for the VA.
So why have fewer candidates with military experience entered the presidential race in 2016? It’s not because the public’s appetite for leaders with military experience has decreased, as Tyson said that figure has remained stable and appears deeply rooted in American society.
Tyson said an all-volunteer military is one large contributing factor to why fewer veterans may be running for president. Hegseth adds that there is a generational gap, as older veterans age out of government service.
“I think you’ll see a new wave of younger veterans coming through [soon], but we’re also a little bit past the crest of that World War II, Vietnam, Korean War generation,” Hegseth said. “Certainly we welcome folks with military backgrounds like Governor Perry and Senator Graham, but we also recognize they are a rarity and that that shouldn’t exclude others from consideration.”
