Support Drops for Supporting Clinton in Commander-in-Chief Role

WASHINGTON — She backed the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq early on then challenged Donald Rumsfeld's competence, served on the Senate Armed Services Committee and says her White House experience has prepared her to defend the country against all enemies starting on Day One in the Oval Office.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, though, has struggled to pass the commander-in-chief test, falling far behind Sen. Barack Obama in convincing voters that she can lead the U.S. military as president.

With troops waging war on two fronts, Clinton's difficulty persuading voters that she can bear this mantle is an important reason, analysts say, that her campaign is losing ground to her Democratic rival.

"The role of commander-in-chief is central to the presidency, and people take it very seriously," said Cal Jillson, professor of political science at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. When it comes to engendering voter confidence in that role, said Jillson, "He (Obama) has just been putting distance between himself and Clinton."

Six weeks ago in New Hampshire, 38 percent of Democratic primary goers said Clinton would make the best commander-in-chief, with only 26 percent favoring Obama in the role. With six Democratic contenders, Clinton's showing was strong.

By Feb. 12, though, with the Democratic field winnowed down to just two, Virginia primary voters favored Obama over Clinton as commander-in-chief. In exit polling, 56 percent of Democratic primary goers said Obama had the most qualifications for the role; just 42 percent favored Clinton.

A New York Times/CBS News poll published Tuesday found that 69 percent of Americans - Democrats, Republicans and independents nationwide - believe Obama would be an effective commander-in-chief, while 54 percent have confidence in Clinton's ability to assume that role. The poll surveyed 1,266 adults Feb. 20-24 and has a 3 percentage-point margin of error.

In part, the trend reflects overall gains in Obama's popularity, and the time he has had to flesh out to voters his approach to foreign policy and national security affairs.

"People have gotten increasingly comfortable seeing Obama as the one who's ready to be commander-in-chief," said Daniel Gotoff, a partner with Democratic polling group Lake Research Partners of Washington.

"They can see him behind the big desk in the Oval Office exuding the same kind of calm and confidence that they've seen him exude in the debates and on the campaign trail," said Jillson. "They're saying 'I think he can be president, and I think he can do the whole job.'"

Gender, however, may be playing a larger role, said Michael Genovese, a political science professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.

"A lot of the baggage of sexism and gender still remains," said Genovese. "There are certain people who are going to be reluctant to vote for a woman because they fear she would not be tough enough on defense."

On some level, any viable presidential candidate has to pass the commander-in-chief test, making voters comfortable with the idea of putting them in charge of the military - and the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal.

Democrats face a special opportunity this year, owing to the broad public discontent with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

They also face a challenge: the presumptive GOP presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, is a Vietnam veteran who spent five years as a prisoner of war in Hanoi. He is the ranking Republican on the armed services committee. And the New York Times poll found that 80 percent of the public feels McCain would be an effective commander-in-chief.

Whoever becomes the next president will inherit not only the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but also face "the additional burden of rebuilding the respect of our military and our nation both within our country and around the world," said Retired Army Gen. John Shalikashvili.

Shalikashvili, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for four years under President Bill Clinton, said Hillary Clinton would make a more effective commander-in-chief than Obama.

"Sen. Clinton has proven through her time in Washington that she understands the process of decision making at the highest levels of our government better than someone who has less experience within the walls of the White House," Shalikashvili, wrote in an e-mail exchange.

Clinton has hammered home her experience, noting she has traveled to some 80 countries, met with heads of state and other foreign dignitaries as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee for the past five years and, before that, during the eight years she spent as first lady during her husband's administration.

An open question she faces, though, is how much difficulty Americans are having envisioning a woman at the head of the world's most powerful military.

"It should not be a testosterone test," said retired Air Force Col. P.J. Crowley, senior fellow with the Center for American Progress, a progressive Washington think tank.

Or, as Shalikashvili put it, "character and experience are far more important today than gender."

Genovese, however, will soon publish research in which he found that both men and women are between 20 percent and 25 percent less likely to vote for a woman for president than conventional polls would suggest. One reason for that, he said, is a reluctance to envision a woman as an effective commander-in-chief.

"Defense is one of the manly arts," said Genovese. "It may be unreasoned and it may be without sufficient evidence - but it's one of those prejudices that we hold."

It may take two or three viable female candidates, he said, before voters overcome those predilections.

"Any pioneer has to break down old prejudices," said Genovese. "At this point, being that pioneer requires that she pay a price."

Crowley, who served as spokesman for the national security council during the Clinton administration, agrees.

"We are still dealing with a glass ceiling," said Crowley. "That may be more about the voters than about the candidate."