By Alan Yuhas/Washington

Out to make history as the first female president of the US, Hillary Clinton ‘s most formidable obstacle to achieving the highest office in the land - more than progressives undermining her on the left, Republicans snapping at her from the right, or even stubborn sexism in all corners - may be history itself.
Clinton will have to make herself an exception to a stark trend: only once in the past 64 years have either Republicans or Democrats managed to keep their party in power after eight years in the White House.
Republicans did it in 1988 with George H W Bush, but Democrats haven’t managed the feat since Harry Truman won in 1948.
Ever since, voters have put their elected leaders through a game of trading places, usually shuffling them in and out of the White House every eight years and then voting their opponents into Congress in the years in between.
Before 1950 it was more common for one party to hang on to the presidency for more than two terms. So why did things change?
“Some of it is just the changes in the media and the visibility of the presidency that greatly expanded in the 20th century,” said Princeton historian Julian Zelizer. Television and other sources greatly amplified the presence of the president in Americans’ lives, he said, which in turn gave them more material to feel negatively about after eight years.
Zelizer also said that in the last two or three decades the partisans for one party or another have become “very rigidified”, meaning every candidate and president faces “huge pockets of opposition even when they’re elected”. Those pockets could hold sway over the next election, he suggested.
A silver lining for the parties, Zelizer said, was that while a polarised electorate might boost the opposition party after eight years, it also seems to make two-term presidents more common.
Samuel Popkin, a professor of political science at the University of California San Diego, agreed that at least some of “what elects a president is momentary disgust with the other party’s candidate”, but also offered another theory. The massive growth of the middle class after the second world war changed the playing field, he said, as people and wealth moved around the country.
That movement then meant more voters who remained undecided about politics as their own lives changed - and more of a middle ground for candidates to fight over. But as inequality has increased in the past 30 years the party lines have hardened, Popkin said, which may mean more reliable voting blocs that could help keep a party in office. While Zelizer suggested a polarised electorate is probably an obstacle to that end, Popkin proposed that with the right circumstances it could be a boon.
Wars and crises also played a role in keeping one party or another in power before 1950. Republicans held the White House longest for the 20 years encompassing the civil war and reconstruction; Democrats ruled the executive for 20 years ranging from the Great Depression through the second world war.
Both Zelizer and Popkin agreed that there are always variables - party infighting, an incompetent candidate, luck - that could sink or lift a campaign. Democrat Al Gore was reportedly obsessed with defining himself against “Clinton fatigue”, and proceeded to remake his campaign almost every week. Republican John McCain struggled to define himself against George W Bush, for instance, during the 2008 financial crisis, undermining his “maverick” slogan. Hillary Clinton’s chance to become the first female president could be an advantage, especially for swaying women.
George H W Bush, on the other hand, used his time as vice-president to carefully plot a 1988 campaign that would keep Republicans just unified enough to help him into office - and was boosted by a negative ad campaign that targeted the many blunders of his opponent Michael Dukakis. Bush won, the only exception to the rule in the last 60 years.
Clinton’s challenge, in large part, will be how she handles Barack Obama’s legacy. Having served as his first secretary of state, she is inescapably part of his administration. But if she hopes to drum up both his partisans and voters who feel disaffected, she must also distance herself from the president and pitch something new, Popkin said.
Former Florida governor Jeb Bush has distanced himself ably from extreme elements of the Republican party, Popkin pointed out. Asked about a no-tax pledge signed by many Republicans in 2012, Bush told a reporter: “I don’t believe you outsource your convictions and principles to people.” Arguably, Bush and Clinton have followed the example of the elder Bush and been running tacit presidential campaigns for years.
“Nobody in America likes the idea that the king gives you the ring,” Popkin said. If she hopes to succeed Obama, Clinton has to improve her “bedside manner” and not run as “a kind of incumbent”, he added. “It’s a matter of understanding that you have to earn it or it’s worthless. Nobody votes for somebody with the highest grades unless they know what she’s going to do.” - Guardian News & Media