Does it make sense to judge a candidate by his behavior toward animals?

This article originally appeared on the Boston Globe’s Opinion page. In a recent issue of National Geographic, celebrity dog “whisperer” Cesar Millan criticized the White House’s handling of its dogs. “When you see the president of the United States coming out of Air Force One, you always see the dog in front. When the president goes inside the White House, you see the dog going in first,” he said, explaining his belief that, in the wild, leader wolves never allow subordinates to go ahead of them. He argued that humans must do the same to maintain control over domesticated dogs. One wonders what Millan would say if America elected a president who once strapped his Irish setter to the roof of a car. That certainly seems like a unique way to assert authority. On family trips in the early 1980s, Mitt Romney regularly placed his dog Seamus in an enclosed, vented crate secured to the roof of the family car. On one occasion, the dog got sick—but dogs get sick riding inside cars, too.

A recent Public Policy Polling survey found that over a third of respondents said this incident made them less likely to vote for Romney. Personally, I find the whole situation trivial and far less troubling than other widely accepted forms of animal mistreatment, such as dog racing, which was legal in Massachusetts during Romney’s time as governor. The Romneys, at least, seemed to have good intentions. They’ve claimed that Seamus enjoyed his crate and was happier traveling with the family than being left behind at a kennel. In the 1980s, humane methods for transporting dogs in cars—like restraints, booster seats, and barriers—weren’t as available as they are today. Back then, even seat belts for humans weren’t mandatory in Massachusetts.

Animal welfare is subjective. When I spoke with Scott Crider, founder of the Dogs Against Romney Facebook group, he admitted he hadn’t spent much time thinking about other common practices I consider unnecessarily cruel, such as electric shock collars or tethering dogs outside. I believe that despite our best intentions as dog owners, many dogs in America are living unhappily.

As an animal trainer who uses non-aversive, science-based methods, I’m discouraged by how many people rely on force, yelling, and physical corrections to manage their dogs’ behavior. It’s disheartening that so many follow the harsh techniques of an untrained television personality instead of the advice of respected scientists like B.F. Skinner and Ivan Pavlov. Are they misinformed? Perhaps. Do they have a different perspective on what constitutes cruelty? Absolutely. But most of them are still loving dog owners—and I would include the Romneys in that group.

If Romney were to become president, he’d join a long list of leaders who’ve made questionable choices when it comes to their dogs.

For example, the White House released an Easter video of President Obama’s dog, Bo, dressed in bunny ears. Bo didn’t seem particularly upset about the costume, but one could argue that the stunt encouraged the growing trend of dressing dogs in elaborate outfits. Every Halloween, I see parades of dogs who often look terrified by the oversized bumblebee wings or tutu skirts they’ve been stuffed into. For all they know, they’ll be stuck wearing Princess Leia buns forever—a truly torturous fate.

One of the most famous dog-loving presidents, Lyndon B. Johnson, once tried to sneak one of his five dogs into his daughter’s wedding. However, he also faced public outrage for picking up his beagles, Her and Him, by their ears. Bill Clinton’s chocolate Lab, Buddy, became part of the family just before the Lewinsky scandal. Buddy worked hard to boost Clinton’s image and appeared frequently in photo ops. However, the Clintons were neglectful dog owners: in 2002, Buddy was hit by a car outside their Chappaqua home—a tragedy that could have been prevented with a simple fence. He was the second family dog to die after being struck by a car.

Then there are presidents whose treatment of dogs seemed to overshadow their treatment of people.

According to psychologist Stanley Coren in his book The Pawprints of History, John F. Kennedy’s groundskeepers were afraid to report bites from his Welsh terrier, Charlie, for fear of losing their jobs. Herbert Hoover reprimanded staff for being too kind to his German shepherd, worrying that the dog preferred them to him. And Franklin D. Roosevelt faced criticism for using Treasury funds to fly his dogs on planes.

How direct is the connection between treating pets well and treating people properly? It’s a winding road, one that makes you hope we never emulate a certain 20th-century leader who was known for his concern for animal rights. He avoided eating meat, opposed tail docking, supported anesthetizing fish before slaughter, and outlawed animal mistreatment in films. That famous dog lover? Adolf Hitler.