3 ms·

I think that is a bit of an ad hoc fallace. Sure, because Obama won we declare him the most charismatic candidate. Had he lost, people would say the oposite, d

I think that is a bit of an ad hoc fallace. Sure, because Obama won we declare him the most charismatic candidate. Had he lost, people would say the oposite, declaring him 'professorial' 'aloof' or 'elitist' (all criticisms directed at Obama at times in the media) and point out his lackluster performance in the first debate as evidence of a lack of charisma. Perception of charisma is also heavily influenced by our personal biases. I'm sure that we perceive candidates we like as being more charismatic. I bet a majority of Democrats would say Obama is charismatic and a majority of Republican would disagree.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago
That isn't true. Obama was the more charismatic candidate before we knew he would won. Romney always really came off as disconnected and aloof. I don't think a majority of republicans would agree otherwise, they just hated Obama and only had to make due with Romney, not many of them were happy with that! Bush and Clinton were charismatic in ways that both sides of the aisle could easily acknowledge. Charisma is a pre-req to being president, and is not conveyed on victory. If Gore would have won in 2000, that would have been very interesting, since he really wasn't at the level of Bush on likability, he would have been the least charismatic president since...Johnson, Nixon, or the way Carter actually turned out.
- waterlesscloud 14y ago
  Carter had a very folksy friendly persona in '76. Very upbeat. Johnson had his own way of being charismatic, and he only beat Goldwater. Nixon wasn't as charmless as his reputation would have you believe, and he had Humphrey and McGovern as opponents, so it's all relative. Bush Sr. is the weakest point of the theory. He's pretty flat however you look at him. But Dukakis wasn't exactly Marlon Brando or anything. I don't think the theory could have won either way with those two.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    "Bush Sr. is the weakest point of the theory. He's pretty flat however you look at him." Words tossed around when he started his campaign were "efette", "wimp", and "unmanly". Obvious slurs, but he had a lot of public perception to get over.
illuminate 14y ago
"Had he lost, people would say the oposite, declaring him 'professorial' 'aloof' or 'elitist'" People in the media have been saying that regardless of his performance.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago

That isn't true. Obama was the more charismatic candidate before we knew he would won. Romney always really came off as disconnected and aloof. I don't think a majority of republicans would agree otherwise, they just hated Obama and only had to make due with Romney, not many of them were happy with that! Bush and Clinton were charismatic in ways that both sides of the aisle could easily acknowledge. Charisma is a pre-req to being president, and is not conveyed on victory. If Gore would have won in 2000, that would have been very interesting, since he really wasn't at the level of Bush on likability, he would have been the least charismatic president since...Johnson, Nixon, or the way Carter actually turned out.

waterlesscloud 14y ago
Carter had a very folksy friendly persona in '76. Very upbeat. Johnson had his own way of being charismatic, and he only beat Goldwater. Nixon wasn't as charmless as his reputation would have you believe, and he had Humphrey and McGovern as opponents, so it's all relative. Bush Sr. is the weakest point of the theory. He's pretty flat however you look at him. But Dukakis wasn't exactly Marlon Brando or anything. I don't think the theory could have won either way with those two.
- illuminate 14y ago
  "Bush Sr. is the weakest point of the theory. He's pretty flat however you look at him." Words tossed around when he started his campaign were "efette", "wimp", and "unmanly". Obvious slurs, but he had a lot of public perception to get over.

illuminate 14y ago

"Had he lost, people would say the oposite, declaring him 'professorial' 'aloof' or 'elitist'" People in the media have been saying that regardless of his performance.