If we were to try to isolate one factor that makes a difference in Democrats’ chances of taking the White House, what would it be? Experience? Voting record? Toughness? Geography? More than 50 years of history indicate the answer is charisma, a hard to define but know-it-when-we-see-it quality.
Here’s a pithy definition: “a special magnetic charm or appeal.”
Look at the modern history of Presidential elections since 1960 when TV became a major force in politics. When Dems have a charismatic candidate they always win and when they have a charisma-challenged candidate they lose — barring unusual circumstances.
I’ll admit it, my decisions about who has it and who doesn’t are subjective although I try to think of it more as the typical voter’s view instead of just mine. For example, Ronald Reagan’s supposed charisma didn’t work for me because of his politics but I can’t deny that for most voters he had it in spades.
So here’s my list of each Presidential election, and to make it easy in my view there are exactly three Democratic candidates who had undeniable charisma: JFK, Bill Clinton, and Obama. The rest, to varying degrees, are a bunch of stiffs with special mention to John Kerry who was as dry as a chalk sandwich. I liked almost all of them, most enthusiastically, but am clear-eyed enough to know that Al Gore, for all his prescience on global warming and, yes, sponsoring the bill that created the internet, did not have that special sauce. And, yes, Gore and Hillary both got more votes but did not get enough in the right places to become President.
Here goes (winner in bold, “C”=high level of charisma):
year |
dem |
rep |
special circumstances |
1960 |
Kennedy (C) |
Nixon |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
Goldwater |
Post-JFK assasination |
1968 |
Humphrey |
Nixon |
|
1972 |
McGovern |
Nixon |
|
1976 |
Carter |
Ford |
Post-Watergate |
1980 |
Carter |
Reagan (C) |
|
1984 |
Mondale |
Reagan (C) |
|
1988 |
Dukakis |
GHW Bush |
|
1992 |
B Clinton (C) |
GHW Bush |
|
1996 |
B Clinton (C) |
Dole |
|
2000 |
Gore |
GW Bush |
|
2004 |
Kerry |
GW Bush |
|
2008 |
Obama (C) |
McCain |
|
2012 |
Obama (C) |
Romney |
|
2016 |
H Clinton |
Trump (?) |
|
You probably noticed that the same rules don’t apply to Republicans. With the exception of Reagan and possibly Trump their side of the ledger is littered with stiffs like Nixon, Dole, and George H W Bush. This can be explained by the old adage, “Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love.”
Since Democrats have outnumbered Republicans through this period, while Republicans fell in line and came out to vote for not only stiffs but crooks and con men, Democrats needed to feel that special magic to come out in sufficient numbers while grabbing enough independents along the way.
To be fair, the past is prologue to the future but nothing is written in stone. Special circumstances exist, in fact Donald Trump’s reelection may be such a circumstance. And someday Democrats may nominate a “likable enough” candidate without natural magnetism but with a strong enough resume or issues that carries them to victory. But we would be far better off rolling the rock downhill than pushing up against gravity.
So which women and men have charisma among our likely nominees? I’ll leave that for all of us to decide in due time. But just because we want to believe that experience, issues and voting record are the most important factors in who should be President, two generations of elections show charisma to be critical for Democrats to win.