"Who in their right mind would use what candidates say to decide who to vote for? Come to that, who would choose a spouse in such a matter? Or love a child for rational reasons? There are many real things other than facts."
Tony Farrell, brand strategist.
 |
| Audition |
The Democratic Debate was only superficially about policy issues. It was really about identity, personal appeal, self confidence, character, and relatability.
We are picking a person, not a policy package.
We paid attention to Bernie Sanders extending his hand and Elizabeth Warren not taking it, and we are deciding how we feel about that. It was a reflection of something for each of them. Character? Temperament?
 |
| Facebook comments |
We are considering whether Amy Klobuchar strikes us as steady and sensible, or as boring. We observe Pete Buttigieg's manner. Is he ready?
As a retired businessperson, I reflect that in the current Democratic Party, pulled left in policy and message by Sanders and populism, it is likely that nothing whatever Wall Street billionaire Tom Steyer could possibly say or do would make him an acceptable candidate to Democrats. He is trapped by his identity.
Today's Guest Comments are from businessmen, former college classmates, and like me, retired with time to observe political presentation. Tony Farrell was a very successful brand strategist for The Nature Company, Sharper Image, the Gap, and handled the doomed-from-the-start Trump Steaks account. Stan Werlin was a business development executive in the environmental, engineering, and management consulting industry.
Tony Ferrell comments:
 |
| Tony Farrell |
"Personal appeal and basic skill at speaking and appearing genuine are practically infallible predictors of success in presidential elections. Look at 1932 and the first major impact of mass media (radio) in conveying FDR's profound charisma (and Hoover's icy charmlessness despite being the greatest humanitarian among all our presidents). And when I read popular accounts of Truman's victory over Dewey, the telling comments revolve around the 'little man on top of the wedding cake' criticism of the brilliant Dewey.
Trump is brilliant at conveying a charismatic affection for his base of virulent anti-PC'er, and he has great charm for those that buy in. (Even John Oliver called Trump 'objectively funny." With his roaring economy and relative peace, Trump should have approval ratings in the high 60's but he's never topped 45% because he's chosen the narrow, base-only route. But he is formidable nonetheless, and Democrats need to field a candidate with obvious charisma, charm, and personality in order to win."
Stan Werlin comments:
Stan Werlin says the key to that charismatic presence "is something I think voters are pretty good at sussing out--genuineness.
"Elements such as tone of voice, energy level, bearing, clothing, posture, confidence do matter enormously. I happen to think a natural smile is hugely important. So is speaking with a natural cadence. Being super serious all the time doesn't work.
 |
| Stan Werlin |
Biden is much more down to earth and relatable. Gaffes often make him human and appealing, more like 'the common man.
Bernie is as genuine as it gets.
Mayor Pete seems pretty genuine to me as well. I think that when a candidate appears intellectuality's most often a put off to voters and a death knell. Warren suffers from that. Ditto Kamala Harris. Mayor Pete seems more in control of his intelligence as an asset, not a liability."
In the end it seems to me - no Ph.D. level political science here - that elections since 1960 have almost always come down on the side of positive personal appeal/charisma for the winner, with negative appeal/charisma a contributing factor for the loser in a couple of cases."
11 comments:
Genuineness, yes. But also integrity: when your words and actions are consistent and congruent with the whole package message. Warren lost it at the end of the debate. If she’s in a huff at a “friend” about different interpretations of a meeting a year ago, how kcan she stand firm against the full scale Trump attacks to come?
Tough to forgive Senator Gillibrand and the Democratic caucus for throwing Al Franken under the bus. If Democrats need a TV star to take out the reality TV con man, he could have been the one to do it.
IMO, the most charismatic of the 2020 candidates has already dropped out: Cory Booker. He seemed to me the most charming and personable, but what do I know about charm.
Joe Biden seemed quite genuine and authentic in his disdain for young Americans when he said in 2018: “The younger generation now tells me how tough things are. Give me a break. No, no, I have no empathy for it. Give me a break.”
Maybe the 'common man' also feels this way about their children and grandchildren, so it's a 'relatable' sentiment. I hope not. Many older people I know consider it to be a family problem when a young member is trying to carry $40,000 in student loan debt with a minimum wage job.
A big component of the Obama Coalition that won in 2008 was enthusiastic young people persuading their elders to vote to make history, and showing up to vote in November. It's very hard for me to see how Biden can reassemble the Obama Coalition and win the GE with these kinds of statements from him on youtube.
Great guest posts.
Seems to me infantile, and dangerously naive, that we imbue this one person & office with so much power, but that's what we do and it is all the media -- all of it -- does all the time.
Took me a long time to understand why Reagan was called the Great Communicator.
One thing about Trump: he isn't afraid of his shadow like most of the Democrats seem to be.
I would add Warmth to genuineness as needed personal characteristics. Warren has that in spades, it seems to me. she needs the image make-over from scolding teacher to protective mother-bear. That part of her is there. She made one gaff, which was due to GENUINE anger at the whole woman-for-president issue. it seems to me. A handshake at that moment would have diffused her anger, and she needed to be angry!
Sanders does not seem very warm, to me. Nor does Buttigieg. I am back and forth about Klobuchar. but again, how important is that? Ironically, I see Steyer as both, but that still doesn't mean that he is qualified to be president! So we still need that experience. along with strong principles. I see all of them possessing integrity. Biden, too.
I will go with whoever is the eventual nominee.
Warren did great DURING the debate but showed her incompetence afterwards by forgetting she was still on mic (unless it was intentional...I hope not). A shocked Sanders initially reacted defensively and quickly backed off, knowing it wasn't the time or place to do dirty laundry.
Neither candidate was helped by that display, however, I believe Warren was hurt by her demeanor. Americans have always rejected the intellectual. If Mark Twain or Adlai Stevenson were here, you could ask them.
Integrity matters. When I ask young folks why they support an aging curmudgeon they say, "civil rights, consistency" (and they're not talking Biden).
I appreciate your insights in how people choose candidates. Frankly, I wish it was more about policy and less about charisma. I find it a dangerous road because sometimes genuine people are serious in tone. They're worried about doing the right thing so smiling when talking about serious things is hard. Believe me, I've been told to smile all my life. Yikes. That said, I do find the candidates more engaging than in past years. But Mayor Pete--seriously--sounds like he's been in the basement watching Obama clips for six months and practicing how to sound like him down to every phrase and period. The only thing he's missing is the "Well, look" at the start of a sentence. It's crazy how close his cadence and phrasing really is. This cannot be an accident. I used to teach voice so I notice this but someone else let me know I'm not crazy. This guy is an Obama knock off--right?
Good comment, Anonymous, who appreciates my comments.
Yes, Buttigieg is very Obama-like. Serious, mostly calm and steady in manner. There is a reassuring seriousness to him. I respond favorably to that. There is something about Bernie’s jeremiads, and Warren’s high drama intensity are stirring and they draw crowds. That is good. But the come across as extreme, as excitable. But Buttigieg’s matter of fact tone makes me think he will make good decisions and that is what appears to me to be “presidential.”
Hey, sign your name. This is a reasonable comment. No need to be anonymous.
Peter Sage
I think we’ve learned that in addition to policy we desperately need a president who has sufficient intellect and character to choose wise and ethical advisors and let them do their job. That’s what good executives do. Oh and I guess the only way we’ll get one is if he or she is charming.
One more thing: Choosing a running mate is important; the candidate's first executive decision ("Who is most qualified to be president by accident?"). To me, this disqualified McCain (Palin) and Bush I (Danny Boy). It's one real fact that tells.
Bernie is the only bbn one in the group who truly stands for real people not ett rich ones. Consistent message forever
Warren showed true colors doing this to Bernie.she knew what she was doing.
Post a Comment