It’s my contention that, in a two horse race, likability and charisma are literally the only things that matter. Nothing else, not facts, policies, experience, background, or anything else, are remotely important. So, with that in mind, I’m curious to see who you think is the most charismatic candidate. Please, please, please don’t let any preconceptions about a candidate’s policies cloud your vote. Pretend they all stand for exactly the same things. I’m only interested in your gut reaction to each candidate.
No contest: Pete Buttigieg.
Booker, IMO. I think he’s the most talented communicator, and best on camera, of the current candidates.
Booker is a close second to Buttegieg. Booker has that sharp, polished, useless feel about him. He waxes poetically for a little too long without enough substance. He’s the guy you want as your graduation/motivational speaker, not your president.
Booker’s not my top choice, but he’s in my 2nd tier, because I think he’s the most naturally talented of the candidates. I don’t dislike Buttigieg, and he’s obviously very sharp, but I think Booker comes across as a lot more likable on camera. But obviously this is just down to personal preference.
Ditto. Buttigieg seems plastic and robotic to me. And he doesn’t really say anything.
Booker is pleasant and intelligent. I voted for Warren because she appeals to me. Not in a personal, warm and cuddly kind of way, but more in her mind chimes more with mine and that’s appealing to me.
Biden and Yang are the two I think would be fun to have a drink with.
Likeable as a person but not necessarily as a candidate? Id say Yang. The person I’d “most like to have a beer with” is rarely, if ever, the person I’d want to be Commander-in-Chief.
Close between Buttigieg and Booker. I went with Booker because I am more familiar with his persona/presentation, to allow for the fact that Buttigieg hasn’t been prominent long enough to be judged charismatic, as opposed to just new.
I don’t want to have a beer with the President. I want him or her to run the country in ways that I agree with. Charisma comes into play because a given candidate can inspire and attract people to get behind running the country in ways that I agree with.
All politicians, and all successful public figures, have a public persona. Whether or not that public persona is close to what they “really are” I care very little about. If I ever met a politician, no doubt they would present me with the same persona, just the “in person” persona, that they assume when meeting with the public. Is that hypocritical? Of course not - everyone is different with people they don’t know vs. actual friends, and at work vs. relaxing. And a candidate, at least a successful one, is always “at work” when meeting with the public.
Reagan was very charismatic, and apparently the only person he was really close to was Nancy. He was rather distant even with his kids. Trump can apparently be engaging one-on-one or close to it. Clinton was a schmoozer with everybody - he is IMO the closest President I can think of whose public face was the same all the time. That’s because so much of his self-image was caught up in being liked, which he defined to himself as being re-elected. Obama was a community organizer. He had to develop the ability to get strangers to like him and work with him.
Likability is a great thing if it helps you get elected, and helps you get your policies enacted. But I can be 100% convinced that he is a wonderful guy, sincerely wants what’s best for me and the country, and still vote for Reagan instead of Carter.
Charisma is a means to an end, and the end is good governance. If a candidate is dedicated to the things I want, I could not care less if he has a stick up his butt or is boring at parties or whatever.
Regards,
Shodan
Booker narrowly edging out Buttigieg for me. Either one of them would absolutely massacre Trump one-on-one in a debate, particularly given the contrast between their youth and vitality and his age and infirmity.
Boot edge edge.
Sanders has a charisma due to being authentic, but that probably wouldn’t help him in a debate.
It’s “booty judge”. (And my vote, too)
Weasel pete is really appealing to you 45+ year old centrists isn’t he?
Sanders is by far the most charismatic and likeable, but that would kill you to admit wouldnt it?
It’s an anonymous poll :rolleyes:
We’re not here to critique each other’s choices. There are no wrong answers to this question.
To me, Gabbard is the most likable. Or perhaps I should say, least unlikable. The rest all make my skin crawl. But I’m a died in the wool conservative, so my vote probably doesn’t mean much.
- Dear Leader…*
I just want to point out that this is completely ludicrous. I’m active in party politics here in South Carolina and have met both several times - both this time and in 2016 for Sanders.
To say Sanders has charisma is just flat out wrong. There is, literally, nothing likeable about the man and his presentation. His entire approach is about appealing to outrage and fairness. That’s fine, and a perfectly good focus for a campaign.
But to say it’s charismatic? He comes across as a bitter, bent over old man. There’s nothing there that would make anyone want to spend any time with him or to follow him.
Buttigieg does have some of that charisma. He’s having trouble communicating it sometimes because he does come off as focus-grouped. But it’s there.
Yang is the only correct answer.
I feel like I woke up in a netherworld in which Dan Quayle won the Nobel Prize in Literature for his groundbreaking work in creating a coffee table book for fly-over country titled “Talkin’ Tubers”.
WTF are you all smoking? And can i get some? Bernie Sanders is about the least charismatic Presidential candidate in recent memory. He’s a loud mouth, cranky, asshole who really has no sense of humor or sense of his own relevance.
And fucking GABBARD??? All i have to say is Tim Mortiss would find it much easier to deadpan over text. I’d believe that before taking him seriously. She is a psychotic paratrooper from the future programmed to hunt and kill the future savior of the country. She’s The Warrenator. Give me a break. She’s about as likeable as a tailpipe.
As far as BootyJudge goes, he was likeable until he turned into Evil BootyJudge. He’s smarmy, aggressive, and dickish now imho. He’s like.Stan and Kyle from South Park when they were visited by “opposite” Stan and “opposite” kyle. The opposite versions were evil and they were identifiable from the good guys by their stubble. If Buttigieg stsrts donning a five o’clock shadow, im freaking the fuck out.
Sanders I agree, his likeability has mainly to do with authenticity, which really isn’t the same thing. Gabbard and Buttigieg however I do think are likeable, while recognizing that they both have other issues, to put it mildly in Gabbard’s case.