Comments

Charisma in politics, charisma in life — 46 Comments

1. Martin Peretz once offered that Max Weber had coined the term to describe figures with rare inspirational ability – e.g. Buddha and Christ – not pols who put together applause lines. He objected to its use for any contemporary public figure bar Martin Luther King.

   It’s amazing when you look at retrospective assessments that JFK is rated favorably by > 80% of the public and held in more esteem that any other quondam president. That’s a superficial judgment, and a depressing one.

2. What’s the role of the crowd? Was Obama (or Kennedy, or Clinton) really charismatic, or was it just the effect of being in a crowd really excited about the speaker?

   I don’t doubt Menges felt what he felt, but I’m curious on what basis he attributed to the speaker rather than the kind of crowd that gathered to hear that speaker.

3. Jim Jones comes to mind.

4. Jim Jones comes to mind.

   That smarts.

5. I had just started college when JFK was running against Nixon. I didn’t find either of them very appealing but the media worshiped Kennedy. I couldn’t figure out why, but according to the media, Kennedy was from heaven and Nixon was from hell.

6. Charisma in a politician is a dangerous thing so it’s good that it’s rare … and often retrospective. I read that Abe Lincoln had a terrible – high pitched – speaking voice. That would never go over now. And poor Winston C. would never get out of the gate in these puritanical tyrannical times. Obama and Clinton are both often cited as being “charismatic” but I didn’t see it. I believe their followers believed this very deeply but I think the “charisma” due to their followers’ fever dreams about them. Some people just need to be led, and they make up fantasies about The Leader. Ick.

7. You see the same with teachers. Some teachers are charismatic, and have the class eating out of their hand. They don’t get better results than the merely professional teachers though, because the kids aren’t concentrating on the right thing. (The kids will *swear* that the charismatic teacher is excellent, even if their pass rates are low — and the teachers the next year can tell that the students aren’t better at the intangibles either.)

   Every now and again a teacher comes along who is charismatic and an excellent teacher as well. Unfortunately that is an energy draining way to live, and such people almost always burn out. (Jaime Escalante, of Stand and Deliver fame, didn’t have it easy.)

8. The tragedy that we’ve separated the word from its roots “charis” or “grace/gift” (specifically from God) tells a great deal.

   We use “charisma” as almost synonymous with “hypnotic ability” when it was used originally to suggest someone uniquely gifted by God for specific work…or so my old Greek professor used to say.

9. I forgot to post these two:

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S0FDjFBj8o

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZBKX-6Gz6A

   Perfect examples of inspiring speeches meaning very little.

10. I was in college when Kennedy came to speak at the USC campus in Los Angeles. I did not go but a girl I knew who was very sensible and not at all likely to get hysterical, went to the speech and became a “jumper” as the Kennedy staff used to refer to girls who would keep jumping to see better,.

11. When I walk into a room the lights flicker.
    Style points.

12. A good point, John G.! Interesting and in accord therewith that my old Liddell-Scott refers, when I look up ???????, only to the New Testament, not any other classical or Hellenistic sources.

    I’d note also that where Mendes is talking about charismatic (modern sense) vs. boring speakers, one could also divide the latter down a little more into the ones that really are flat-out dull and the ones that are more factually oriented, but who can still bring off a neat harmony that impresses listeners on a different, more intellectual level than do the charismatic types.

13. To me, charisma is the (innate) ability to project one’s ‘charm” points toward others.
    It was said of Edwin Edwards, the former LA governor, that all heads turned to him upon his merely entering a room, no speaking needed. He was not a tall man, either.
    All of the so-called charismatic figures leave me cold. Obama and JFK both, and I was young in JFK’s time.
    There seems to be a tendency to mindless worship, particularly among young women, that seems to date back to the beginnings of rock ‘n roll. Thus the “rock star” label we hear about today.
    I expect that I have always been cynical and a Doubting Thomas. No one has ever charismaed me. Obama in particular, creased trousers and all!

14. Some people are immune to charisma. I know I am, but I got this way by hard experience, it was not something I was born with.

    It is easy to recognize charisma, though, by both observing the subject and those interacting with them. Bill Clinton has it, Ronald Reagan had it, and Obama has it. Both Bush presidents had little or none of it, but in the four races the two men ran for president, only the 1992 race did the opponent have charisma. Al Gore has no charisma. Hillary Clinton has anti-charisma, and so does Elizabeth Warren.

    Of the Democratic candidates likely to run, the one with the highest charisma is O’Rourke. In general, I find charismatic people to be over-represented as male- though all my bad experiences are with women who possessed it.

15. I can’t tell with JFK. I was eight when he was elected and eleven when he was assassinated. What I remember was the optimistic feeling of the time, then the abrupt darkness when he was taken.

    Watching footage of JFK later, I do admire his easygoing wit when speaking and compared that with the chronic pain I now know was his companion.

16. Successful salespeople have charisma coming out of their pores. It is like a super-power, and it is one I wish I possessed to some degree.

17. Neal Cassady, the Dean Moriarity character in Jack Kerouac’s “On the Road,” had astonishing sexual magnetism. I recall one story where he was shacked up with a young woman. Her mother came to rescue her and within a few hours Cassady had bedded her too.

    Of course he had a general charisma too which bewitched the Beat writers and then Ken Kesey’s Merry Pranksters circle.

    Cassady was unique. He had his imitators but no one could pull it off.

18. I knew a guy once who could walk into a store and talk to the owner or manager and come out with free samples. Of just about anything. With women, I don’t think he ever actually approached a woman cold. They approached him.

    He wasn’t a conman. He had a successful business of his own. Very successful actually. When he was 35 he sold it for 15 million. He could wheel and deal like nobody’s business and he had charisma in spades. Very likable. But not very good looking. On a 1-10 scale, a 5, tops: overweight, terrible complexion, terrible teeth. Great posture though, for all that.

    He was confident but not overly so. Just a very likable guy. Made you feel like the center of attention and when he walked in the room, all eyes turned toward him.

    I didn’t believe charisma was a thing until I met him and saw the real thing. I witnessed the free sample phenomenon once while out with him and some friends. We were walking past a seafood market and he made conversation with own of the merchants. A couple of minutes into the conversation, the man was trying to give him a fresh lobster. Just give it to him. He didn’t take it. Everyone we were with just laughed, “That’s our Mike.”

19. My stepfather had his variety of charisma. He was an unpleasant, dangerous person, and a junkie to boot, but he could just take people over and they would like it.

    Once I went to the grocery story with him. He was wearing only a bathrobe and within minutes he had the manager of the store, running all over the place like a dog fetching items for my stepfather. I couldn’t believe it.

    Later I realized that some of my stepfather’s charisma was that he was a straight-up psychopath.

    He didn’t fool my grandmother though. She was a tough cookie who had grown up in the Oklahoma territory. Geronimo had been a regular customer at her father’s soda fountain. I once asked her about my stepfather. She said, “I could have driven a stake through his heart.”

20. huxley:

    Psychopaths aren’t always charming, but sometimes they are VERY charming. Not everyone is susceptible to their charms.

    By the way, about your Grandmother and Geronimo and the soda fountain—my grandmother’s parents ran a store. When Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show with Annie Oakley and Indians and all the rest used to come to perform in town (“town” was somewhere in or near New York City, by the way), they came to her parents’ store to shop. This was probably in the 1880s or early 1890s. It was very exciting for her when she was a kid.

21. The only charismatic pol I can think of is Slick Willy. Ayn Rand described Cuffy Meigs (I think it was): “He had the puffy face of an aging football hero.” When I first saw WJC on TV, that came to mind at once. Red flags all over the place, and in the news as well: Watch out, this one is a liar.

    Then I watched part of a speech or interview (maybe the latter) on TV, during his Presidency. I was sucked in. Everything he said seemed so reasonable, so sensible, you could be certain his foremost concern was the well-being of the Republic … and the charisma — he couldn’t possibly have been anything but completely sincere! I had a tough time holding onto my hat. But with the TV off, n short order the news brought me back to the Real World.

    Charismatic non-pols: Matthew Broderick and Hugh Grant. I’ve read that Mr. Broderick has a successful Broadway career. I hope this is true, and that he hasn’t allowed his charisma to take him over. (I only know him through Ferris Bueller and a couple of other videos.) I know nothing about Hugh Grant.

    I’ve never seen any of these people except in the privacy and shelter of my own den.

    But I’ve known at least three highly charismatic people personally. One, a boyfriend of the Young Miss when she was a teenager; his older brother; and a fine musician, the organist retired from a very good post, with whom we both studied piano for awhile.

    Every one of these people was a mess. I wouldn’t say that any of them were con-men, although the organist (who needed a keeper, financially) had people falling all over themselves to help him out financially, with tax returns, even with cooking for him. He would make you feel like king or queen of the world, insult you dreadfully, push you away when you got close…men and women alike. Highly unreliable. The boys were not from a terribly good home and they were, as I say, a mess. But I don’t think any of the three really intended to harm anyone.

    As for the former occupant of the Oval Office, the most attractive thing about him was the crease in his trousers. I always thought WJC could have eaten his lunch. Indeed, if Pres. Trump’s predecessor were left out on the street with nothing but the clothes on his back, it seemed to me that he’d starve to death in a week, whereas in the same circumstances our boy Bill would be eating at the Waldorf in company of such unknowns as J. Pierpont Morgan, J.D. Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie — or their modern equivalents — the next night. A born con-man and then some!

    I would advise anyone to run like a gazelle, like a cheetah, from anyone with charisma. (And maybe from anyone widely said to have charisma…such as you-know-who.)

    By the way — None of these people struck me as having any particular sex appeal. (Now there’s a term that dates me!)

22. Edit AWOL. Correction about Cuffy: “He had the puffy face of an aging college football hero.”

    I think the correction helps her image of Cuffy and mine of Willy.

23. “And I guess I’m looking for a Churchill or a Lincoln. And even then, I’m not sure that what they had would be called “charisma.” At least, I wouldn’t call it that; I’d call it eloquence and depth. Do those qualities even correlate with charisma? I don’t think so.” — Neo

    Some charismatic politicians (and othes) have eloquence, but little depth, as commenters remarked about WJC and BHO. I think JFK falls into that category as well, but I was still in grade-school when he died,, and it’s no longer possible to separate the legend from the reality (Thanks to Jackie’s deliberate evocation of “Camelot”).
    * * *
    Julie near Chicago on January 8, 2019 at 7:58 pm at 7:58 pm said:
    The only charismatic pol I can think of is Slick Willy. …

    Then I watched part of a speech or interview (maybe the latter) on TV, during his Presidency. I was sucked in. Everything he said seemed so reasonable, so sensible, you could be certain his foremost concern was the well-being of the Republic … and the charisma — he couldn’t possibly have been anything but completely sincere! I had a tough time holding onto my hat. But with the TV off, n short order the news brought me back to the Real World.
    * * *
    I noticed that about Obama as well, when watching him give speeches before I quit listening anymore, because I could no longer endure the charm when I knew the depth of his deceits. (Not the kind of depth Neo had in mind, I think, and his eloquence was limited to pre-written scripts, as we also discovered.)

    One real-life candidate for the trifecta of charisma, eloquence, and depth is Jordan Peterson.

    And about those psychopaths: is “charisma” the same as “charming,” even with a secular rather than religious context?

24. This part of the linked article seems to address the concept directly, and secularly:
    “Campolo had long believed that was true. “I was convinced charisma flowed directly from God,” he told me. “It was a gift.” As he began to lose his faith, he said, “I passed through every stage of apostasy on my way to heresy, I slowly left my ability to believe in all this stuff.” He began to preach that charisma may be something you’re born with, but it wasn’t supernatural; you could employ it at will. “You can use it to get women in bed, you can use it to win people down the aisle for Jesus, or you can use it to sell insurance,” Campolo said. What’s more, it was a quality that could, at least in part, be learned and perfected.
    …
    Antonakis has identified a series of what he calls Charismatic Leadership Tactics (CLTs), which range from the use of metaphors and storytelling to nonverbal methods of communication like open posture and animated, representative gestures at key moments.”

    I think this is true, but there are also people who are “born charismatics” (although few have charisma thrust upon them), and use naturally the techniques others can learn (as with any skill, for instance, musical or athletic talents).

    The preacher-turned-atheist at the root of the quote argues against the restriction of charisma to religious figures, and I agree: a charming preacher is no more charismatic than a charming pagan.

    What interests me more are the people who aren’t charming at all, in that their behavior doesn’t really exhibit the skills listed above and they aren’t necessarily attractive physically, but still attract attention and followers. I knew a young man like that in college, and a few since then, but I have never figured out the source of their appeal.

    So, did Christ have Charisma?
    I think (reading the NT) that he originally attracted followers because he was eloquent and deep and “charming” (scare quotes because the root of that word is related to witch-craft), but when he introduced tough doctrines, the charmed crowd disappeared pretty fast.
    Charismatic politicians, and even preachers, today don’t often ask us to do hard things.

25. Piore (the article’s author) seems to be channeling what a lot of conservatives have said about Democrats and the Left in general: they concentrate so much on feelings, that they have no capacity any longer for reason. Of course, they (along with the #NeverTrumpers) say the same about President Trump’s followers, but I think the accumulation of evidence gives more credence now to the former than to the latter.

    “Even so, when offered the chance to follow each speaker into a coffee room to discuss the ideas of their talks, the students almost never followed the boring speaker—and almost always followed the charismatic one.

    This does not surprise Richard Boyatzis, who studies organizational behavior, psychology, and cognitive science at Case Western Reserve University. Using fMRI, Boyatzis and Anthony Jack, an experimental psychologist, have demonstrated that emotional speakers engage with a neural pathway called the default mode network (DMN). This pathway, also known as the task-negative network, spans multiple areas of the brain (including the amygdala) and is associated with daydreaming, thoughts about others, and remembering things in the past. Interestingly, its activation is often found to be negatively correlated with the very circuits we rely upon for analytic thinking—those involved in executive functions, planning, reasoning, attention, and problem-solving. “The problem is these two networks have almost no overlap,” Boyatzis said. “They suppress each other.”

    In fact, beyond shutting down our ability to reason, some scientists have found that under the right circumstances, charismatics—especially if that charisma stems from our perception of them as a “leader”—can induce a state akin to hypnotism.
    …
    The scientists agreed that charisma grabbed us on an emotional level. They also agreed snap judgments and subconscious fears could be overcome. In his bestseller Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow, Nobel Prize-winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman outlines two separate parallel decision circuits. The brain’s intuitive system is far faster than the rational system. The intuitive system, though, is prone to unconscious factors, based on limited personal experience and tendencies that result in irrational biases. But the slower, more rational system, centered in our prefrontal cortex, can serve as a potent check on unconscious tendencies—when we take the time to analyze them.

    That was the final point Bart Campolo wanted to make about charisma: We could learn not to be taken in.

    “You’re not going to stamp out charisma,” Campolo said. “The way to protect people from demagogues is not to kill all the demagogues but rather to teach people how charisma works so they can recognize whether it’s being wielded responsibly or abused“…”

26. In all these comments about charisma, there is only one brief mention of “Beto” O’Rourke. That surprises me, as I think he has more charisma than JFK did, and probably only has his equal in the young WJC. Plus, he has a very wealthy wife.

    I expect to see a lot more of O’Rourke. Crowds seem to get the vapors over him and he knows it. The field he is running in is full of geriatric has-beens. AND, he has adopted a hispanic-sounding name despite the fact that he is not hispanic.

    In six years we will be looking at what the US has become after one term of O’Rourke and wondering if the voters will be stupid enough to elect him for a second term. I’m guessing the voters will be that stupid.

27. I expect to see a lot more of O’Rourke. Crowds seem to get the vapors over him and he knows it.

    I agree but only the left is taken in by these snake oil salesmen. A lot of moderate people of good will were taken in by Obama but they have been taught a lesson.

    Kennedy was a charming guy but I thought he was a lightweight at the time and I knew Obama was an empty suit in 2008.

    I agree that Jordan Peterson is very impressive speaking and the other is Steve Bannon. He looks like an unmade bed but he is very impressive, to me at least, speaking.

28. F:

    I think maybe it’s because O’Rourke hasn’t yet had all that much national exposure. I have read about his charisma, for example, but not seen it myself because I don’t tend to watch TV news. But anyone with charisma has the capacity to go very very far politically, whether that person has any substance or not. That was always true but it’s even more true these days.

29. AesopFan:

    I think that charismatic preachers today often ask their followers to do hard things, if you define giving up money as a hard thing. And Jim Jones certainly asked his followers to do hard things.

30. Mike K:

    I don’t think people have been taught a lesson on Obama at all. I think it he were able to run today he’d win again hands down.

31. I seem to have a charisma shield. I didn’t find Kennedy all that charismatic, although I could recognize his appeal to those who are subject to charisma. Same with Bill Clinton.

    What I’m a sucker for is gravitas. Men and women who have it win me over rather easily. What is gravitas? To me it is wisdom and character that has been hard won through the experience of difficult and far-ranging challenges in life. Eisenhower and Reagan had it. Jean Kirkpatrick had it. Few politicians have it because so many of them come from the moneyed upper class. Few have had to struggle to get an education, keep a job, make ends meet, served in the military, worked their way up from neophyte to accomplished expert, failed and tried again to succeed, and so much else that builds character and wisdom.

    I once flew with a man who was my age. He was a child in Germany during WWII. His father was killed in the war. He and his mother lived a desperate life staying in bomb shelters during the nights and scrabbling for food and clothing during the days. At war’s end his mother managed to get them to Denmark , then to Norway, and finally to the U.S. He was 12 years old when he came to the U.S. His mother found work as a seamstress and he did all kinds of low level jobs to earn whatever he could. He joined the Air Force at 18. He did his hitch, went to college on the GI Bill, then re-enlisted for pilot training. He eventually got out and got an airline job. He had gravitas. Wisdom and character from meeting the hard challenges of life. I loved flying with him and knowing him. Gravitas is what impresses me.

32. AesopFan…”So, did Christ have Charisma?” Good question…

    New Testament says on more than one occasion that he had “authority” that the religious institutionalists didn’t have. That authority is in itself a “charism” a specific endowment from God to accomplish the in-breaking rule of God which is what Jesus was sent to do.

    John the Baptiser and Jesus also were the first genuine “word from God” to God’s people in about 400 years…So there’s no surprise that after that silence and the phonies in the interim people were at least intrigued and most assuredly engaged. I suspect it’s that combination of Spirit-given authority and being the incarnation of the Word directly to humankind that drew the crowds.

    As an observation…That was a depressing read about Bart Campolo. I had forgotten he was the antithesis of his dad. I never fully bought into the Tony Campolo schtick, but to see his son throw him under the bus…I hope 40 years from now my kids treat me better than that. Then again…I’m no Tony Campolo nor do I want to be. He can have Slick Willy all to himself. 😉 I also pray their faith fares better than his too…which is more important in the long run.

33. James Madison is supposed to have been an archetypal uncharismatic person. One of the sharpest tools in the founding father toolbox (IMHO), he was small and had a terrible weak high-pitched voice. I think he sometimes used Jefferson as a front man, though more often they used each other as sounding boards.

    Jefferson himself had some height and gravitas maybe, but often preferred an unassuming appearance. While Pres. Washington like to ride his horse in full uniform, Jefferson rode a great deal also, but was sometimes mistaken for a less than destitute vagabond. A semi-important person walked into the unlocked Whitehouse one day or evening and mistook Pres. Jefferson for the help.

34. It’s interesting, the differences among commenters as to whom they find charismatic. There are people on this list whom I find about as attractive as the lid of an old garbage pail, and forget “charisma.”

    To me, there’s a big difference between charisma and the ability to get attention. I can imagine becoming fascinated with said lid, for analytic reasons or because I see faces or something in it. Of course, I don’t say everyone’s attention would be caught by it.

    Mike mentions that Peterson and Bannon are, to him, impressive speakers. But that alone doesn’t mean that they have charisma, “charm.”

    Speaking of Charming Willy, the old saying comes to mind: “He could charm the pants off a cast-iron lawn dog.” (CiLD swiped from somewhere in Thurber.)

    It makes me wonder whether the “beauty” of the charismatic is, in truth, in the eye of the beholder. Or whether the word means exactly the same thing to different people.

    .

    Along those lines, AesopFan’s comment about the brain researchers’ findings is interesting. Thanks. :>

35. To me, there’s a big difference between charisma and the ability to get attention.

    Julie near Chicago: There are various definitions of charisma, but they all go beyond getting attention to gaining authority, loyalty and influence, though not everyone will be susceptible.

    There simply are people who can exert shocking amounts of influence on others beyond what would one expect based on an objective account of what such people say or do.

    I find charisma both fascinating and frightening.

36. The first time I saw and heard WJC on television, my immediate reaction was “Friday night lounge lizard.” I never was able to stop thinking that about him.

37. By all accounts Werner Erhard, the founder of est, was charismatic. People gave up promising professional careers to follow him and preach his gospel. At a meeting of seminar leaders in 1977:

    …one seminar leader got to his feet and with a serious look on his face.

    “The question in the room that nobody is asking,” the man told Erhard solemnly, “is ‘Are you the messiah?'”

    The room grew silent as Erhard looked out to the curious faces of some of his most devoted disciples. After a few moments he replied, “No, I am who sent him.”

    –Outrageous Betrayal” p. 147

    That’s Biblical language. With that line Erhard announced he was God and the people in the room sat still for it.

38. Correction: –Steven Pressman, “Outrageous Betrayal” p.147

    Interestingly, Erhard was able to train his trainers to recreate some of his charisma. In fact their explicit mission was to “recreate Werner.” They worked very hard to duplicate Werner’s words, tone and physical mannerisms.

    The est trainers I saw were all very impressive people.

39. Mike mentions that Peterson and Bannon are, to him, impressive speakers. But that alone doesn’t mean that they have charisma, “charm.”

    Maybe I am too cynical to believe in “Charisma” as anything but salesman talk.

    Peterson and Bannon are at ease with others who disagree or even try to attack them. That takes something that I respect.

    Jim Jones had “Charisma.” The pols believed in him. The real role he played in SF politics is still not discussed.

40. I don’t think people have been taught a lesson on Obama at all. I think it he were able to run today he’d win again hands down.

    I think a lot of people who voted for him out of goodwill and a desire to heal racial tension would not be fooled again. The left wing Democrat base and the blacks would, of course, buy the same pig in a poke.

41. Jim Jones had “Charisma.” The pols believed in him. The real role he played in SF politics is still not discussed.

    Mike K: It’s starting to come out, but way too late.
    __________________________________________

    Flynn’s new book “Cult City: Jim Jones, Harvey Milk, and 10 Days That Shook San Francisco (ISI Books)” is a bold, at times shocking work of revisionist history that challenges what we think we know about both men and the murderous events that brought them to national prominence.

    Flynn reveals that Jones was in fact a socialist fanatic who, far from the theological and cultural fringes, was a key player in left-wing San Francisco politics. Flynn also shows that Milk was an opportunist and a showboater who was willing to use extremist rhetoric — and in one case, indulge in outing — to advance his political career. His assassin was not a homicidal homophobe, but a hotheaded former political ally furious over Milk’s political betrayal.

    And, most bizarrely of all, Milk and Jones were friends and allies.

    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/jim-jones-harvey-milk-cult-city-secret-history/
    ______________________________________________

    Jim Jones’s “People’s Temple” was the ACORN of its day. Whenever a liberal Bay Area candidate needed help in an election, Jones would put his people in buses for rallies and get out the vote efforts.

42. Then there’s Adi Da, an American New Age-y teacher who went under a dozen or so crazy names, and successfully sold himself as an incarnation of God.

    He put together a cult which revered him and paid his bills, which allowed him to buy an island in Fiji from Raymond Burr(!), where he lived the rest of his bizarre life hidden from normal society.

    I don’t have the words for how strange his books are and absurdly inflated in praise of himself.

    He fooled a lot of people who should have known better, including transpersonal psychology authority, Ken Wilber, who is over-rated IMO but not crazy and taken seriously by many respectable authorities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Da

43. John Guilfoyle on January 9, 2019 at 2:49 pm at 2:49 pm said:
    AesopFan…”So, did Christ have Charisma?” Good question…
    * * *
    Thanks for the observations. The point on the long dearth of true prophets in Israel is well-taken.

    Neo: in my experience, giving money to my church is the easiest thing they ask me to do; getting “down in the trenches” with service, or accepting and living doctrines that force you out of your comfort zone is hard.

    In re Jim Jones and other ersatz messiahs: the devout core that followed him in drinking the kool-aid were the ones who DID accept the hard things he preached.
    Just because doctrines are hard doesn’t make them right, but easy-peasy religions generally fall by the wayside pretty fast.

44. I’ve got a candidate for Charisma for you. I’ve begin a biography of Huey P Long. It looks like it is going to be good.

    When, early in his career, he began to campaign in southern Louisiana, he was warned by the local boss that this part of the state was Catholic. Huey responded with a story. He told how every Sunday he would hitch up a horse and drive his Catholic grandparents to church, after which he would drive his Baptist grandparents to their church. The person listening to the story said, “Huey, I didn’t know you had Catholic grandparents.” Huey responded, “Hell, we didn’t even have a horse.”

    It looks good.

45. Well, he certainly drives like a Kennedy.

    And seems to have a father who watches out for him.

    Along with sources of “sufficient” funds.

    All of which makes for a pretty good start, I guess.

    Alas, not as much between the ears as Juan Fitzcarraldo or Roberto Francisco; but he’s tall, lanky and has a terrific smile.

    Which might well be enough to get him past the post.

    On the other hand he is, alas, a White Male!! (Though not old, not old.)

    Nonetheless the powers-that-be can massage that rather unfortunate (these days) feature…disguising it (journalistic Coppertone?…or maybe the real thing) so that truly, this mostly untested version of the enduring political legend could in fact be elected America’s first Latin American president.

    Neo-Camelot Ho!

46. Speaking of JFK, Joe Lieberman says that he was drawn to the Democratic Party by JFK and his agenda. Not long, and I think quite interesting.

    “Lieberman: Ocasio-Cortez more socialist than Democrat “:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iSujjGS074

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>