
It's Charisma, Stupid (2004) - pashapiro
http://paulgraham.com/charisma.html
======
mc32
As someone aptly put it on twitter (Nate Cohn), the "white working class" is
voting like a minority block--and why would they not? The elites have ignored
the working class (white and black) for ages and when they do think of them,
white (and other) elites look down at them with the contempt of 'white
privilege' while they, the elite whites, sit comfortably in their protected
perches rarely exposing themselves to insecurity.

It's possible this is a consequence of overplaying identity politics used to
try and counterbalance Trump's followers' politics. In other words the working
class had their identity unintentially forged in the scrum of identity
politics.

~~~
retreatguru
Trump runs as the anti-establishment candidate and with his charisma does a
good job selling it. His candidacy reminds me of the movie Idiocracy.

~~~
icantdrive55
I think the working class was really tired of Globalism. I'm as liberal as
they get, but building in the cheapest country always bothered me.

I get hammered for this, but we buy Apple products. We pay a premium. We are
told Apple has to build overseas, in order to sell us products at their low
prices. Then they have the gut wrenching corporate problem of too much cash?

I'm sorry--it always bothered me.

That said, I'll be shocked if Trump succeeds in bringing back manufacturing.
Those senators are not going to raise Tarriffs, or do anything to upset their
corporate lobbiests.

~~~
sangnoir
> I think the working class was really tired of Globalism...I'm sorry--it
> always bothered me.

It's not just globalism - it's global _competition_. Even if the US repeals
NAFTA and other trade agreements and economically isolates itself, competition
from Japan, China and Germany will remain.

The golden age of American manufacturing wasn't possible just because
Glabalism wasn't in existence - it was possible because there was no
competition since countries were rebuilding in the aftermath of WWII

------
LargeCompanies
Hilary Clinton has and is highly unlikeable and her narrative is similar.

The DNC chose her over Sanders... would the results be different?

~~~
runevault
Both the super fiscally conservative and the more... unpleasant parts of
Trump's voting block would never vote for someone as liberal as Sanders. I
have a hard time believing anyone that would have voted for him would vote
Trump, now if you think it would've swayed enough people who voted 3rd party
to vote Sanders instead you might have something.

~~~
retreatguru
The thrust of the essay is that people don't vote by issues but by charisma -
and Sanders has more charisma than Hillary. And he is also an anti-
establishment candidate.

~~~
Tinyyy
I'm not sure Sanders has more charisma than Hillary.

~~~
retreatguru
Maybe, maybe not, but it was so fun to watch and listen to Sanders - what a
character. Hillary often feels scripted, forced and on message.

~~~
civilian
Is it fun? I think if you buy his story it might be fun. I feel pretty strong
on my economics, and listening to Sanders talking was just disappointing.

When the hit-piece anecdote came up that Sanders was asked for leave a commune
for lollygagging instead of working, it rang SO true for me. I know that it's
overall a small irrelevant week in a whole life, but it really painted what
kind of guy he is. [http://freebeacon.com/politics/bernie-sanders-asked-leave-
hi...](http://freebeacon.com/politics/bernie-sanders-asked-leave-hippie-
commune/)

------
soneca
Wow. I think it applies perfectly today.

 _" Theory: In US presidential elections, the more charismatic candidate wins.

People who write about politics, whether on the left or the right, have a
consistent bias: they take politics seriously. When one candidate beats
another they look for political explanations. The country is shifting to the
left, or the right. And that sort of shift can certainly be the result of a
presidential election, which makes it easy to believe it was the cause.

But when I think about why I voted for Clinton over the first George Bush, it
wasn't because I was shifting to the left. Clinton just seemed more dynamic.
He seemed to want the job more. Bush seemed old and tired. I suspect it was
the same for a lot of voters."_

------
retreatguru
Trump is entertaining to watch. Even though I find him a buffoon I still find
him fun to watch. Hillary has more experience, matches my views on policy but
she is a bore to watch, I can't bear it.

(I'm Canadian, and our immigration server is now down due to the load).

------
Gupie
The election of an "Entertainer in Chief"

------
farright
It's a number of things:

Going against political correctness by voicing controversial but popular views
on immigration and Islam.

Populist economics in a recession after two terms of Obama.

And of course a yuuuge charisma.

~~~
wavefunction
I don't find him particularly charismatic. I'd probably punch the dude in the
mouth if I had to deal with him and his attitude in person.

But your points about populist economics are the bigger cause I believe. But
then I'm a Bernie supporter who knew he could steal that issue from Trump.
C'est la vie.

~~~
farright
The fact the so many progressive's response is to want to "punch the dude in
the mouth" is exactly the kind of oppresive political correctness Trump voters
are rebelling against.

These scenes probably garnered even more support for Trump's rallies:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMux_UHmpvc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMux_UHmpvc)

~~~
inimino
Not exactly political correctness but it is contempt. I think the contempt for
Trump and his supporters by the other side explains a lot of both the result
and the incorrect predictions in advance of the election. A lot of the country
literally could not imagine a Trump win.

~~~
farright
The contempt stems from political correctness. Political correctness isn't
some superficial outrage, it's the genuine belief that people who don't hold
progressive beliefs are bad people who need to be punished. Trump can't
convince progressives that his views are reasonable, but he can show that
these views can't be repressed anymore.

------
blfr
It surely helps and Trump exploited every opportunity, spared no effort to
make sure he wins but charisma is generally not the path to the White House

[https://sociological-eye.blogspot.com/2016/11/does-
charisma-...](https://sociological-eye.blogspot.com/2016/11/does-charisma-win-
presidential-elections.html)

 _Overall, 6 of 29 modern elections were won by strongly charismatic leaders
(Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK); another 4 elections were won by well-liked but
uncharismatic figures, Eisenhower and Reagan. About 80% of the time, an
uncharismatic person wins the presidency._

~~~
Retric
BS. Reagan Like trump was a popular actor and was very charismatic.

Importantly Trump (likely) lost the popular vote by a large margin. But he
focused on the few areas that actually count. Remember the extra 250 thousand
Hillary voters in DC count for 3, the significantly smaller margin in Florida,
and PA count for 49.

------
anondon
This is from 2004. The title should be updated to reflect that.

~~~
kayoone
That makes it even better

