The more charismatic candidate always wins

[Alben Barkley]

It’s been generally true in the modern era, i.e. since FDR. Only a couple arguable exceptions.

1932/1936/1940/1944: FDR was one of the most charismatic candidates of all-time, far more than any of his Republican competitors.

1948: Truman was much more fiery and charismatic than bland, stuffy Dewey.

1952/1956: Stevenson wasn’t exactly uncharismatic, but he had nothing on the war hero Ike.

1960: JFK quite possibly won this election solely because he was so much more charismatic than Nixon.

1964: LBJ was more charismatic in a gruff, down-to-earth, dominant sort of way than Goldwater, whose uncompromising idealism didn’t play well at the time.

1968: This is one of the possible exceptions. Wallace might actually have been the most charismatic candidate. Neither Humphrey or Nixon were very charismatic; between the two, I might actually give the edge to Humphrey, but then the election was very close in the popular vote and unusual in many ways.

1972: Nixon was still not charismatic, but neither was McGovern. Another wash, more or less, that was thus decided on factors outside charisma. Where Nixon had a clear advantage.

1976: I love Jimmy Carter, but I’m actually not sure I’d call him more charismatic than Ford. Both were likable, but in different ways. Again pretty much a wash, this time because both candidates had some charisma rather than because both lacked it.

1980: Carter’s charm had worn off by this point to much of the public, and Reagan was the most charismatic candidate since JFK if not FDR. No contest.

1984: Mondale was less charismatic than Carter and maybe even McGovern. And he was going up against Reagan. Small wonder he got destroyed.

1988: Another one where neither candidate was very charismatic at all. Dukakis made more mistakes however (e.g. the tank, the debates), and Bush coasted to victory on the popularity of Reagan combined with a ruthless campaign. Lloyd Bentsen was actually the most charismatic candidate on either ticket though. Could have won if the ticket was reversed.

1992: HW fell apart when he had to go up against an extremely charismatic candidate in Clinton, who was the Democratic answer to Reagan.

1996: Dole was possibly even less charismatic than HW, basically a sacrificial lamb thrown up against Clinton.

2000/2004: Dubya’s folksy, plain-spoken charisma helped him immensely against the stuffy, boring, and intellectual Gore/Kerry. Probably wouldn’t have won if he was less charismatic or if he was running against more charismatic candidates, as close as both elections were anyway.

2008/2012: McCain was a bit more charismatic than Romney (and had Palin, charismatic in her way), but neither had anything on Obama. Another once-in-a-generation charismatic politician.

2016: People didn’t like either candidate, but ultimately Trump’s form of “charisma” helped him motivate his base more and win over more undecideds, which was enough to eke out a win.

2020: I’d argue this year that Biden is more charismatic than Trump; he polls as more likable/favorable for a reason. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens, but for now he’s on track to win which would continue the pattern.

So clearly there is a strong correlation between charisma and electoral success since around 1932. What’s interesting is that no such correlation is evident before then; Coolidge and Hoover were not charismatic at all, yet won big in the 20s. Wilson before them was not that charismatic either. Bryan was more charismatic than any of his opponents, yet lost three times. There were actually loads of dull, uninspiring presidents in the pre-modern era who had no trouble getting elected, sometimes even over more charismatic candidates. I think there is a clear reason for this however: With the rise of radio, newsreels, and television, charisma became far more important. Far more people than before could hear and see candidates speak. Before it didn’t really matter so much if you had no charisma, because most voters would never hear you or see you outside maybe occasional photos in the paper.

Nixon is the only candidate in the modern era who managed to win twice despite having hardly any charisma. But he lost the first time to a much more charismatic candidate, and the circumstances under which he did win were heavily skewed in his favor, including the fact that his Democratic opponents weren’t all that inspiring either.