hotpprs
Rookie
![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif)
Posts: 85
![](./avatars/Republican/R_NY.gif)
Political Matrix E: 0.77, S: 3.83
|
![](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/post/xx.gif) |
« on: February 09, 2012, 03:14:48 PM » |
|
|
« edited: February 09, 2012, 03:19:08 PM by hotpprs »
|
If you look back at the last 7 Presidential contests, it seems to indicate that the winning President is a winner of a congeniality contest. That does not appear to be the case for a number of elections before 1984. I don't want to get into why this is the case in this post, (it probably has to due with the rise of cable TV and the internet), but why it is critical for the GOP to pick the correct candidate. I think there are a set number of people that vote on policy or party of the candidates. That is probably around 85% of people who vote. (I'm just pulling these numbers out of the air just to illustrate the point I am making. The exact numbers do not matter, just the outcome). Out of these, lets say around 37.5% each never change which party they vote for, which leaves the other maybe 10% who are open minded on policy and will vote for the opposing party based on policy. I do not think these 10% decide the election. I think it is the 15% that are left that just vote by who they "like". I am not saying these people are ignorant, or don't understand the politics involved. I just think when it comes down to it, those 15% vote subjectively, not objectively. So now I will cut to the chase. I think this election will follow this current pattern. The GOP needs someone who is more likeable DIRECTLY compared to Obama. Not compared to someone one else, or not within a multiple group, or not based on a poll just on how likeable they are independently. Just think of it as a simple 2 sided balance weight scale that tips one way or another. You combine likeability, trustworthiness, if they have a mean streak, a weird personal affect, or even how they look in person or on TV, and put that in one big lump. Then you take each lump (candidate), and put that on that simple balance scale and see which way it tips. I contend that the heavier lump,(heaviness being favorable), won in the last 7 elections. George H.W. Bush was a perfect case because he both won and lost. He weighed better then Dukakis, but not better against the big loveable Bubba. And as hated (by some) as Clinton and Bush were during their reelection campaigns, they ran against candidates that everyone said had personality flaws, Dole and Kerry. Their parties were sure personality did not matter, and that the utter disdain for the current President would guarantee a win. Does this sound familiar this year? Here's my opinion on how the scales would tip this year. (And I'm not basing this on who I like or dislike. I'm basing this on who I think the whole of the electorate would like or dislike). Obama weighs better then Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann, Christie. Obama weighs worse then Daniels, Santorum, Perry, Jeb Bush, Cain. This is subjective on my part, so you can argue all you want on my scale picks. And like I said, I am not basing this on policy or who is Presidential material or who can best serve the country. Just the congeniality contest. Bottom line, the GOP is in big big big trouble if the things are not tremendously worse in October then they are today, and they go with Romney, when it is now painfully obvious he has the Kerry, Dole, Dukakis, McCain, Gore personality issues.
|