i have a theory…
here it is:
that more often than not the funnier presidential candidate is the one who wins.
or, rather, the presidential candidate with a better sense of humor.
let’s go back:
- jimmy carter had a better sense of humor than gerald ford
- ronald reagan had a better sense of humor than jimmy carter
- ronald reagan had a better sense of humor than walter mondale
- george bush senior and mike dukakis were both humorless, so 1988 doesn’t count…
- bill clinton had a better sense of humor than george bush senior
- bill clinton had a better sense of humor than bob dole
- gw bush had a better sense of humor (or so it seemed at the time) than al gore
- gw bush had a better sense of humor than john kerry
- 2008 was tricky, as both john mccain and barack obama are funny
but, generally, sense of humor (and the personability associated with it) is a big predictor of who’s going to win a presidential election.
this isn’t to say that the funnier candidate is better or more qualified (just look at 2000 and 2004), but rather that americans tend to vote along the lines of ‘who do i want to hang out with for the next 4 years?’
which is, of course, odd criteria. but it does seem to be how most people ultimately vote.
with that criteria in mind i predict that obama will beat mitt romney in november.
because, simply, mitt romney has no personality and isn’t funny.
and as more people get to know mitt romney they’ll think, ‘ew, do i want to spend 4 years hanging out with this wei robot?’
that’s my prediction, at least.
because every time i see mitt romney speak i think, ‘who is this person? he doesn’t seem to actually have any identity beyond being ambitious, angry, and irritable.’
and i don’t think that americans want to spend 4 years hanging out with someone who is only ambitious, angry, and irritable.
ok, that’s my political thought of the day.
feel free to disregard as you see fit.
thanks
moby