Which candidate has the most charisma?

Since this is apparently an issue important to many less politically aware voters.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I figured that three seperated by li would work fine.

klikky klik

:)

and I thought I was more than sarcastic enough :(

It suddenly changed to page 2.

Charisma:

Clark
Dean
Sharpton
Edwards
Ghep
Braun
Kerry
Lieberman


Sharpton is very good don't agree with all his positions, but I think one of the reasons Clark and Dean are doing well is because they both have this quality.

I just don't feel this from Kerry or Lieberman. Braun has her moments. Ghep and Edwards are both good.

I am amused that people think Clark has charisma. He has a pretty face but I get no sense of conviction when I watch him. He just smiles and it leaves me questioning why he is really running.

Clark and Dean are tied for me on the charisma scale.

*hoping for Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean ticket*

The General wins people over left and right.

<<...but I get no sense of conviction when I watch him.>>

One of the things I admire so about Gen Clark is how much he obviously cares about what he's saying, and about the problems in this country.

I dunno. Maybe you've been watching different appearances than I have (which I kind of doubt, because I've been watching a lot--but I did miss the Phoenix debate, and I hear he was sort of wooden in that one).

Or maybe you are just seeing what you want or expect to see. 'Course, that could be true of people like me as well. But if so, there seem to be a whole bunch more of us. Assuming reports of audience reaction to him can be believed.

Maybe you have some preconception that we military people are always cold and uncaring. Steely-eyed killers, and all that. LOL--I'm a retired Army officer, but I'm also a rather traditional Jewish bubbie. And I make a mean matzah ball soup.

As for the original question, I think charisma should, in theory, take a back seat to policy, ability, and experience. But that doesn't mean it will with the average voter. Or at least for enough voters to decide an election's outcome. So if one's main concern is ousting Pres Bush, then charisma becomes a very important factor.

I would further submit that, if at least some part of a candidate's charisma lies in whether you get a gut feel that you can trust him/her, then it's not quite as superficial a quality as it might seem at first blush. None of us can anticipate every situation that will arise over the next 4 years, nor will we ever have all the information available to a president or other high level official. At some level, you should be able to trust the person you vote for.

I have NEVER trusted Pres Bush. Even on the rare occassions I agreed with something he did or said. Don't trust his motives; don't trust his ability; don't trust that he's really the one calling the shots.

Trying to rank the candidates on charisma, I find myself at somewhat of a loss.

Edwards is nice to look at, but he doesn't inspire me to have any confidence in his depth of experience or ability. I do think he cares about people and policy, and I do agree with much he has to say. A little age-ism on my part, perhaps. He looks younger than he is.

Dean sort of alienates me at some level. Not sure why. Maybe the anger thing, even tho I too am very angry about what the Republican machine has wrought. Otoh, I don't think anger, however justified, is a very good basis for decision-making. Maybe it's the trust thing too--I get no sense of where he's really at.

Kerry and Gephardt don't get me excited in any way either, altho I would have no compunctions against voting for either. Sort of neutral on charisma, I suppose.

I enjoy listening to Sharpton, but I can't separate the baggage he carries from so much of his past. If he were brand new to politics, I might see him more positively.

I really really like Mosley-Braun. And I do trust that she has an incredible amount of common sense--I'd love to know her personally. So I guess I'd have to rank her second on a charisma scale.

Kuchinich would probably come last. He just seems to have a high "wussy" quotient. I know that's probably unfair, but that what comes across to me at a superficial level.

I actually like Lieberman, as a person. I think he speaks his mind even if unpopular, so that helps on the trust thing. Got sort of turned of by his lashing out when he was shut out of the last debate. Even tho I agreed he should not have been, I think his staff was probably most responsible for the screw-up. Part of my liking him may have to do with his being a MOTT (hey, I'll admit to prejudice on that score), so I should rank him lower for most others.

Sorry for the rambling, but it did help me sort out my ranking. Not that it means anything, but it's good to sort out one's thinking from time to time.
1. Clark
2. Mosley-Braun
3. Kerry or Gephardt
5. Sharpton
6. Lieberman
7. Edwards
8. Dean
9. Kuchinich

:hi: B-)

But he's still not getting my vote.

But he cannot win.

Al Sharpton has a shitload more charisma than Dean, and Dean is higher than Clark.

I voted for Al, though I am a Dean supporter. Sharpton hands down has the most charisma, and I'd even put Edwards in 2d place for his charm.

However, some supporters of (all) candidates can't let an opportunity pass to say that their favorite "won" a poll on DU. :shrug:

but anger is not charisma.

Seriously...rolling up your sleeves to your biceps and getting redfaced isn't exactly charisma. It's angry, yes. And anger can be good, yes. But charisma it is not.

which gives Dean something...Clark is still hunching his shoulders

But even I acknowledge that Rev. Al is the most charismatic of this bunch.

based on charm alone, Edwards should be president.

Clark has CHARISMA??????


OMG, ROFLMAO. Damn, now THAT'S a good one, Clarkettes. For real, I needed that!



So you guys can please yourselves to the utmost, I won't even vote here. In fact, I hope the Clark vote will go as high as possible just so I can give myself another good laugh later on.

Deanies, take heed.

That's why none of them can win unless they make a change in their pesentation.

Charisma is the ability to project real confidence. It is looking like you have it in the bag, like you can't lose, like winning is easy for you.

Clinton had "it."

None of these candidates have the "mojo" to win. They're all trying too hard. They make what is hard -look- hard. The "trick" is to make it look easy.

Never let them see you sweat.

with the execption of Sharpton, who's dripping with it.

welcome to DU!
:toast:

But he lets his emotions run away with him, as he did over Dean's Confederate flag waving statement. He was pressing too hard, he was competing and fighting the wrong enemy. Charisma has a kind of Zen Buddhist air of detachment that rises and even appears to float above the frey, where you can sense the volcano boiling underneath, but it is under his control, he's not controlled by it, and you know that if he ever decides to unleash the force of that anger it will be to strike a decisive killer blow, not against a fellow Democrat, but against Bush. We have to remember who the real enemy is that we're all fighting, and it can't be each other. Sharpton lost sight of that.

To illustrate what I mean about charisma, think of the song from the James Bond movie, "Thunderball" as a description of a heroic figure who cannot fail, because he is fighting to save the world (btw, charisma is not about physical appearance):

He always runs where others walk.
He ACTS where other men just talk.
He looks at the world and wants it all,
And he STRIKES like Thunderball.

I can't remember the rest of the lyrics, but the gist of the song is that he does all this because he KNOWS the fate of the world rests on him, he is the hero in a fight for justice and truth, against a formidable enemy that threatens to destroy the world. It is a life and death struggle that requires heroic -action-. Unfortunately, the candidates are not heroic, they don't act, they merely talk, and as everybody knows, talk is cheap.

People dont' want just another politician giving speeches and pandering for votes. They want a heroic leader who will defeat the monstor who threatens to devour us all.

None of them have that. None of them have the heroic size to assume a larger-than-life presense on the world stage. Sigh. They're just politicians, a dime a dozen, that's why there are nine of them. They huddle together in a pack, they follow the traditional path -- not one of them has the guts to cut their own path and do something out of the ordinary -- like maybe visit the veterans of the Iraq war in the Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, D.C. Why is no one standing with the soldiers who have their arms and legs blown off? Where is Dr. Dean? Why is he not at the hosptial? Where is Kucinich who gives rousing speeches calling for the troops to be brought home? He's not at the hosptial either, he's talking from behind a podium. Why does not one of them have the GUTS to go where the pain is and expose the human tragedy?

So what we have are talkers, but none who can ACT to STRIKE the killer blow.

Where is James Bond when we need him.

Thanks for the welcome, rucky ;)

He may be running for President, but it's more of a statement run and he had to take a very strong pro-black stance on that issue. I don't question whether or not he believed in what he was saying when he was on the offensive, I just think this election to Al Sharpton is about making Al Sharpton the voice for African Americans over that of Jesse Jackson or even Lewis Farhikhan (sp?) to a lesser degree.

Sharpton needs to be very strong for his constituency. He knows damn well he won't win this election, but these strong showings have made him a far more popular character in his circles for sure.

Rp

unknown talkshow host: "-Latest news on Joe Lieberman is that he experimented with charisma in High school"

And we forget that at our extreme peril.

My choices, a tie among Clark, Edwards, and Dean.

The correct answer, though, is Sharpton.

i love him! =)

when he makes a funny... it comes off so smooth and natural.
and funny. and spontaneous.

unlike dean who tries to hard and spoils it.

during the thing the other night,
clark had just explained how he was going to take back the tax cuts from the wealthy.
and then ppl started clapping and such,
and then he goes..
"i notice that some of you are NOT clapping, and ill assume its because your arms are tired!"

haha

another thing there, he said in response to a defense expenditure question..
"Youve got to have as much defense as you need, but no more!
it just has to be that way"

yup!

I think he comes across as intelligent while also seeming very genuine. He seems friendly while also showing focus and motivation. He can deliver heavy criticism of Bush* while sounding forceful and credible. And, he can deliver smackdowns to lame Faux "journalists".

John Edwards is also very likeable. I think he connects with people when he's speaking and when someone is talking to him, he really looks like he is listening and cares.

Dean's personality seems more complicated than the others. He acts different depending on the setting, i.e. when he's fired up at a rally is way different than when he acts more laid back being interviewed. I like him, but I can see where others would only see 1 side. And when he's speaking--some interpret his passion for change or as "anger". Also, it's obvious when he's doing a phoney smile.

Al Sharpton is entertaining, but I think there's more to charisma than that.

Gephardt seems like a nice guy although he can be a bit bland.

In order, I'd say:

1) Clark
2) Edwards
3) Dean
4) Braun
5) Gephardt
6) Kerry
7) Sharpton
8) Kucinich
9) Lieberman

what's up with your poll?

50% of Americans would vote for a candidate ONLY for charisma.

this poll shows how much trouble he's in...huh, and I thought Kerry would be the nominee :eyes:

which doesn't say a lot for the other candidates. A perpetual scowl doesn't make Dean charismatic and good posture doesn't give it to Clark.

It's a very bland field.