WHATEVER HAPPENED TO CHARISMA?

Decades ago, charisma was a popular word. The first time I ever saw a charismatic politician was when I lived in Chicago. President Dwight Eisenhower came to town in 1960, and over one million people stood in the streets to cheer him on. I happened to be in the front row when he drove by, sitting atop a convertible seat. Just for a moment, our eyes met. A shiver ran through my entire body. He was old and white haired. But with his brilliant blue eyes, robust coloring and warm smile, the man radiated charisma.

What is charisma? The dictionary describes it as a compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others.

A lot of presidents haven’t had it. Nixon, Carter, Johnson and Bush were good speakers, but they didn’t have that spark. John Kennedy had it. He was young, handsome, and inspiring when he said: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

Ronald Reagan had it. When his enemies attacked him, he didn’t get mad. Just smiled and said, “there you go again.” I don’t remember him ever calling his opponents bad names. He was just the gipper. Smiling, confident, unflappable.

Barack Obama had it. All you had to do was read his book, “Dreams From My Father” to know he was sensitive, empathetic, inspiring, and yes, charismatic.

In 2008, they started holding workshops that could teach people how to be charismatic. But the truth is, charisma is hard to teach. I think it’s something a person is born with.

Fast forward to the present day. A lot of people compared Trump to Reagan. But Trump doesn’t have charisma. Trump is an entertainer. He’s funny and dynamic, but when he starts the name calling, it’s over. Charismatic people don’t run people down; they lift you up on eagle’s wings. Our current president Biden is affable and pleasant, but he doesn’t make your heart swell when he delivers a speech.

Our country is in desperate need of a presidential candidate who has charisma. There has to be someone out there who can charm and inspire us to loftier goals.

Whatever happened to charisma?

August 31, 2020August 31, 2020

SHOULD A ROBOT RUN FOR PRESIDENT?

Have you ever said something stupid? Or done something irrational? If you’re a human being living on this earth, it’s safe to say you have a few regrets. However, if you’re a politician, the voters won’t cut you much slack. I can think of many cringe worthy moments and major mistakes made through the years with every single president of the United States, starting with FDR. It makes you wonder: Should a robot run for president?

Some scientists think artificial intelligence would make better presidential decisions — Using artificial intelligence, robots might make better presidential decisions.

For example: John Kennedy made a mistake during the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba . He made up for it during the Cuban Missile Crisis, But he was assassinated before he came up for re election. Harry Truman had a public hissy fit when someone made fun of his daughter’s singing. Richard Nixon was dumb enough to order a break in at the Democratic headquarters. Bill Clinton had an affair with an intern. Presidents are just way too human.

While you may think it sounds outlandish, a robot for president isn’t a new idea. Some scientists say politics is a “multidimensional, nonlinear problem of optimization.” Consequently, they believe we should put a computer in charge of the country. They’ve concluded that artificial intelligence could make big, complicated decisions better than a real live president.

Let’s take this idea a step further. I suggest that we have two robots running for president. Robot Dem and Robot Rep. Each party would key in the basic aspects of their platforms . The Democrats would tell their robot to make decisions favoring Medicare for all, and open borders Naturally , the Republicans would plug in closed borders, and private health insurance. Decisions on war and peace would be based on outcomes of conflicts throughout the ages. Mathematical statistics would decide the best economic policies.

Others things a robot president wouldn’t have to worry about:

Age. A robot is never too young or too old.

Hair: Orange hair, baldness, hair plugs—none of it matters. A robot has no hair at all.

Sexual harassment: Robots don’t smell women’s hair, have sex with interns, or get accused of raping a girl at a college frat party.

Health: Robots don’t suffer from back pain, heart attacks, cancer, high blood pressure. IT technicians can keep them in good working order.

Embarrassing relatives. Many presidents have had to deal with them. Remember Jimmy Carter’s brother, Billy Carter?

Emotions. Robots don’t have character flaws . They aren’t greedy, lusty, or narcissistic. They make decisions strictly on the facts.

Therefore, It seems as though the American people might be better off with a robot for president.

February 21, 2020February 21, 2020

MONEY CAN’T BUY LOVE

There’s an old saying: those who marry for money earn it. Can a mansion and a yacht make up for a miserable love life? By the same token, do Bloomberg’s paid supporters love him for himself, or for his money.? Small donors to any candidate are much more apt to get out the votes for the person they believe in. Therefore, big money can’t buy love. And it doesn’t send people to the polls.

If you watched the Democratic debates, you could see why each candidate has a base of supporters who love him or her. For example, Buttigieg appeals to people who value civility and intellect. Warren is an attack dog. Her fiery rhetoric appeals to those who want a ton of freebies including health care and college tuition. Sander’s socialists want to eliminate capitalism altogether. He’s passionate, and articulate, and loved by his supporters. Biden is suave, sophisticated, knowledgeable and personable. Klobuchar is just a good old girl who appeals to the working class. And she’s the only woman who doesn’t mind wearing a skirt. She’s witty and sharp.

Except for Bloomberg, all the candidates on that debate stage were people who have campaigned to the point of exhaustion. They’re seasoned and personable. Each, in their own way, is able to stir the soul and warm the heart. If any one of them wins the nomination, they will have earned it.

What could we say about Bloomberg ? As the mayor of New York for three terms, there must be something the voters liked about him. But I didn’t find him all that appealing. I guess that thing about the non disclosure agreements, and the women he treated like dirt had me against him from the get go. Sexual harassment is one thing, but when you chew out women for getting pregnant, and suggest that any old “black” could take care of your baby, you’ve lost me.

He had no warmth or charm. He’s came across as condescending and defensive. Sorry, Bloomberg. money can’t buy love.