In 2004 Paul Graham wrote an article which posited that: In us presidential elections, the more charismatic candidate wins.

One would like to believe elections are won and lost on issues, if only fake ones like Willie Horton. And yet, if they are, we have a remarkable coincidence to explain. In every presidential election since TV became widespread, the apparently more charismatic candidate has won. Surprising, isn’t it, that voters’ opinions on the issues have lined up with charisma for 11 elections in a row? ¹

This theory which has become known as the Charisma theory is debated. It seems on the surface to be and accurate model however.

I personally have only be alive to see 7 us presidential elections and only paying attention for the last 4. However reading more about these elections seems to reinforce the model.

Of course, the model itself begs the question; what is Charisma? Paul himself supposed that;

If political cartoons portray your candidate as stupid or unprincipled, you have nothing to worry about. But once they portray him as boring, you’re in trouble. ²

and that;

Off the top of my head, I’d say that one has to be confident, cheerful, and outgoing. But especially outgoing.

The deeper and more interesting question for me, though, is; does the political culture generate charismatic leaders, or do charismatic leaders generate political culture. Said another way, are charismatic leaders the societal response, or the societal drivers?