With the election next month I continue to be perplexed by President Obama's job approval at around 50 percent while the number of people saying the nation is moving in the right direction is only around 37 pecent. As our elected leader and agenda setter it would seem logical that these polls would track closely. Why the disparity?
An answer may be found in an editorial that ran early in President Obama's term. During this time of "Obama-mania" the editorial made the case that while glamorous, Obama is not charismatic. This distinction may explain both his continued popularity and bipartisan failures.
Swept up in the "Yes We Can" hysteria of 2008, Obama became for many an idol; an image of what a disillusioned electorate hoped for in a president. Like Hollywood celebrities, Obama became the recipient of mass adulation. But, while certainly glamorous, is Obama charismatic?
Charisma can be described as the ability to influence people of different beliefs and perspectives to come together and support your position. Reagan was charismatic, as was Clinton. Bush was not and, based on his record, neither is Obama. Interestingly, as seen in the first debate, Romney, while not glamorous, appears to be charismatic. So which is more important: glamour or charisma?