very true , but it's an oversimplification to say that Clinton lost because she wasn't charismatic enough .
-
-
-
If it's an oversimplification, it is one that has worked for the last 14 elections in a row. http://paulgraham.com/charisma.html
-
are you sure Nixon was more charismatic than Humphrey, for example?
-
You may want to read the essay.
-
we should note though that for this theory to be truly valid , it should predict popular vote winner - i.e. Will of the people
-
The essay talks about that too: http://paulgraham.com/charisma.html#f2n …
-
but fact is 3 M more people picked the less charismatic individual on their ballot
-
Because Trump never bothered asking them to pick him.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
wouldnt you consider charisma part of the requirements for the job? Especially for the highly public positions you mentioned
-
It's always helpful. But in some jobs (including startup CEO) it's less important than determination, product vision, etc.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
playing devil's advocate - shouldn't builder types be better suited to be COOs?
New conversation -
-
-
Reading the last sentence, I couldn't help but think: yikes, people are going to draw a false equivalence with Trump.
-
He's the opposite of a magnet. Magnet = you once had an insecure mail server, and people care.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
politics aside, have u had truly great founders without their own kind of charisma? I'd say passion usually comes across as charisma
-
Yes, they're often more charismatic than a random person. But also more powerful, so c/p ends up lower.
-
ratio wise that makes sense. interesting to think about ;)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Perhaps one solution is teamwork. With tight-knit relationships, builders can be effective chiefs of staff to charismatic principals.
-
That was the conventional wisdom a couple decades ago. But it turned out to work better to let Zuck be CEO.
-
You’re right. A nuance may be the structural difference between systems incentivizing US electeds vs CEOs. Campaigning vs governing.
-
thanks for the re-read. Spooky. Similarities to Plouffe’s note that “personality, not party” drive campaigns.https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/11/opinion/what-i-got-wrong-about-the-election.html …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.