Comments
6 CommentsSo Scrivs' has figured out what is king. I don't quite believe his claim to nativity to not understanding that personality and likability trump everything, but frankly, if it is true, it wouldn't be the first time that he's surprised me like that.
He points out some examples to prove his point. I'd like to add a few from events in the "real" world.
Why do you think Hilary pulled out the surprise victory in New Hampshire? I think it had everything to do with her showing a little of the softer side of her personality.
Why does no one really ask Obama to define what he means by "change"? Well probably because he's an engaging individual and a nice looking and relatively young guy who doesn't look like a poster boy politician with the standard politician hair cut. It's easy to get caught up in the energy of his charisma without worrying of the details or his experience.
Speaking of experience though, if you're going to go in to the game on the strength of your personality make sure you bring it on the qualifications and capabilities as well. Personality will get you in to the game and on to the field, but skills is what gets you in to the endzone -- and that's really all that matters. Personality without equal amounts of content soon wears thin -- I'm sure all of us can point to any number of likable "ditzies" (male or female) to prove that point.
Just look at our current administration, who beat Al "Bore".
BTW: Good luck with this live broadcasting thing Scrivs. It's a rare individual who can pull that off on a quality level for any length of time. Use your charisma, but don't lean on it.
cooper
Written Jan. 10, 2008 / Report /
"Why does no one really ask "Obama to define what he means by "change"? Well probably because he's an engaging individual and a nice looking and relatively young guy who doesn't look like a poster boy politician with the standard politician hair cut."
Obama's change is clearly defined, starting with moving away from the partisan politics of the last 20 years. working with members of both parties to actually pass laws. changing our methods of foreign policy to speak with countries that are our "enemies". I could go on, but you should just do some research I believe there is a full roll under "issues" at his website, from foreign policy to education and from immigration the economy it's all there.
I am sure some people are naive or careless, and really don't care. Many people, just like you, have a brain and have probably thought about voting for someone for other reasons besides their charm and their haircut.
I briefly went through scriv's post - as far as internet goes or blogs or whatever, he is probably right in some respects. I wouldn't read crap, but if there were two or three blogs and I only had time for one and they were all about equal in content, the one where the person charmed me would be the one I'd read.
I have a very small personal blog, I don't have time to write much I've always been either in school or working and soon both. I have a decent number of readers and subscribers and I am fairly certain the only reason seventy percent of the readers who read it routinely read the blog is because they like me.
I write a better blog than I did when I started, but if they didn't like me in some way they wouldn't bother.
I know that for a fact, because with time so limited if I didn't like the whole personality aura of the blogs I read I wouldn't be reading them either.
I'm sure most people are the same way.
Scrivs
Written Jan. 10, 2008 / Report /
First: Thanks for the good lucking as I will need it. I can't hide behind this big nose and thing it will magically all work out.
@Cooper: Why do you feel you write a better blog now then before?
Doesn't that make me right instead of "probably right"?
estarla
Written Jan. 10, 2008 / Report /
I agree. Well, with Scrivs making personality the big winner over general "content." Like you touched upon above, fuscom, it makes sense that skills are what get you "into the endzone," and this is where the grey area comes into play. If you are all charm and no substance, isn't that an incompletely awesome personality? As in, not awesome at all? :) You could describe a personality of that type as "full of hot air" or inherently "superficial," or something.
To only a certain degree will people care only about information, that is "content," because there's someone out there that will have that information maybe 1 or 2 hours later but will be able to put an entertaining spin on it - thus making it more easy, enjoyable, what-have-you to read. And like also touched upon in this note, Scrivs' post or probably both, everyone is writing about the same thing anyway.
So yeah, personality.
Scrivs, you are 99.99% right. You can't have the 100%, just because I said so.
Tony
Written Jan. 10, 2008 / Report /
(To give a pop culture example)
Omarosa! OMG, I haven't watched The Apprentice since season two, but when they announced the celebrity edition and that she was on it, I made sure to clear my schedule on Thursdays.
Whether you love her or hate her, her personality makes for great television, and keeps you coming back for more. Dare I say, they couldn't have done a celebrity version of the show without her? She made the show the phenomenon it was several years ago.
The format (content) is still the same, but the personalities this season make it watchable again.
Scrivs
Written Jan. 10, 2008 / Report /
Thank you estarla, I need those little bits of percentage points every once in a while.
cooper
Written Jan. 11, 2008 / Report /
@Scrivs
"Doesn't that make me right instead of "probably right"?
Because it is my opinion, and it would be presumptuous of me to pronounce something right just because of my opinion, I had to say probably.