I’m amused that The Hill decided to grapple with the ‘wimp factor’ as it applies to Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty. People might think this is a hyped issue, but I think it is extremely important to understanding how voters will behave.
Republican presidential candidates have long enjoyed an advantage among white male voters. There is no single reason for this. But the GOP’s success at portraying its candidates as more assertive, decisive and outright macho than their opponents is clearly part of the mix.
Those who don’t fit the template, like Bush Sr., can often pay a political price.
Jack Pitney, a professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College, worked on Bush’s 1988 campaign. But even he admits the candidate had problems with projecting a robust image.
“As vice president, he came across as servile,” Pitney acknowledged. “And his whole package of mannerisms just didn’t come across as being those of an alpha male.”
America is not a tribal society. In some ways it is affirmatively anti-tribal in its values and culture. But we’re still a pack of human beings who come together every four years to choose our leader. And any time human beings select a leader, they are going to select an alpha dog. Beta dogs may do fairly well in elections for lower office, but they do not do well when running to be commander in chief.
Most Democrats seem kind of blind to this, letting their idealism or their interest in policy cloud their judgment about which candidates are likely to appeal to the general public. For example, a lot of Democrats thought Bill Clinton was finished after his infidelities were revealed during the 1992 primaries. What they didn’t realize is that Clinton’s carousing nature had an alpha dog appeal that Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown couldn’t match. It helped him win the primaries and it helped him project as a more plausible leader than Poppy Bush (the original wimp) or H. Ross Perot.
People aren’t looking for an unfaithful man. That’s not what I’m saying. But they are looking for someone who is a natural leader, and that means that they exude confidence, make friends easily, seem trustworthy…have charisma. These type of leaders make you want to follow them. You feel safe in following them.
If you lack these characteristics, like, say, Michael Dukakis, you are going to have a hard time winning a presidential election based on your superior argument on the issues or your advertising or your debate performance. How did George W. Bush do so well in the polls after his debates with Al Gore? It wasn’t related to anything that was actually said in the debates. It wasn’t, as is often said, about who people wanted to have a beer with. It isn’t a likability thing. It’s an alpha dog thing.
People pick natural leaders to lead them.