While this sounds somewhat flippant, it is actually as serious point. Most of the American electorate donm't seem to trust a smart politician (and who can blame them?). Tracing the list of holders of the office from the second world war it's easy to see why:
- FDR: one of the greatest leaders the country ever had and a fearsome intellect;
- Truman: something of an everyman and a safe pair of hands;
- Eisenhower: clearly trading on his military triumphs, but you don't need to be smart to be a general;
- Kennedy: charismatic, but only just managed to scrape past Nixon to gain office. Had he not been assisinated, would we still have this idealised view of what he did?
- Johnson: old-style, rather saturnine southerner who managed to carry on some of the civil rights work that JFK started, but also took US troops in Vietnam. So not that smart then.
- Nixon: The only real intellectual heavyweight since FDR. And look where he ended up. Probably the principal reason why Americans don't trust a clever man in the highest office to this day;
- Ford: decent, but only got the job by being the last man standing after Watergate.
- Carter: won because he was the down-home peanut farmer form Georgia. A bright guy but he didn't play on that for the electorate. Unlucky. and much underrated;
- Reagan: the start of the cult of dumb. Need I say more?
- Bush Snr: got the job by virtue of his closeness with Reagan, and the fact he was running against the patently crap Michael Dukakis;
- Clinton: fearsomely intelligent, but you wouldn't have known that from the campaigning. Used his enormous charisma and marketed himself as a good-ol' Arkansas boy to get the seat. And even kept up the pretence a little after he won;
- GWB: at heart I don't think Bush is that stupid (I don't think that's actually possible), but he seems to embrace ignorance in an entirely unhealthy way.
1 comment:
I never looked up 'Dukakis' from the film Donnie Darko - I assumed it was made up. Apparently not!
Post a Comment