Hacker News Reader

Comment by LanceH | Hacker News Reader

I maintain this was a major reason for Bush defeating Kerry. I saw news stories on both of them one night and they were both in jeans. Kerry looked like they were purchased so he could dress down as the people do. The jeans looked like they had never been worn, maybe a dress shirt tucked in. Bush on the other hand was at Camp David casually talking to the press outdoors while his dog happily circled him.

It's not really how we should be deciding the presidency, but Kerry put off a strong vibe that he's not one of "us". The democrats need to embrace the actual people in their popularity.

View on HN

This is a genuine question, I'm not leading here. Do you think this has to do with anti-intellectualism, jealousy or is there more at play here? I wouldn't want an average joe to run the country, I want someone truly extraordinary. Better suited to the role, more experienced, smarter, better dressed and showing it. I don't want the stereotypical truck stop waiter/waitress, you know? It's not fair as they may be just as qualified of course. What is so wrong with being an 'elite' in the political sphere?

How do you think an average middle-of-the-road person would feel if an 'average joe' was promoted to be their boss? I'd guess probably not great...

I think its about trust. We believe like individuals will have aligned interests. Elites will serve elites but regular Joe knows what its like for us. 9/10 times the Joe becomes elite and serves himself...

The reason politicians try to dress down is that they want to give off the impression that they can relate to the experiences of most Americans. The general idea being, "How could this person ever promote policy that benefits me, if they don't understand what it's like to be me?"

The irony is that most successful people in the world were rarely ever born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Kerry was actually one of those few candidates that I wished got their shot because his war record wasn't anything less but admirable. John Mccain's war record was far and beyond even his considering his many years being a POW.

They sacrificed so much for this country and yet the people only resonate with the candidates that seem hip nowadays.

Those candidates were more “hip” to older demographics because those people actually lived through those wars and knew what it meant to serve in those wars.

Its not about running the country, there are smarter people in his cabinet that will do that. It's about being an average person and recognizing the problems that the average person goes through, and hopefully solve those problems, not the ones that the elites have.

" ordinary Americans also refused to defer to those possessing, as Tocqueville put it, superior talent and intelligence and these natural elites could not enjoy much share in political power as a result."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis_de_Tocqueville#On_major...

Better suited to the role, more experienced,

The experiences of the elites are typically very different from that of the Average Joe. As such, they are frequently wholly unqualified to understand the needs of the people.

The people want someone capable of relating to them at least a little.

> I want someone truly extraordinary. Better suited to the role, more experienced, smarter, better dressed and showing it.

I think someone who’s truly extraordinary shouldn’t have to try very hard to look “relatable”. JFK comes to mind immediately— he didn’t dress or act like a man of the people, but you still got the sense that his family life was like what your family life would be like if you had a lot more money.

Kerry in jeans simply felt inauthentic. Nobody had any idea what his life was actually like behind closed doors.

I think it's simpler - we just want to know that whoever leads understands our perspective. Being relatable is a very strong (and yes, fakeable) signal.

I appreciate the honesty of your question. I think you probably miss a lot of nuance about what it's like to be a middle-of-the-road person. As someone from a lower middle class background and being of mixed race I can probably give you a few hundred answers for what's wrong with being 'elite' in the political sphere, but I'll leave at this to think about: Which political party has painted itself into a corner of perceived 'elitism' the last election cycle?

The 'elites' underestimate the middle-of-the-road at their political peril.

I think Democrats desperately need to admit that charisma is a necessary qualification for a presidential candidate. An un-charismatic candidate is likely going to lose the election, and even if they do win, they will also probably be an ineffective president. A president not only needs to choose the right policies, they need to convince people to go along with them too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com