I admit that I first heard Living Colour's song "Cult of Personality" as wrestler CM Punk's entrance music. The song is about charismatic people who trick other people into following them, their charisma often masking their true identities as ruthless dictators. The 20th century was awash in the cult of personality. Here in the 21st century, a lot of people have decided that a much-maligned US president was destined to join the ranks of the cult of personality. But the thing is, the US presidency is somewhat...immune from what Living Colour was singing about. There're just too many checks and balances in place. No matter how big the personality and no matter the character of the cult, the system keeps the president within reasonable confines.
But that doesn't mean the cult of personality has nothing to do with the presidency.
I'm here to argue that the most surefire way to win the presidency is by cult of personality. Simply put, the biggest personality invariably wins on election day. It doesn't matter how the personality is defined. The biggest, the best, the most easily defined personality wins. I defy you to name an election outcome that contradicts this.
Within living memory, Kennedy famously bested Nixon because he was better on camera, and a whole mythology soon followed, even if he became incredibly contentious, capped off by the assassination that has become his chief legacy. Johnson (who in personality was pretty much exactly the equal of the current president, although media coverage greatly diverges) didn't have to worry about campaigning, since he essentially acted as Kennedy's surrogate until he decided he wouldn't run again, at which point Nixon no longer had a problem of rivals. Then the Democrats found their next surrogate Kennedy (Carter, followed by Clinton, followed by Obama). Republicans had a movie star(ish) in Reagan (H.W. Bush slipped in one term essentially riding his coattails), and then W. Bush won over a robot with a lockbox (and later, too late, an environmental messiah complex).
Reasonably, the current president had no real competition. His rival in the election was the Clinton with no personality. It'd've been a far different story if Clinton had run with Clinton (just imagine!). Instead we have an endless bemoaning of the (latest) end of the world. And yet, the presidency remains the same as ever, and...will anyone figure out how these elections are really won?
If history proves anything, no. But campaigns can produce counterfeit cults. Isn't that really the whole idea?
