v'ܩ Top 10 Reasons Obama is Going to Win
Home > 2008 Election > Top 10 Reasons Obama is Going to Win

Top 10 Reasons Obama is Going to Win

October 23rd, 2008

10. He is the better speaker.

9. The majority of Americans prefer style over substance.

8. The majority of Americans have no idea what substance would be better for the country.

7. He is the better speaker.

6. The majority of Americans really don’t like Bush.

5. The majority of Americans think McCain is similar to Bush.

4. He is the better speaker.

3. The majority of Americans have been brainwashed by the media into thinking our current economy compares to the Great Depression. (It doesn’t)

2. The majority of Americans think FDR did a good job during the Great Depression. (He didn’t)

And the number 1 reason why Obama is going to win on November 4th is….

My friends, he is a much better speaker.

  1. October 25th, 2008 at 17:09 | #1

    At least five of those reasons would also belong on the top ten list of reasons why Obama SHOULD Win. (Although the uniqueness of all your points seems somewhat suspect.)

    It is the role of the leader to mobilize and direct the actions of his followers. The most effective and basic means of influence is speech. It will usually be the case that the better speaker is also the superior leader.

    A president who transcends the simple duties of the executive office and effectively mobilizes the human spirit, for the better, goes down in history as one of the great leaders of our age, and for a good reason. The real problems with any country are ultimately traced back to its people. When electing a government official it must be weighed who will be more effective at curing the disease and not simply addressing the symptoms. If Obama, through his superior rhetoric, can make one small positive change in the character of the American people he will be immeasurably greater than any leader who cannot inspire change.

  2. October 26th, 2008 at 22:04 | #2

    I would have to tend to disagree. While being a better speaker is a nice asset for a good leader, it does not in any way in and of itself make a person a good leader. For example, Adolf Hitler was a great speaker who was very charismatic. Being a good speaker makes a leader more effective at what they are trying to accomplish, it does not however make them a good leader. As a note, I am not comparing Barack Obama to Hitler, just using that as an example to prove my point.

  3. Jared
    October 26th, 2008 at 22:24 | #3

    Nathan has a valid point though. What good is a leader that nobody will follow?

    Unfortunately being “right” doesn’t necessarily make a person a better leader, it just makes them a better policy maker. Most people would probably believe that the more charismatic leader is “right” because he told them so.

  4. October 26th, 2008 at 23:34 | #4

    I disagree, I think being “right” does make the person a “better” leader. It doesn’t make them the more effective leader.
    “Most people would probably believe that the more charismatic leader is “right” because he told them so.”
    Most people would believe this, that doesn’t make it true. Go back to Hitler, just because he was a very effective leader does not make him a “good” leader.

  5. October 27th, 2008 at 08:50 | #5

    Clarky is playing at semantics here though. Don’t change which definition of good we are talking about. Hitler was certainly a ‘good’ leader. He lead very *well*. He was not a *good* person. I think the issue at hand is which is more important. The ability of the person to lead or what the person will lead us TOWARDS.

  6. October 27th, 2008 at 12:32 | #6

    We are talking semantics. Good and effective leader are not the same. “I think the issue at hand is which is more important. The ability of the person to lead or what the person will lead us TOWARDS.”
    How can this be debated? I think it is very clear that each of us would choose the guy that isn’t Hitler.

  7. October 27th, 2008 at 13:39 | #7

    Thats not a given. There is a different power structure in the US than that of Germany before and during WWII. Frankly, having someone of Hitler’s crazy ideologies is not as dangerous when you have a working balance of power.

    But, I think you made me point clearly. You believe that what the leader leads us toward is more important, as do I. But I don’t think that necessarily has anything to do with being a good leader, that’s all about being a good person. The two are not mutually exclusive.

  8. Jared
    October 30th, 2008 at 13:13 | #8

    “You believe that what the leader leads us toward is more important, as do I. But I don’t think that necessarily has anything to do with being a good leader, that’s all about being a good person. The two are not mutually exclusive.”

    Exactly.

    Its like why people buy Mac’s… they are not necessarily “better”, but lots of people think they are because Apple is better at advertising.