ELECTABILITY MYTH: Jonathan Cohn has a great online piece in TNR today, arguing that Democrats should stop chasing the ghost of electability. He analyzes their mistake in 2004, where they found reasons to disqualify every contender but Kerry, even though none found him inspiring. But Cohn leaves out a strong point that supports his argument. Polls among Iowa and New Hampshire primary and caucus voters showed a majority of those who voted for the candidate they actually liked voted for Edwards, while a majority of voters who voted for who they thought would win in the general election voted for Kerry. Meanwhile, Independents and Republicans heavily supported Edwards. Clearly the Dems were making a mistake at the time. Why did they think that their guess as to what swing voters would prefer was more trustworthy than what those voters actually did prefer? Indeed, Cohn alludes to, but doesn't state outright, the most important but least discussed factor in electability: charisma. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton both had it, but long resumes couldn't compensate for Bob Dole's or John Kerry's lack thereof. Cohn argues that the Democrats should vote with their hearts instead of trying to calculate who is the most electable. I would say that the Dems would be wise to still consider electability, but they should replace resume with charisma as the most important factor in measuring it. As the example of Clinton demonstrates, in practice those two bits of advice will often amount to the same thing. --Ben Adler
