I predicted Trump was going to win the 2016 presidential election almost from the beginning. Even as all the experts were telling me I was wrong and that Hillary Clinton would win by a landslide. When people asked me why I was so sure Trump would win, I said: “I predict Trump will win because Hillary is so boring.”
Ha ha. How’s that for a sophisticated analysis of presidential politics.
But my premise really isn’t as far-fetched as it might seem. When you look back at our previous presidential elections, the one common denominator is that the more boring candidate invariably lost. For example, check out this chart (Republicans on the left, Democrats on the right) with the more boring of the candidates duly noted:
2016 Trump – Hillary (boring)
2012 Romney (boring) – Obama
2008 McCain (boring) – Obama
2004 Bush – Kerry (boring)
2000 Bush – Gore (boring)
1996 Dole (boring) – Clinton
1992 Bush Sr. (boring) – Clinton
1988 Bush Sr. – Dukakis (boring)
1984 Reagan – Mondale (boring)
1980 Reagan – Carter (boring)
1976 Ford (boring) – Carter
1972 Nixon – McGovern (boring)
1968 Nixon – Humphrey (boring)
1964 Goldwater (boring) – Johnson
1960 Nixon (boring) – Kennedy
I rest my case.
Some people scoffed at the idea of Trump winning the presidency, claiming: “How can a reality TV show star become president?” Which reminded me of something Ronald Reagan used to say when they asked him how an actor could become president. He said “I don’t see how you can be president WITHOUT being an actor.”
In fact the presidency is a 24-hour-a-day reality TV show. And considering we’re going to have to look at the guy’s face every day for the next 4 years, the LAST thing we want is somebody boring. And Trump may well be repulsive to many. But boring he is not.
David Letterman — who despised Trump — conceded he was a great for his show. “Trump is one of those guys that says whatever’s on his mind. That’s what makes him a great TV talk show guest.”
So may the least boring candidate win.