Scamps vs. Dorks: Why Do We Want to Have a Beer with the President?

I'll start by saying I hope I'm wrong.

In modern American presidential politics, a dork can never beat a scamp. To clarify, let me first define the terms. A scamp is a person with a devil may care quality, a charming rogue who exudes positive, charged energy. Bugs Bunny is a scamp. A dork is someone uncomfortable, awkward, and doomed to defeat. Elmer Fudd is the obvious example. While a true scamp, say, Billy Carter, could never get near the White House as anything other than a presidential sibling/embarrassment, once a legitimate candidate clears the vetting threshold, an absence of scampishness will doom his or her chances for victory.

A quick survey of modern national elections proves this theory. The vaguely sinister, graceless Nixon was easy pickings for the insouciant Kennedy. When Nixon won eight years later, he exhibited a sense of humor (readers of a certain age will remember his "Sock it to me?" moment on Laugh-In) and he was blessed with the extremely earnest Hubert Humphrey as an opponent. Reagan vs. Carter was a rematch of the Kennedy/Nixon dynamic. Whatever you thought of Reagan's politics, his ease and joie de vivre set him apart from Carter, the parson-like Annapolis technocrat. Reagan vs. the sober and dull Mondale was more of the same. Flyboy war hero Bush I against the little guy with his head sticking out of the tank? Once again, scamp annihilates dork. Moving on to Bush I vs. Clinton, the flyboy loses to the playboy. Both have scamp qualities, but while Bush's have a slightly amateur, country club quality to them, Clinton is a stone cold pro. In that context, Clinton vs. Dole isn't even worth talking about. What about Gore vs. Bush II? Al 2.0 (before his sense of humor was allowed out of the basement) may have won the popular vote, but what kept it close enough for Bush II to steal were the Texan's scamp bona fides. This fake airman, failed oilman, party animal was the first man elected/appointed president because America wanted to have a beer with him. And once he was ensconced in the White House who do you bet on next time? The French-speaking, Chardonnay sipping, windsailing patrician, or the guy who was looking for WMDs under his desk in his very own comedy video?

So who is the scamp now among Democrats? Obama? Yes, he went to Harvard Law where he was the editor of the Law Review (dork-like in the eyes of Joe Voter), and he speaks like Cicero (ditto). But he plays basketball religiously (semi-scampy), and I saw him bust a move on Ellen that showed a degree of mischievousness which went a long way toward erasing his more Adlai Stevenson-like qualities. As for Hillary, after her campaign had been pronounced dead, she has allowed her inner (faux, in her case) scamp to show and was rewarded with a healthy victory in Pennsylvania. The gun talk worked, and throwing back the shots of whiskey helped, but what really seems to be fuelling her new image today is the way her whole campaign has taken on the quality of a drunken bar fight. While Obama is hooping like it's the NCAA, Hillary is playing ball like she's in a prison league. The ability to wield a shiv with aplomb may not exactly be scampy in the pure sense, but compared to the slightly NPR quality Obama is projecting Hillary is a veritable Tracey Ullman.

The result: she has temporarily neutralized his scamp advantage.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, right now McCain outscamps the both of them. He finished near the bottom of his class at Annapolis, fought, caroused, and philandered. Then, in a paroxysm of obviousness, he married a brewery heiress. It's the classic charming rogue profile. So which Democrat has a better chance against him? If the nominee is Hillary, she can go duck hunting drunk and won't beat McCain. Her transparent lack of authenticity will ultimately work to her disadvantage against him. Picture their debates: a split screen between C-Span and an NFL halftime show.

But if it's McCain vs. Obama, there is some hope for the Democrats. Why should this be the case? Seeing McCain on the trail one is reminded of Lucille Ball in her last sitcom. The prospect of slapstick was upsetting because no one wants to see an old scamp break a hip. So, while McCain remains full of piss and vinegar, in the mind of the energized younger voters his advanced age edges the scamp-quotient down thereby providing an opportunity for Obama, straining to stay amiable and waggish in an increasingly Darwinian crucible, to gain traction.

Unfortunately for Obama, Reverend Wright, a veritable Jack in the box, is currently making him look like Elmer Fudd. This does not bode well. A true scamp rolls with the punches and comes up dancing. That would be the old Bill Clinton. Too bad he's not on the ballot.

McCain in November?

Like I said, I hope I'm wrong.

Comments

[overtheedge]

Seriously, this is a myth that has gotten out of control. Do you people really think that Americans who voted for Bush considered him "a guy I'd like to have a beer with" and therefor gave their vote to him for no better reason? Can't you see that this is the type of lazy and ignorant thinking that you accuse others of?

[tattery202]

I will never understand the American voter. Why wouldn't we want the most intelligent person in the country leading us? I wish I could afford to buy a beer.

[JudgeCrater]

Thanks for the deathless prose: "...straining to stay amiable and waggish in an increasingly Darwinian crucible..."

I'd like to think that the USA has learned the price of having a scamp as POTUS and would yearn for someone a bit more capable. Unfortunately, 28% of America is resistant to this object lesson regarding the sins of incompetence. Either BHO or HRC can make McCain look like a doddering moron in the GE debates. And the next morning the papers/MSM would be full of "shame on you for picking on an old man!" As if competence in government has become clearly undesirable.

[munimula]

Damn it! I want to live in a country that is led by a brilliant, articulate visionary, that is strong but humanistic and who never needs to have a shot and a beer SO I CAN AFFORD TO!!!

[VisiteDeVoltaire]

I wholeheartedly agree with your premise. This is one of our major faults as a nation. We have an obsession with style over substance which has carried over into our choice of leaders which is the major reason why we haven't had world class leadership in the last 40 years. Lyndon Johnson, with his civil rights legislation, was our last great presidential visionary.

However, I see Hillary more as my Aunt Constance than scampy and fun. Wielding the shiv was an appropriate enough analogy, certainly daringly felonious, although hardly mischievously charming. Charm is the one thing, besides libido and evasiveness, which Bill Clinton had in abundance at one time, but it is completely missing in his spouse as is charisma.

All this reminds me that the major strength of democracy is its limiting the amount of time one person or group can hold power. The major weakness is the ability to recognize and choose good leadership.

[earlyearlyearly]

Hell, I got no money to buy a beer to drink with anybody.
How about a president who's smart enough to help fix that.

Obama'08

[wmfor]

Charles Pogue once remarked, "I don't want to have a beer with the President. I want him to be the designated driver."

Pogue is not, alas, a typical American.

[loril]

Maybe I've spent too much time around dorks (and, at certain points in my life have actually been a dork.) But I really don't get it. To me, picking a president is like picking a surgeon or another high level medical specialist. I don't care if my doctor is someone I would want to drink with post-op. I just want to have confidence that he/she knows what they are doing, won't screw up and will get me through the procedure. Bedside manner is nice. But it is not the most important aspect, as long as the person in question remains professional.

The dubyas of the world are neither knowlegeable or professional. When they are put into positions higher than, say, managing a Steak N Shake, they scare me. But that is just me. Dork over Scamp.

[wmfor]

You are making the wrong analogies. Picking a President is more like American Idol or Survivor to all too many voters.

I've been watching Fox all week in the early morning. They regularly follow their long earnest panel discussions about the great issues of the day, i.e. Rev. Wright, with a lighthearted clip of either Bush or McCain playing cute frat boy for the camera... on Deal or No Deal, or splashing through the mud, or just acting silly, precisely what we expect of the Leader of the Free World.

And then Britt Hume chuckles as if to say, "Look at that scamp! 4,000 dead can't ruffle HIS feathers!"

[SpectCon]

People want to like their President, like their country and feel good about the future. McCain can arguably give the first two, but who wants more of this Bush economy or war? Obama brings all three, better than any Dem candidate has in my life. Clinton has the absolute worst of all strategies which can only win in an opposition primary and would be doomed in the general. She's not likable, her message is that the world sucks and she is going to save us, and her message for the future is turn back the clock.

[PrairieDog]

A lot has been made of Hillary's shot-&-a-beer photo op. But look at it a little closer. First of all, she chose Crown Royal, a Canadian product. Now I have no problem with that on a drinking level. I'll hoist just about anything in a glass. But if you are running for President & just a little obssessed with your image shouldn't you be knocking down a JD? Freaking elitist amateur!
And (correct me if I'm wrong) she reportedly had a light beer at her alcoholic photo op. Light beer? Give me a freakin break. If you must have a light then you might as well drink water. Now I like water. A lot. Straight from the tap with a few cubes is fine with me. But if you're going to drink beer, drink beer. Especially if you're drinking it "for show". Like an elitist. Like an elitist who served on the billionaire WalMart board.

[lacitepq]

Canadian vs American? not a big difference really

[newunderground]

Light beer is gay beer. Not that there's anything wrong with that,(as far as I know)

[Trueheart]

My bet is that Crown Royal is "top shelf" liquor at that little bar, and it was the best they had to offer. If it was a Bud Light, would that make a difference?

[anons]

I think Obama actually is a scamp but has approached the presidency and running this country from a dork perspective. In America, a black scamp is not charismatic, he's a fad or a trend. Luckily OBama is intellectual before he's a "brotha." The thing of it is, i think, because he's a brotha he actually has to be more intellectual for people to take him seriously

[shrinqrap]

The author's premise is right on, and so is "anons".
America's "wild west" wasnt tamed by pointy-headed, restrained inlellectuals, but by the the scampiest of scamps, or so we believe; its in our nation al DNA.
Perhaps the author might have saved a lot of words by simply invoking what the rest of the world know best about us: we have simply become a nation of anti-intellectuals, and we loath even the sligtest appearance of a real thinker.
Too threatening. Too "other". Too "anti-American". Dare I say too "unpatriotic".
This is why Mr. Obama is going to have to loosen up, drop the suit and tie for sweats, and be seen every day playing gritty 3 on 3 b'ball for the rest of the campaign.
After all, we Americans do love our jocks. It's a class thing, and we dont have a lot to spare any more.

[EbonBear]

"[Obama] speaks like Cicero"? I don't think so. No question, Obama is a fantastic speaker, especially after eight years of President Malaprop, but he's got a ways to go to get to that exhalted level.

[Dingoangst]

Woodrow Wilson beat Theodore (the ultimate scamp) in 1912, of course he was a third party candidate. But, that said, beware historical determinism. (Because it's happened before, it'll happen again.) The times, they are a'changin'. After an idiot, perhaps an intelligent man. (Obama, of course!)

[Trueheart]

Not sure I agree with the conclusion the author reaches with his theory on "ya wanna have a beer with the scamp," but you'll "skip a sip of Chardonnay with the dork" theory. I think it's bigger than that.

Knocking back a beer with John and Jane Q Public is symbolic. It's about being able to relate to people on a common level. In times gone by, when nations went to war, the most successful leaders were those who grabbed their swords, jumped on a horse, and led their troops into the fray. Like all good managers, they spent time walking around, talking to soldiers, listening to complaints and addressing those complaints. George Washington was much-loved because of this. Napoleon was successful for the same reason. WWII General George Patton had the loyalty of his men because he understood this.

So that's why I think voters feel it's so important that their elected leaders are able to relate to the common things. If they are going to ask for our support, then before we accept their right to lead, we need to feel we'll be following someone who respects us, values us, and can participate in the reality of our everyday lives. A "scamp" might lead the charge, but isn't likely to be worthy of trust, because in the end, he's only looking out for himself. A "dork" might give inspiring speeches, but is more likely to spend time strategizing in the war room than engaging in the battlefield.

[c1ee]

Australia's new prime minister is doing a great job. He is basically Obama in personality and policies (Obama is a bit more charismatic). And he's such a dork and a nerd, but the people love him. Maybe it's different cultures between australia and America, but i think it's something to think about.

[billydog]

JUST HEARD IT ON THE NEWS-----The Fonz, Henry Winkler, endorses Barack Obama. Man you can't get a scamp bigger than The Fonz.

[RS]

Which reminds me of the following riddle:

Q: What do you get when you cross John Travolta with the Fonz?

A: "AAAAAAAAAAAY" fever! :-)

[rektruax]

I usually don't run with the clean humor, but that was funny. Problem being my kids won't know who I'm talking about.