I offer this in full respect for the candidates and voters.

Over the past few years, I’ve mulled over the idea that the candidate who wins the general election (not the nomination fight) is always the one seen as the most fun.  By “fun,” I mean not necessarily the person I find the most fun, but the person whom the electorate regards as the most buoyant to the national mood—the person who helps us feel better about ourselves (not always in positive ways).

2004 — Bush seemed more fun than Kerry.

2000 — a problematic election considering the recount, but I wonder if Bush wasn’t perceived as more fun than Gore

1996 and 1992 — Clinton clearly more fun than Dole or Bush the elder

1988 — Bush more fun than Dukakis, who lost his fun edge.

1984 and 1980 — Reagan more fun than Mondale or Carter

1976 — Carter more fun than Ford

1972 — This is a tough one, but I wonder if the side of Nixon that democrats saw as cheating, wasn’t celebrated by republicans and the swing voters.  McGovern = moral uprightness = no fun.

1968 — A weird year, but again, I suspect that Nixon, of all people, came off as more fun

1964 — Johnson more fun than Goldwater

1960 — Kennedy more fun than Nixon

Okay, just putting it out there. 

FWIW, I think that both Obama and Clinton, in addition to being better superior alternatives to any of the Republicans, are also more fun.