Personality Wins

Section I: The Winning Personality

The Landslide That Wasn’t

IT WAS THE UPSET OF the century to anyone who accepted the conventional wisdom about how to predict a U.S. presidential election. There was no way that Donald J. Trump could defeat Hillary Rodham Clinton to become the next president of the United States…or at least, that’s what most experts and polls were predicting.

Two days before the election, Princeton University data scientists gave Hillary Clinton 99 percent odds of beating Trump. Their model had correctly called forty-nine out of fifty states in the 2012 election.

The Los Angeles Times, Moody’s, Fox News, The Associated Press, The New York Times, Reuters/Ipsos, ABC News, Bloomberg, The Economist, the betting markets, and nearly every other news source you can think of called the election in favor of Clinton.

There was such over-the-top confidence in Clinton that op-eds from October had headlines like, “Hillary Clinton will win. But what kind of president will she be?” Other articles worried about what to call Bill Clinton after Hillary’s inevitable victory. First Man? First Gentleman? First Partner? First Dude? It was worth considering since Hillary would win by a “landslide.”

Every pollster and pundit gave Hillary monster odds of trouncing Trump. But there was a difference between what the numbers said and what people did.

Excited about Hillary

“Hillary Clinton faces an enthusiasm gap,” said Berkley Professor Robert Reich, who served as Secretary of Labor in Bill Clinton’s administration. “I don't know many people who are extremely excited about her candidacy.”

Even Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson, who has all the charisma of a Valium prescription, threw shade in an op-ed: “The political elites and their loyal media are desperate because they are seeing the large enthusiastic crowds for Donald Trump and the meager crowds for Hillary Clinton, and they know that there will be a huge enthusiasm gap on election day.”

CNN ran an entire news segment about Hillary’s enthusiasm gap. One clip showed Clinton trying to look tough and cover her heart with one hand, Obama-style. In Clinton monotone, she said, “We’ve got to defend the American worker’s right to organize and bargain for better wages and benefits. We’re going to get incomes rising here in Western Michigan and across this state.”

Seconds later in the clip, Trump boasted, “We will stop the jobs from leaving your state.” He was in his element. Something about his approach, his communication style, and his demeanor generated, well, enthusiasm.

But where did this enthusiasm come from? Were his policies more carefully defined? Not really. Did he have a more compelling resume than Clinton? That’s not it either. So why did one candidate create raving fans and another create an “enthusiasm gap”?

The Lesser of Two Personalities

Polls captured what people do if they had to vote, which they don’t. Just over 61 percent of voting-age Americans went to the polls in 2016.

Despite what all polls and data scientists said, the media focused on the personalities of Clinton and Trump. We heard it after every debate. We read about it in the blogosphere. We watched it on every twenty-four-hour news station.

“She’s too robotic.”

“He’s too brash.”

“She’s too dispassionate.”

“He’s too aggressive.”

While Trump generated enthusiasm, he lacked likability. In fact, a shocking number of Americans disliked the personalities of both candidates. For about two-thirds of Americans, voting against Clinton or Trump was the main reason for supporting their opponent. Many people couldn’t bring themselves to vote for their party’s candidate.

The people who disliked Trump were concerned about his “temperament” and “unpredictability.” Many Clinton haters said, “I just didn’t like her.”

Were political pundits and everyday Americans onto something? Does personality really make a difference in the election process?

The answer is a resounding YES.

It’s All about Personality

On November 8, 2016, Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton with 304 electoral votes to 227. The polls and pundits were wrong.

For those who say, “Yeah, but Hillary got more actual votes than Trump,” that’s true. But in the end, Donald Trump put his hand on the Bible and was sworn in as the forty-fifth president of the United States. This book is about why candidates win elections, not how to reform electoral politics.

Why did Trump fill convention centers and stadiums while Clinton could barely pack a high school auditorium or community center? The answer is hidden in plain sight.

If you looked at the personalities of Trump and Clinton instead of their polling numbers, 2016 was completely predictable. In fact, every election—and we mean every election—since Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s first run in 1932 was predictable.

Personality has won the day in twenty-two straight elections. Let that sink in for a moment. Regardless of whether the country was at war or peace, personality determined the outcome. Regardless of whether one candidate was an incumbent or both were running for the first time, personality determined the outcome. Regardless of whether the economy was booming or flailing, personality determined the outcome. For eighty-four years of elections, personality has determined who takes the White House.

We’ve Been Thinking about Elections All Wrong

As a nation, we act as if elections are about party, platform, and policy because we’d like to think they determine how an enlightened democracy elects its leader. But that doesn’t square with the facts.

If you want to know what will happen in 2020, forget about those, “When I am president, here’s what I am going to do” plans. Instead, focus on what matters: the candidates’ personalities.

We can hear it now: “What about die-hard party loyalists? Don’t they always vote party first?” Sure, many voters will only vote for their party’s nominee. They’ve done it before and will do it again.

Of course, we hear about the infamous “undecideds.” These folks can swing to either side of the political spectrum, as the term “swing voters” implies. What variable pulls them to one side of the pendulum versus the other? You’re about to discover that it’s the personalities of the candidates.

To be clear, we’re not trashing policies! They are critical to the health of our government and society. We’re just saying that people don’t vote for presidential candidates based on their policies. We vote for who they are, not what they say they will do.

If we want to understand how our democracy works, we need a model that matches reality and predicts elections. And if you want that, well, the heck with platform. It’s all about personality!

Section II: Which Bird Are You?

Personality in Everything

AT PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN’S FIRST State of the Union address in 1982, he opened the way that only the Gipper could:

President Washington began this tradition in 1790 after reminding the Nation that the destiny of self-government and the ‘preservation of the sacred fire of liberty’ is ‘finally staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.’ For our friends in the press, who place a high premium on accuracy, let me say: I did not actually hear George Washington say that.

This is the most important annual speech on the president’s calendar, and Reagan started with a joke that pokes fun at himself and the media. What would prompt him to do that? Look no further than Reagan’s personality.

Personality is reflected in everything we do. We see it in our daily actions. We see it in characters from books and movies. We see it in our spouse and our coworkers. We also see it in the way candidates run for office and in the way a president speaks and governs. Reagan had a “big” personality that lit up rooms and helped him win elections.

In 2020 election coverage, the personalities of the candidates have taken center stage. Donald Trump has held rallies with sound-bite slogans like “Lock her up!” and “Build the wall!” Biden can’t get through a public address without botching the story of a war hero or mixing up the First and Second Amendments. And Elizabeth Warren is selling T-shirts with the slogan, “Warren has a plan for that.”

If personality is that important in presidential elections, let’s take a step back to discuss what we mean (and don’t mean) by “personality.”

What is Personality Anyway?

Allow us to nerd out briefly. The American Psychological Association (APA), which is presumably filled with people who understand human behavior, says that “personality refers to individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving.” So, personality is a combination of what people experience inside and what others see on the outside.

Many behaviors reflect personality, but some don’t. Anyone can be respectful, honest, courageous, or reliable regardless of their personality. Likewise, anyone can be mean, deceitful, cowardly, or reckless. There is a big difference between personality and concepts like values and ethics. We will leave the latter to philosophers. There are also vast differences between personality, intelligence, and mental well-being. We will leave those topics to psychologists.

Skills like creativity, leadership, and negotiation aren’t exclusive to one type of personality. For some, creative art looks abstract and messy. For others, art must be perfectly realistic, like a portrait that resembles a photograph. Personality does not determine how creative people will be, but it absolutely shapes how they will go about being creative.

The same is true about leadership. Personality does not determine how successful someone will be as a leader, but it does shape how that individual will lead.

For example, Richard Branson’s fly-by-the pants leadership style at Virgin Group is different from the way that Steve Jobs led Apple. Branson, known to be democratic, unpretentious, and upbeat, treated his employees with dignity. In public, he was never afraid to be the butt of a joke. He dressed up in a $10,000 wedding gown for the launch of Virgin Brides in 2006. He also wore a space suit to the press conference announcing Virgin Galactic, his space travel company.

Jobs, on the other hand, was famed for being autocratic, brash, and unforgiving. Neither employees nor business partners were spared from his profanity-laced tirades and penchant for public humiliation. He took himself and his accomplishments very seriously. In 2007, Jobs introduced the first iPhone in the same black turtleneck and blue jeans he wore daily. On stage at MacWorld, he said that Apple was going to “reinvent the phone” six times. He said the word “revolutionary” twelve times and “breakthrough” seven times.

Although Branson and Jobs had almost opposite personalities, they both built multibillion-dollar companies. They just went about it differently. The same is true for the White House. Presidents with different personalities have led the country to prosperity. As we discuss the personalities of the presidential candidates throughout this book, it’s important to note that we are not talking about their odds of succeeding in office. We’re addressing how likely they are to win an election.

Doesn’t Integrity Matter?

We don’t view politicians the way we view coworkers, friends, and partners. In friendships and romantic relationships, integrity comes first and personality second. Nobody wants to be in a relationship with someone who lies, cheats, or steals. Presidential candidates get way more leeway than people in our personal lives!

Why? Maybe they get a pass on character because we’re naturally skeptical of anyone who wants power. Is it so surprising that people who want power lie to get it?

It would be great if presidential candidates didn’t rattle off lies and get caught by FactCheck.org and PolitiFact. But as long as the U.S. is safe and the economy is healthy, we cut presidents slack.

Most people wouldn’t be happy with a spouse who is truthful 90 percent of the time, yet most of us can live with a president who only stretches the truth 10 percent of the time. As the old joke goes, how do you know if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

Americans elected presidents with the nicknames Tricky Dick and Slick Willy. We didn’t care. For better or worse, character doesn’t seem to matter when America chooses a president.

About That Personality Training Your Boss Made You Sit Through

If you work for a corporation, there’s a good chance you’ve taken a personality assessment and done some personality styles training. You spent the day looking at reports, learning a model, and boiling your personality down to a few letters. Maybe you took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and discovered that you are an ENTJ. Or perhaps you completed a DISC profile and learned that you are a D.

If you don’t know what any of that means, don’t worry. Three months after the training, neither do most of the people who have learned them!

If you do happen to remember your personality type, you must use it every day. The insights you gained about your style guide how you communicate and interact with the people in your life. It is your secret power that helps you get along with everyone. Right?

Probably not.

Most likely, the results of those personality assessments are filed in a drawer, never to be seen again. You have no idea what other people’s letters are, and you don’t even remember your own. You can’t read people’s personalities even though someone at your company paid a lot of money for those acronyms.

To understand the presidential candidates—and everyone around us, for that matter—we need a better model. We need something that you can learn in seconds and never forget. It needs to be intuitive, so you don’t have to memorize anything. It should be visual, so you can see the personality styles in everyone you meet. It has to be practical and easy.

Let’s discard the DISC letters introduced by Dr. William Marston in his 1928 book, The Emotions of Normal People, and replace them with something that doesn’t need to be memorized. Five years from now, you’ll still be able to use this model because it’s just that memorable and simple.

Enter the four birds.

Welcome to the Birdhouse

In Taking Flight! and The Chameleon, books by yours truly, Merrick Rosenberg, four birds were introduced to symbolize the personality styles. Instead of the alphabet soup of letters used in so many personality assessments, the birds make it easy to learn about yourself and others.

It’s time to use your imagination. Take a moment to think about an Eagle. Picture how that Eagle stands and looks out over the forest. Visualize that Eagle flying at 10,000 feet. Now picture a person with the traits of an Eagle. What characteristics come to mind?

Maybe you thought of someone who is confident, assertive, direct, and decisive. You may have thought of words like visionary, daring, or take-charge. And if results-oriented came to mind, you’re right on target. Eagles are all business. They call it like it is and make things happen. Spoiler alert: George W. Bush, Donald Trump, and Bernie Sanders are Eagles. Bush was the “decider,” after all. And Trump and Sanders are pretty blunt and direct.

What about a Parrot? Visualize this brightly colored bird amongst a flock of her friends. What are the first words that come to mind? Talkative, perhaps? Maybe social, outgoing, and fun? If those words came to mind, you’re feeling the right vibe.

Parrots are also optimistic, enthusiastic, and fun-loving. They typically have a contagious smile, and their wild ideas inspire people to take risks and try new things. They love the spotlight and revel in being the life of the party or the center of attention. Spoiler alert #2: Can you feel John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden’s Parrot energy? Their toothy grins and charisma can be seen and felt across a crowded room.

How about a Dove? Imagine the soothing sounds of these gentle birds as you identify their traits. What comes to mind? Maybe you selected words like calm or peaceful. As the universal symbols of love, harmony, and compassion, they seek to help others. As for conflict, no thanks. It tears at the fabric of collaboration and togetherness.

Doves are usually more reserved and in no rush to change or disrupt the status quo. They’re great listeners and want to be there for you and everyone in their life. Spoiler alert #3: Picture Jimmy Carter or Pete Buttigieg. Both talk a lot about their personal values and giving back to the community.

Finally, what is the first word you think of when you picture an Owl? If you’re like most people, the word “wise” or “wisdom” comes to mind. From the Owl of Athena in ancient Greek mythology to Owl in Winnie the Pooh, this bird has been characterized as thoughtful and knowledgeable throughout history.

We’re not saying that the Owl personality is the smart one. Remember, intelligence doesn’t correlate to style. Still, the logical and observant nature of the Owl radiates wisdom.

What other words come to mind? You may have thought of analytical, detail-oriented, or accurate. They love to ask questions. Even the sound they make is a question! “Hooooooo?” Accident or just happy coincidence? We’ll let you decide.

Know this: Owls are all about plans and tactics. If they are going to do something, you can bet that they have a plan for it. Spoiler alert #4: George H.W. Bush and Elizabeth Warren are Owls…. They have plans galore.

Notice how you were able to identify the traits of the Eagles, Parrots, Doves, and Owls. The birds embody the four personality types, making them easy to remember and apply. Soon, you’ll be able to identify the styles of people around you as well as the presidential candidates.

You may already be thinking about which bird you, your spouse, your kids, and your coworkers are. Before you start playing personality whisperer, a few things to note.

First, we have all four styles. We each have varying levels of Eagle, Parrot, Dove, and Owl, and many of us are so strong in two styles that a personality assessment would reveal that we’re a combination of two. (If you would like to take the assessment to identify your bird style, go to TakeFlightLearning.com/profile to purchase an online profile.)

Second, we can display any behavior regardless of our personality. Some situations require us to be flexible and take on the styles that are less natural to us. Picture a Parrot talking to an IT person because she encountered the “blue screen of death.” When this technician asks what the Parrot was doing prior to this catastrophe, the Parrot may want to reply, “I don’t know. It just died.”

Most Parrots have no interest in troubleshooting a problem or explaining the specifics of what they were doing just before the breakdown. An Owl in the same situation might say, “I wrote down the last ten actions I took before the blue screen. I just emailed them to you in a bulleted list, starting with the earliest action and ending with the most recent.”

In order to communicate more effectively, the Parrot could explain her actions in detail, as if she were an Owl. We can all be flexible when we need to be. The more flexible we are, the more effective we are. When we lack flexibility, we get into trouble.

Third, people can change over time. Life experiences can impact us so profoundly that our personality changes over time. Imagine the structured, disciplined Owl who becomes more carefree and Parrot-like in retirement. Picture the Dove who has had enough of people stepping on him and starts to act more Eagle-like. He learns to stand in his power and assert his needs with conviction. Our personalities don’t change quickly, easily, or dramatically, but they can change a bit over time.

Fourth, some traits are shared by all presidential candidates. Whatever their style, candidates for president tend to be confident, ambitious, optimistic, active, competitive, courageous, dutiful, idealistic, outspoken, and even a bit narcissistic. Wouldn’t they need to be a bit conceited to think that they should be the one to run the world’s most powerful nation? While some of these traits relate to a specific style, in the rarified air of the presidency, some traits transcend style.

Birding Practice

Before we reveal the styles of the presidential candidates, we’d like to show you how we came to our decisions. Let’s go birdwatching to see how personality predictions are made. (Vests, khaki hats, and binoculars are optional.)

We’ll name some folks from each style. See if you can figure out which bird they are.

First up, Simon Cowell. Recall the early days of American Idol. He was brutal. His bluntness regularly offended his fellow Dove judge, Paula Abdul, and his feedback sometimes made contestants cry. You want honesty? You got it. He didn’t pull any punches. He stated exactly what he thought of people’s abilities. He’s toned it down in recent years but is still one style to the core.

Which bird?

Yep, you guessed it. He’s an Eagle. He’s straight to the point and about as dominant as they get. So are Jeff Bezos, Michelle Obama, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Serena Williams.

How about legendary television personality, Mr. Rogers. With a soft voice and genuine compassion, he taught 1970s kids to be kind and respectful. What style does that sound like? You got it. He’s a Dove. So are Princess Diana, Beyoncé, Howard Schultz, and Pharrell Williams.

Let’s take a fictional character: Hermione Granger from the Harry Potter books. She knows all the spells, does all the homework, and always raises her hand in class. She saves Harry and Ron by knowing her magic and formulating clever plans.

What style? She’s an Owl all the way. Other Owls include Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Jerry Seinfeld, and yes, Emma Watson herself.

Next up, three late-night TV hosts whose parents named them James: Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, and James Corden. What style do you think they share? They think fast on their feet, sport big smiles, and exude positivity. They bring laughter to millions and have conversations for a living. What a perfect job for a…

Parrot. Notice how easily you are identifying people’s personalities. Saturday Night Live’s Kate McKinnon is also a Parrot. So are Miley Cyrus, Kevin Hart, Jennifer Lawrence, and Katy Perry.

Personality in Action

Let’s see how the styles play out in the real world with two actors whose personalities drove their approach to the craft. Compare Daniel Day-Lewis to the late Robin Williams. We can agree that they’re both outstanding actors. But they went about it differently.

Robin Williams was so dynamic, off-the-cuff, and unpredictable that when he played the Genie in Disney’s Aladdin, he ad-libbed many of the lines. Williams did his thing, and the illustrators had to depict whatever he said. The magic was in his spontaneity.

In the more serious movie Good Will Hunting, Williams improvised while playing the therapist Dr. Maguire. In one scene about accepting imperfections in a partner, Maguire tells Matt Damon’s character that his late wife farted so loudly in her sleep that she once woke up the dog, which woke her up. That was ad-libbed. No one knew he would say that, which is why Damon’s character broke into genuine laughter. For Williams, making things up on the spot brought the scene to a new level.

Daniel Day-Lewis, the only man who has ever won the Oscar for Best Actor three times, is a method actor. He learned Czech so he could speak English with a Czech accent in a movie adapted from Milan Kundera’s The Unbearable Lightness of Being. He tracked and skinned animals, built a canoe, learned to fire a flintlock rifle, and then carried his rifle to Christmas dinner while preparing to be Hawkeye in Last of the Mohicans. Allegedly, while playing Abraham Lincoln, he sexted Sally Field who was playing Lincoln’s wife, Mary Todd. Thankfully, she understood his approach and responded in character.

Daniel Day-Lewis spends months embodying the character he’ll play. Robin Williams made up his lines on the spot. Their styles are completely different, but they are both acting geniuses. Can you guess their bird styles?

If you guessed that Williams is Parrot and Day-Lewis is an Owl, we agree with you. And that’s how it’s done. Once you know the styles, you can quickly and intuitively read them in others. By the time you finish this book, you will become what the Audubon Society refers to as a Master Birder.

Dead People Can’t Take Personality Assessments

Identifying the style of a celebrity is one thing, but this book hinges on accurately identifying the presidential candidates. We can’t make them take a personality assessment, especially if they’re no longer with us.

So, how did we do it? We based our determinations on a variety of sources. We watched videos of debates and speeches. We tuned into their tone, body language, and connection to the audience. We examined what they said and wrote and looked at the decisions they made. We studied what presidential scholars, authors, and journalists said about them. We reviewed interviews with their colleagues. Using all this information, we linked each candidate to the four styles.

For example, British journalist Paul Johnson once said, “The most intimidating world leader was Lyndon Johnson.” Does that sound like a Dove? Of course not. It’s a clue that he may be an Eagle.