Politicians have some mad skills when it comes to social attraction and ability to connect with others. Value theory aside they are literally some of the most powerful people in the world, it takes a lot of skill to get into that kind of position.

Let's look at Bill Clinton as a case study, he's been described as having a "reality distortion field", if you google it you'll find a wikipedia article referencing Steve Jobs and Bill Clinton as having been described as having this.

There are many stories out there describing events where people who have always despised Clinton have had their mind instantly changed upon meeting the man. Upon shaking hands with him, in that moment, face-to-face, all of their animosity towards Clinton would disappear. While shaking hands Clinton would make eye contact in such a powerful and intimate way that it would feel as if they were the only two people in the room, connecting on a deep level.

Steve Jobs was first to have this term attributed to him, it is purported that when interacting with him face-to-face it's almost impossible to not follow his will or follow him, such is the power behind his aura of charisma, confidence, and persuasion.

A New York Times article near the beginning of Clinton's presidency describes him as "making eye contact so deep that recipients sometimes seem mesmerized. Tabloid rumors aside, Clinton embodies the parallels between the seductions of politics and the seductions of sex. As one Clinton watcher said recently: "It's not that Clinton seduces women. It’s that he seduces everyone.'"

That final part, seducing everyone, that's SO unbelievably powerful but I'm going to leave that for another day, I want you to watch a short video from the 1992 presidential debate.



0:03 - Bush looks at his watch before the woman asks her question, he's not interested.

0:05 - Readjusts trousers and belt buckle, a sign of dominance akin to pumping up one's chest. Cowboys used to do this.

0:30 - Poor eye contact, rocking, clear signs of discomfort, doesn't know how to respond.

0:55 - Hand goes into his pocket, body turned slightly away, creates an air of defensiveness and a lack of empathy towards something she clearly cares about a great deal.

1:20 - Still looks confused about the question, creates and air of not really connecting with the person he's talking to, if you can't understand them you're clearly not connected.

1:30 - Doesn't have a clear idea of what to say until the church part. Turns his body away from her and talks to audience instead.

1:45 - Still not standing still

1:57 - Still shifting his body a lot, still not holding eye contact.

2:00 - Accuses her of not being fair, still little eye contact, still shifting a lot.

It's important to note that Clinton barely moves throughout this entire thing, his body language is rock solid, he's confident, he even smiles gently, he's not shifting at all.

2:30 - Now we get Clinton in, as quickly as possible he's up and on top of this situation, first thing he does is walk much further forward than Bush and address her directly, caring about her.

2:37 - He's as close as he can get to her and addresses her very directly, you, you, you, his eye contact barely breaks at all throughout the entire interaction. There's no need for me to make further specific comments on his interaction, he gets as close as he can and connects with her, he then holds that connection the entire time showing a complete air of confidence and authority, this is reflected in the back channel support(auditory agreements and confirmations that she's listening) he receives from her. He finishes by ending at a peak and driving what he wants to do across, the goal of the interaction remains his primary thought - getting the message of what he wants to do across.

3:47 - The disbelief on Bush's face says it all, he knows he's just been destroyed by Clinton. Clinton owns the entire room.

All of these principles are just as important to attracting partners as they are to politics, everyone can learn from this.
Hold that eye contact, stop fidgeting, speak slowly and with confidence, present a strong state of mind, be authentic and be confident.

Connect with others as if you're the only two in the room, if only for a brief moment.

Great example, love it. Couple other things strike me. Firstly, the prickly nature of the question was taken personally by Bush, it was intended to hurt and it did, and his behaviour thereafter reflected that. Whereas Clinton, whilst he had the advantage of going second, it didn't sting him personally because his self image is different..it didn't rattle him in the same way, and his behaviour afterwards reflected that. Secondly, Bush answered the question logically, Clinton listened to her emotions...if you strip away the words, she was asking for understanding, contrition, compassion...so he gave her those things. Marvellous example RLAJay thanks for posting it, no wonder Clinton's a renowned womaniser.

My thoughts exactly - that was a great example of bad and good connection.

What is interesting is that the same kind of thing happened during the pre-election debates last year....a lot of people thought that Nick Clegg came across as more 'authentic' than Cameron and Brown.

There has to be that emotional connection, not just the manner of someone going through the motions.

The key word here is empathy - Clinton shows it; Bush doesn't.

It's in the language, both verbal and non-verbal; it's in the tonality of his voice; it's in the content of what he says. You show a person genuine empathy and they will love you for it.

Much love,

Craigus