Works and what drives our behavior than we have ever had in the history of humanity. That breakthrough was delivered thanks to our brain scans. I did not believe that i was going to afford that for my brain scanning machine. I looked for a different tool in a different needs. To understand how they are quantifying. And understanding characteristics of somebody. I have typically applied this business quite honestly. My most profound interest has always been in politics and starting in 2004 both the for the New York Times for cnn i began to diagnose the candidates who are occupying or running for the white house. That has been something that has been done persistently since. And with the election of donald trump in 2016 in all of that conservation of that raised in certain quarters i decided that time was there to investigate president s greatness in office perhaps less successful ten years in office. The book that i will take you to. The first part is indeed benchmarked to how president ial scholars had tended to evaluate and rank the president s from one to 44. The middle section i take on all of the president ial debates going back to nixon and kennedy looking for the correlations between those candidates on the debate stage and whether or not they will gain and lose traction. Im looking if theres a correlation between the style of governance. Will they tend to be dictators will they be more a democratically inclined. I made it by Freedom House which i did not know of. Gone through systematically yearbyyear country by country and understood what was a level of democracy in that country. By tracking which leisures were in office. It is a painful procedure. Looking for their governing sows and how it ranked in that. That is my background. Take you through some meat readings and comments. Our president is exactly is not exactly modest. Im a star out this evening with donald trump. I think you can be a little bit surprised by the first thing that i get a tell you. This is the donald. A lot of you are probably can i think that the emotion that most distinguishes donald trump is anger. Im not saying hes not angry but the emotion that most distinguish him is instead sadness. This is quite interesting because after all just last week if youre not happy you can leave the country. Donald trump is actually the most happiest president we have ever had. I will keep explaining the tool as we go. Facial coding starting with none other than Charles Darwin who was the first scientist to take motion seriously darwin comes to realize that in your face you best reflect and communicate your emotions. This is not phonology. If you have a lower brow that means you are criminal type. Im not looking for a permanent mark. Im not looking for your school size or Something Like that. Instead im following a professor named dr. Paul ekman. In paul working with the colleagues in the school of medicine in San Francisco a verve course of 15 years systematically figured out which muscle movements he believed to correspond to seven core emotions. When were talking about sad because there are certain things you look for. The easiest one that you can all look at. Rodeo clowns are painted. They drew. So donald trump does show droops at times. But even more persistently what donald trump also shows is the chin will jot upward. It is a look of sadness it is frankly a look of disgust in anger. The other two emotions that are was prevalent. Just solely devoted to sadness. It is when you get a wince in the cheek. And you get this a wince of Charlie Chaplin who was very prone to this expression so donald trump is a man full of grievances quite honestly. And thats really where a lot of the sadness comes from its interesting. Sadness normally it will slow you down. Ive done work for sports teams. My advice to them. You dont really want athletes who are tremendously sad it leads me to the question why is donald trump sad. Heres what i head for you on this. Be a killer, big await beyond a hard driving father what else might explain the sadness. Like nixon yes. Trump have a brother die young but they werent that close. Could it simply be that extreme narcissism means that the very stable genius as he describes himself as doomed to fail endlessly let down because he cannot secure universal acclaim. So i found one auditor call from one person in new york who went back and interviewed practically everyone from chumps childhood and what they talked about was an endless need to distract himself. It was either through a claim through deals or through. From the deepseated psychological wounds which as best is best as i can tell. Goes back to very domineering father. He just could not quite ever went into his camp. And has been list attempts were thwarted he tried all sorts of things to get his fathers attention. Often acting out. Trying to impress him with his accomplishments. Whatever the case may be. That was a constant game that was being played. What we can see here though is that he was in various stages of feminist. Anger is hard to say its something that distinguishes a truck. It actually shows in nine different ways. There are some people who will show a considerable amount of anger almost to the point of being monolithically angry. Im not saying that he is intensely angry. I am saying what distinguishes him is an unusually large volume of sadness. These would be the other 44 or 43 president s. That is the first slide. Speaking of sadness and you may not be able to read this a manager to help you as we go here. If we move on to sadness this is the emotion that most correlates to failure in office. It wasnt just sports it often tends to be true in politics longevity in office. Its not like a sports arena. It certainly the networks the pundits and everybody else who is paying attention. So sadness is interesting for several rea. Heres what i need to complicate the story a little bit. Weve a fairly strong correlation here. You also had to look at what is being second most prevalent dominant emotion for somebody. And this is what distinguishes the donald from honest abe. The second strongest emotion for Abraham Lincoln is happiness. Socially into different forms is the strongest correlation to success in the white house. What happiness allows you to do essentially as we know now from psychology is that happier people tend to get to superior solutions more quickly. They are more open to brain storming. So prior to my book there is one other book that matters to me and it was to psychologist and interviewed interviewed a great number of historians they went into him and said if they knew the president or president s while. They ask him to raise the big factor. These are personality traits. Openness to experience. Openness to new ideas. Lincoln did very well on openness. Donald trump does terribly on openness. So the other emotion beside sadness is happiness. There was a lot of things that did not go while in his life are were not going while in the country. Lincoln also brought some levity to it. Some self depreciating humor. Those who advocate for it. And then you can decide if you want to continue to advocate for it so strongly. That is not the sort of humor that we get from donald trump. There is something that is at the opposite end of the strict spectrum. You close down your rattle. Your difficulties because you suffer from neuroticism. As i mentioned in the book napoleon while hes rude treating from russia mud is the fifth element element. Its the mud. With the exception every other president on this list for sadness has neuroticism is either their primary or secondary there are two other people here who are probably the president s that trump has the most definitive four. Andrew jackson is second here. And and you Andrew Jacksons other emotion is anger. The largest correlation success. You are approaching and tackling. Youre taking on issues. Jackson did have that quality of anger. The other person here is nixon. There is no portrait of nixon and the white house. This is the person he actually went to and met after a nonprofit fundraiser in houston many years ago. Obviously when nixon was still alive seeking advice about running for the presidency. After i saw a documentary all those many years ago he sat down and but hold nixon for the entire evening. Every likelihood that trump was going to make this endeavor. I did want to move to a happier note for a moment. The joy in particular the highest level of happiness where you get the twinkle in the eye. The single strongest reliable indicator of happiness. Weve only two president s. One of them is actually trumps predecessor. I thought i would read a little bit of a summary about taft to help you along. This is on william taft. They could nevertheless be pegged as a big softy. When they became public foes he burst into tears telling a reporter roosevelt was my closest friend. Taft took losing the white house in stride. Having been pushed to take at the job in the first place by both his dad and wife. When wasnt he focused on the lot. His passionately elsewhere he was the first president to play golf and the man that created the addition of the seventh Inning Stretch in a baseball game. He probably loves that two until he got stuck in one and it took six months of pull them out. Taft was not big he was huge. He weighed 332 pounds as president. Only the cow that he kept on the white house grounds was bigger than he was. I joke around town was that they were a real gentleman. He gave his seat to three ladies. When they offered him that cant chair of constitutional law here piled that a soft is so far up law would be even better. As i suggested. With happiness you tend to be more open to compromises more interested in the softer style interacting with others. Lets leave behind the first part of the book. This head to do with president ial greatness. Obviously we can get into a number of factors later on when we are talking about that during the q a. The second part of the book has to do with president ial debates. My argument was that we need to level set regarding what the voting public nose. A woman approached them on the campaign trail and said to him gushingly. Every stinking american will be voting for you. Yes maam but i need a majority. If you have seen anything from jay leno to other comedians who do the person in the street routines. Im not trying to make fun of anyone. There is a fairly large plaza the of information. When people model how the campaign is can ago. I admit that i smile perhaps even smirk a little bit in response because i dont really think that that is reality in terms of where the voters are coming from. I wanted to start off with just reading you a few statistics that reinforce my point regarding this. Im not trying to shoot fish in a barrel. There are some fairly amazing statistics here. 75 percent of americans cant name all three branches of government. 75 percent. 60 of americans dont know which countries we fought in world war ii. 50 of American College graduates dont know how long the terms of u. S. Representatives are. Now were talking college students. 20 of americans. Believed the right to own a pet is enshrined in the First Amendment the constitution. In the last 110 percent of American College graduates once again think that judge judy is a member of the u. S. Supreme court. I mention that when you are imagining that this is this wellinformed series of arguments that are presented. I dont think so. I think it is certainly the gaffes, the jokes and a lot of other things. And president ial debates it is the taller person who tends to win. About two thirds of the time. It is even more reliable than what you might think is that the happiest candidate wins since weve spoken in terms of the american dream. Its not that. It is in fact not only being taller is a particular form of happiness that is shown on the stage that gives away a lot more about whats going on. So before i get there. I wanted to move to the first and most seminal of all of the debates because it is that debate that has been disk mistaken at times. Just before i set it up to go to nixon and kennedy had brought us three firsttime events. The first president ial debate was never held. The first televised debate. In the first president ial debate remembered for a blunder by one of the candidates. In august he have badly injured his knee and spent two weeks in the hospital. He showed up for the first debate with a temperature of 102 20 pounds underweight. Sporting a 5 00 shadow. Nixon and then compounded his sickly status by refusing to wear any makeup after john kennedy had refused makeup. What nixon did not know was that his younger opponent then have makeup suit secretly applied anyway. Now were talking about the first debate and in leading into that i want to get to one other first regarding the first president ial debate. As the first blunder by a pundit so in his lifetime he wrote his making of the president president serious. And here is what he said about the first president ial debate. The journalist author of the latest Campaign Series the link making of the president yes white got one part correct. This one was glowering and occasionally haggard looking. Its a bit of a modifier. Out of place. To say that kennedy was calm and nervous and appearance compared to nixon was tense almost frightened is the boat. Its to miss the boat. That blunder has to do with the fact that actually it was kennedy not nixon who was the more frightened candidate. Of the debate. After all. Nixon had been the Vice President for Vice President for the past eight years. He had traveled widely over seas. Indeed during the first debate. Whenever there was a question involving foreign affairs. Kennedy started to show fear. Look at those sports jackets. Look at those wrinkles and sleeves that he has. The lack of looking crisp and ready to go. Nixon was quite before lauren for the evening. Although callet kennedy had Kelly Kennedy had a problem with fear you also offset it with a good deal of happiness lets talk about fear a little bit because it for those that dont recognize fear its an important emotion quite obviously. Is the eyebrows pinched together. That could also show sadness it can also show a bit of anger and concentration. But when you see them pinched together. That is a very reliable call for fear when the corner of the mouth pulls laterally. Is not superwide. And you combined with the arching and wrinkles pulled together eyebrows it is one of numerous incidences in the debate when nixon was less afraid than kennedy. I have a very famous relative clint help. He was the secret Service Agent who jumped on the back of the limousine. Its why he knew of the entourage is extremely well and he said yes kennedy was tremendously elated after the debate. And he was tremendously nervous going into the debate. You go back to the footage when they were told to stand up and get out of their seats and moved to the podiums. Actually kennedy was the more disordered to gantlet of the two candidates. We are so used to him having his press conferences on this occasion his nerves meant that he actually could not figure out where he was going. More ready to plunge in on that occasion. There are only 14 debates that really mattered in the end. They moved them by at least 3 . I started out trying to get to this issue. From when the campaign started to the end of the campaign. And take the two or three debates into account. I could not get to any emotional algorithms that way. They were certain campaigns when one candidate made at blunder. And then in the making of eve and each other out. If you look at those 14 debates and really make a difference now im in a to go back to talking about happiness the single smartest thing that a candidate can do in a debate as to show a smile but its an ironic smile. They are showing the smile and making a depreciating may be savagely ironic comment its a very nice way to dismiss them. Bill clinton used to do this. They were kind of pitiful and pathetic it was a way of emasculating his opponents which in those days were all men that he was facing. Skepticism is that way of taking it to someone. You are stabbing it gently into your opponent. And to other forms of happiness satisfaction and pleasure also work nicely for projecting exuberance and so force on the stage. Voters like winners. And that happiness combined it tends to work the one on a motion among the emotions that proved to be effective on stage im not really convinced by t it is fear. The reason it is their most of all is kennedy survived fear and win the election. The other is primarily reagan in 84. Call it the onset of alzheimers already, reagan was on the ropes, Walter Mondale help him by not doing so well in the debates. Reagan got through. And got reelected. If you moved to the negative emotions that do not help you in a debate the strongest is joy. What mondale did in 84 was try to overcome his fear by showing the most amazing collection of joyful smiles. He smiled when reagan came back with i wont use your use against you, he smiled at using jokes like rogers and a disorganized party, showed joy when talking about groucho marx, time and again Walter Mondale was a decent man and tried to go to george reset the stage and be as lovable to voters as reagan and got punished in terms of how the states turned out and any other candidate tending to go to joy who has not been effective. A more modulated version of happiness that equates to the dignity of the office, seems to have performed typically enjoy. On the other hand anger which is good for being a president tackling a problem does not do so well. People dont want to see somebody coming on too strong, makes them dislike them. The old joke of i want to vote for the candidate you want to have a beer with, you dont want to have a beer with a hothead ready to start a barroom brawl because it doesnt work out so well. Then go down to contempt and discussed dont have a factor either way. Now something that cant be in the book because i released it in april, democratic debate in late june. I have a word in the book about the Democratic Candidates, we can talk about that in the q and a but i want to take you through this. There are too many candidates. Those in the first position on either side, i took them out. If they polled 12910 to make things simpler for us, people who might have a chance to get into the white house those are the ones i am concentrating on. What i am showing you is which candidates were dominant and stood out from the pack for the motions i talk about. Amy klobuchar is on this list three times over. It was not her best evening. The occasion may be a bit bigger than she was prepared for. She came very close to Walter Mondale. She showed intense happiness more than any other candidate on stage. Toy does not do well overall in president ial debates. Fear thanks to reagan in 1984 in particular and kennedy doesnt get you in trouble but i noticed all the intense joy, amy was quite fearful, more fearful than any of the other candidates. One fifth of all her emoting was fear during the debate. That is a lot. Even if voters dont hold you against it, what the fear does is inhibit you. It means you are not moving freely. Gives and take of a debate, voters say i am happy, i will freeze, which might be why they have an allowance for that and it reduces her effectiveness. The other places she shows up is discussed which is a characteristic emotion. Discussed which donald trump also shows is any motion that something smells bad or taste bad, literally or metaphorically. It is something in professional sports i tell teams to draft for. Athletes who cant stand mediocrity and drive themselves to a higher level. But it has its downside and doesnt work well for voters in states and make sense because what happens is you are wrinkling your upper lip, wrinkling your nose, kind of saying i am out of here. In a conversation with somebody and seeing discussed, hard to feel good about your self or the interchange you are having if that is the reaction you are getting and that is the other emotion amy dominates. The bar extend so far out, sanders, bernie sanders, a whopping 54 of emailing during the debate was anger. Right behind him is Elizabeth Warren. There is a difference between them. I looked for the intensity of the anchor. Anger is the most prevalent of the emotions, nine ways it shows on face, some ways could be confusion or concentration. The eyebrows knitting together which is what kennedy showed. But if you move to more intense versions of anger, one of the most reliable ones is the lips pressed together so far the line forms between the middle of the lower lip. That is the telltale sign you have taken the bone away from the dog and that is not to go after you. This is a more intense version of anger, one that trump shows. Think to the Charlottesville Press conference. Think of bernie in any situation in life when he says let me make one thing clear. One thing bernie makes clear is he is quite angry. Elizabeth warrens anger is certainly there. 54 , pretty large. I mentioned that for 20 years. I have done research for fortune 100 Companies Looking for consumers reaction. When i tell my clients anything over 30 is problematic, 40 is toxic and over 50 you should declare bankruptcy. [laughter] 50 is a lot. A few other things, beto orourke did not have a good debate came back with mild happiness. He was the happy camper and good boy scout. Tulsi gabbard was out of her league as well. She is not a bigtime politician. She showed a lot of pride. She has been in the military and one thing that is important about surprises eyes go wide, you are taking in information, doing reconnaissance on your enemies for instance. That emotion doesnt help in a debate, doesnt hurt you, but very alert to what was going on. Skepticism, the emotion i told you is most effective in a debate was harnessed by two people. One is the surprise of a campaign so far, pete buttigieg, who has come in is a relative moderate, he has positions on the issues, hard to know where he stands but he wielded skepticism. The other person who did that was kristin gillibrand. The other emotion besides that is contempt. If happiness is hugging you, contempt is i am dismissing you. If trust is the emotion of business contempt is its opposite. Also the Malcolm Gladwell bestseller blank, they used marriage counseling. With 15 minutes of videotape they have 90 accuracy rate, 90 . The most reliable indicator it will fail is contempt. I dont trust and dont respect the other party. Hard to imagine what doesnt work in our Market Research works well in marriage, worked terribly will bond the you to the voters watching on tv screen. Give her credit for having shown skepticism but i think the contempt takes away any advantage they have at wielding of that. The other thing i want to talk about is Kamala Harris who had the most successful first performance. Normally sadness does not work well in debates. It comes from candidates like bob dole versus clinton, knowing he was going down to the sea. There was a forlorn version of dole on the stage for the second debate backed by captain ahab trying to lasso the great whale at the white house, to succeed before the election, watching dole in the campaign refer to the brooklyn dodgers who may have moved to los angeles many decades ago, this will not go well with younger voters. This did not work well with their solutions. One exemption in the book, in 1976 he used sadness in two ways. One was to show how much he cared about racism. That he was troubled by the prevalence of racism in the country. The other one, the vietnam war had recently ended, regarding the pows coming home and the mias. Sadness can slow you down and give a sense that you feel hopeless or forlorn, can be tremendous for suggesting empathy, that you connect, that you care, that you feel what is going on. By extension it was meant to suggest others were caught up in the issue and affected by the attitudes, racist or otherwise how to define them. That is an unusual emotion in a debate. I had to go back to carter to find somebody who uses it a lot and effectively. He uses it effectively against biden. We have one other place to go. Before we go to the q a. This wont be easy to read outback so i will help you out. I am talking about foreign leaders. I looked for 79 foreign leaders and went back to the time Freedom House has been tracking levels of democracy but could not resist going back a full century, i went back to stalin, mussolini, and what was the emotional correlation between being a bully and being a good person and that was compassion, care about your fellow citizens. This is the strongest correlation in the book. Quite honestly it is very difficult looking at human nature to get a strong correlation because human beings are complicated. One of my favorite quotes is from kierkegaard who said out of the twisted timbrel of humanity now strengthening was ever made. Human beings are complicated. 0. 5 correlation unless you have direct personal interaction who youre interacting with, is the gold standard. A level so high you have reached perfection. I had a nearly 4 forward correlation to question you were a bull your good leader. We are talking ted williams batting average territory here. Very strong correlation and that correlation proved to be if you are a bully you will index high on two emotions. Anger because you want to hit and discussed because you are revolted by somebody or something and you are backing away. Those two emotions that identify a bully and someone on the debate stage like Walter Mondale good leaders hug, they embrace and embrace enthusiastically. They index high on joy and pleasure, the two most intense versions of happiness. What i am showing you here is donald trump and the leaders as he took office that he has disparaged or praised during his time in office. I will show you person by person who we are talking about and read you a little bit about their track record. Lets start with donald trump himself. This is where donald trump sits. Because he has a lot of sadness he is not up to the most harsh leaders but because he is one of the saddest president s we have had and the person full of grievances he is almost as far from exuberant as you can get, certainly on this chart. What i did with Freedom House is took all the leaders from three countries, their average landed right here, then i took all the leaders of countries considered partially free, they are away from exuberance and started to be more harsh. Then i moved to the dictators and the dictators were less exuberant and decidedly more harsh. As you take the projector that moves like this, trump is not way up in harshness but a long way from being a democratically inclined leader by the algorithms i came out with. Lets take the other people. Here is the second most powerful person in the world, this is the very subdued chinese leader xi who trump has praised as a great leader. If we go to the next one, this is the egyptian leader who came after morrisy. This is where he sets. A lot of people, journalists their we have moved up to that person. If we go to the person the European Union from hungry who many people consider the prototype, the protege, the leader before trump in terms of leaders in europe. Is way over to the left side in terms of lacking exuberance. The strangest one here is the north Korean Leader the one that supposedly fell in love with trump and trump with him regarding their exchange of letters, he is the strangest outcome in the entire book. He is extremely exuberant and extremely harsh. He seems to enjoy being harsh. This is the one who killed one person in his regime by using artillery guns or antiaircraft guns to kill the person off. We are talking someone who is very peculiar best, mentally let worst. That is where that person sits. He is in short the only exception. These are the leaders trump has put down being weak, not strong, creating a mess and so forth. You have justin trudeau, Angela Merkel quite exuberant and teresa may who is no longer in office. There is a very clear pattern here. If you reflect emotions that fit my algorithm, you are not where trump is and not where people are the trump likes. With the exception of the north Korean Leader, they are always away from the democratic orientation emotionally. Not all of them but most of them tends to be harsh in their nature. One last before we get to the q a. I thought it was important for all of us to think about the top ten countries in the world. I looked at three criteria. One was the strength of their economy, one was the strength of their military and the last was the size of their population. If you take those together, arguably the three most significant countries in the world. You obviously have trump over here, you have the chinese leader here, but you also have number 5 over here, vladimir putin, refuses to put down largely. It turns out he is the least democratically inclined in terms of exuberance. I was speaking in estonia at a conference and someone said to me the first question from the audience with you are really happy, you are an american. I said can you unpack that . You have all your advertisements for america and everyone is laughing and smiling all the time in the ed and they are the leading marketers. Putting that together, i like what i do for a living and i am a rather happy person but i am not faking it. He said in Eastern Europe we have a saying which is if you are a happy person you are a fool, because youre not paying attention to all the miserable things going on around you in society i give credit for being a quintessential russian and very far on the spectrum from where the other leaders could go. I have been trying to track where india is going to go, he is not so harsh but is not exuberant and i am keeping an eye on him. We have bolson aro from brazil. Other brazilian leaders i have looked at our like to dance, they are exuberant. He does have that but also have harshness. It is a twist on what i have seen from other brazilian leaders. Angela merkel is out here. The other one that intrigues me is indonesia. We hardly ever talk about the nature. Is one of the largest countries in the world in population, the thirdlargest democracy in the world and to my eyes looking at a chart like this we should look more closely at indonesia as a natural ally. They have a democracy. They have a Multicultural Society like we do, like result does and when i look at this chart their current leaders in the same space as those disparaged by trump and real stalwarts of democracy like Angela Merkel. As we think about the future we will need allies and indonesia as long as a person stays there could be a natural ally of the us and democracy. I have no idea how long i took but i will wait for the q a and let you all know, so thank you. [applause] thank you. [inaudible question] okay. There hoping you will come in camera range because you are offcamera and cspan is covering it. I would like to say trump has two problems, his mother gave him no love and he could do enough for his father. I did talk about that as of that in the household. My grandfather wanted to be president but he had a cold mother and a cold father, came from an enormous family and grew up in a rural area. There was one interesting story about trumps childhood. People in brooklyn, he learned not to stand squarely in front just in case a shock came out around the person who didnt want it collected from. If you go through that experience over and over, will that have an influence . It might. It is a little more you collect in that. There are a lot of bullets flying around. In terms of the debate i am curious how you think these characteristics are going to shake out. In the past it was exclusively men accept Hillary Clinton. Are people going to look at them differently if someone is disdainful or fearful or feels different emotions. Different walks of life including a comment that still pertains, a great number of female friends looked for me which is men especially politicians will still lay a lot on whether they are tough, strong and for a woman it is a delicate balance, according to some people looking for that. But if too tough it penalized some voters for not seeming sufficiently feminine. It was interesting when i looked at sadness in that book across ten celebrities the people who were least sad were two women who were not sufficiently feminine and that was Hillary Clinton and janice joplin. Interesting how the data fell out. A tight rope to walk in some ways. I go back to Kamala Harris and her sadness. You cant attack a person expressing sadness, you will seem like a bully because you are in that mode and so you get out of that and sadness would be any motions that seems female in some peoples mind, more soft, more caring, more empathetic and having played the sadness card allowed her to be more forward. I think i am sure was a preplanned move but a very clever one and pretty effective. Look at her fundraising tools i think the candidates are helped a lot by the fact that there are other female candidates on the stage so it is not just one. In 2008 on the campaign trail i was in New Hampshire, just after diner in New Hampshire. The Hillary Clinton came out of that, politico asked me to coat the videotape on that occasion. She took the stage and showed a version of Hillary Clinton i have never seen before. The contempt was gone, the anchor had melted away, she was more inviting, stayed for all the questions and afterwords i turned to clive who wrote primary colors in Time Magazine and said this version of hillary could come back and win the New Hampshire primary though she is down at the same point and clive said to me you are dead wrong and walked off. Four days later i was tempted to send him an email lets discuss who is offbase. I was blown away with a different version of her. She passed through that crucible but we are in a different space with more candidates. To enable hillary to come back, to disable somebody who thought i was too soft for a woman candidate, Kamala Harris picked up something. It will be interesting to see. Im too young to see the nixon debate. That would make two of us. Jfk looked better on tv than nixon. The other thing that is relevant, they were debating the missile gap, who was stronger, building more missiles and we are way ahead and had more atomic bombs, could we use the debate to say i want to be strong in this area but lets reach out to the other side and see if we can do some kind of arms control, can we do something, lets do something, lets show that in the future we can do some kind of arms control so we can use the debate not only for america but everybody. Your getting to the golden balint which bill clinton used really well and that to my mind is you show enough anger to be purposeful and strong but dont show an intense version of anger and mix it in with happiness to show you are open to compromise, negotiations, interactions, and that is what i call the golden full and and it works well. They are both approach emotions and index pretty well in debates. And it works well in the white house for that matter. That is something voters could and should look for potentially in the candidates. Not tipping into one or the other necessarily. There have been a lot of comparisons in the past between donald trump and boris johnson. Do you have a sense how closely they would be on your chart . I havent actually gone through and systematically charted him. It now appears is more fierce than donald trump. They have the same hairdo. And they both will make a strong there is some anger. There is a lot more happiness. We will see. I went to oxford with theresa may, look at my charts, are you sure . You have to remember exuberance is both joy and pleasure. It goes well for greatness because pleasure tend to be a big put on smile you put on for the cameras and the politician doesnt really feel the joy. You show the joy. That is a problem with authenticity so i would say he is genuinely happy. Used to drive around the brussels. That is the difference. You talked about Kamala Harris and bernie sanders. Give us a profile of joe biden and Elizabeth Warren based on what you have seen. Joe biden tends to be happy and there is an upside to happy. But there is a downside to happiness which is sloppy with details. You think everything is going well so you are blissed out and comfortable. Biden is a person who has engaged in lectures a man was in trouble more than one time. He didnt seem ready for the first debate. It is my opinion biden wont fare terribly well. They have name recognition, previous status. In 2008 i was in iowa for the caucuses and i ended up in a restaurant one evening with someone whose husband was working on Rudy Giulianis campaign. He had been way out ahead. We talked for a while and she said he is going to take florida. Giuliani will be the nominee. I said my wall is outside and said how much do you want to bait, i will go to any amount. Hes not going to get there. I am not saying biden wont get there but he tends to show exuberance. Obama at once point said stop doing stupid things. That is not a great harbinger for where he is going to go. Who was the other one us about. A different version of anger and anger can show you want to his or take down barriers to progress. And you see greater fairness in the economy. To my mind sanders, Democratic Candidates have a problem when they run a second time democratic voters feel they are stale. On the republican side you run 2 or 3 times before they believe in you. The different mentality on either side of the aisle. Sanderss anger is intense and he has been around for a while and his intense anger echoes trumps intense egg are. That will be a negative. Warren has a lot of anger but is down a notch and it is just purpose, but if she could manage it with more skepticism, ironic smiles, it might help her. Imagine sanders blows up and she has that side of the field open up for her, she still has to get to add like stevensons majority, people who are more inclined to happiness. She has to find other emotions to play. To be too monolithically emotional as a candidate is like being a single issue candidate. Voters tend to penalize that. Ive heard people say castro is great on immigration but what are his other issues. They are looking for your second or third car. Go to immigration, the environment, the white house, show me your wellrounded candidate. A wellrounded candidate has to have other emotions that they show. There is the tv aspect of all this. I will come back to you. The same question but cory booker. Cory booker is really interesting. He looks a little like bugs bunny. He has a big smile and really big eyes all the time. I refer to that as a wow expression because you are really alert to something. Surprise is an interesting emotion. It bifurcate. The positive version is the guy in the car commercial, the negative version is surprised i had to have a car accident on the way to work. Booker is on the Positive Side which is over the moon joy with a lot of surprise that leaves me wondering as a viewer and study of psychology, is there a possible car accident . I am not sure hes going to get there. The next debate is fascinating because you have biden on stage with cory booker on one side and kamala paris on the other, he was sandwiched between those two people, the most likely people on stage to attack him. On either side of the debate on next week, fascinating theatrics. They did a fair draw. It is an interesting position. I like cory booker a lot. I heard him on the radio and when i see him visually i know what youre talking about. Can i go back to 1933 . I have a blockbuster question for you. Maybe i will show surprise. My mouth is not going down. If you look at triumph of the will, i spent five years in germany. I am a german speaker. As i lived in germany i watched germany change. I have watched people change for obvious reasons on material, spiritual and otherwise. One thing i noticed about german politicians, they have one face. Angela merkel has one face. Go back to gerhard schroeder, he had a Ronald Reagan vibe. He was always that way. Whenever the media showed these german politicians, they were very uptight. I always felt it was a play. German politicians, this is the way they use the media. In response to the modern politician in america it seems american politician is much more natural. Am i right . We have Yankee Ingenuity and like to go places. During world war ii, talking about that era, the germans were most afraid of patton. They had no idea what he was going to do the next day. They knew germany would advance 3 miles and stop and that is what he would do to them every day. Patton might go four miles or 40 miles or any direction. They did not know. German politician posthitler, ayer is off limits. You cant go to anger. Since anger and happiness are you two prevalent emotions, they are 70 of the emotions human beings typically show. They only have one other place to go by default whether they feel it or not. If it were anger you know. One of the things i didnt get to this evening with that harshness measure. I had to be honest, the tv era, it went all the way back to hitler who made use of cameras in his propaganda but just took the harshness access alone, if i took the harshness access alone, various eras of the last century, no era had a higher score than the 1930s when we had stalin, hitler, mussolini, very harsh era. As i track the recent years we are climbing back to harshness. We have been since the great recession. I have a friend in germany and i said why dont you come to america . She said i wont come back to america until trump is gone. I asked, with so many germans i talked to, why do you have this man in office . It is because he resembled hitler so much. He was so needy, so unhappy. Trump is of german heritage. When german politician, anger is not offlimits in terms of going back to it. One last question and we will wrap it up, one more as we exhaust the questions. Lets not get in on hitler. I will try not to, what do we do is voters to be aware how you cultivate the knowledge of the trade so we can be better voters . These, if we look at that, these are traits that make such leaders, how do we train ourselves to recognize it and avoid it in the future . I will give you different ways of answering the question, it goes back to happiness. I am open and willing to embrace and compromise and tremendous gridlock in washington, no ability to move forward across the aisle. Happiness would be a better index of doing that. A decent correlation to openness i mentioned earlier that tends to go well with success in the white house so that is one thing. On the debate stage i look for their ability to wield skepticism, the ironic smile as opposed to anger or disgust or contempt when putting down the other party. Two other things, obviously we are wishing mightily for the truthful leader which is tricky because you fdr was not terribly truthful but a very successful leader all the same. Not sure you can go there. Facial coatings have not helped, theres no lying muscle in the face. If there is a god he or she did not make it that simple. The other thing i would look for his Kamala Harris in the debates, look for people who are you noting. When you emote you show you are motivated, shows that you care, that you are involved. Anger as the driving emotion combined with a lot of motivation and this person is a, khasi pilot whos going to get us in trouble. Other emotions are gentler, happiness, sadness in some cases, that is nice. I didnt talk much about buttigieg. When i watched him, he did well in his campaign. I watched him in the first debate, the issues in south bend, he did not come to the spin room after the debate. He said i had enough in my day, im going to go away after words. When i watched him it wasnt just that he was short but relatively speaking he does not emote on stage. For the sake of your character whatever you want to do you dont want to come across as too clark is. One of the most famous moment is the question of the caucus and how he responded in a national matter. I am not saying buttigieg is too caucus but he wants to leave a good amount of emotional space between that example and how he goes forward on the campaign trail. You have been a wonderful audience, thank you very much. Recently on booktv, dale beer and discussed the online message, heres a portion of that program. Horrible online spaces, something awful is one and it gets worse from there. These are Message Boards where people have congregated 10, 15, 20 years and only gotten more and more unhappy to the extent where now they are there and angry and murderous for 2 of the last shootings. Someone in california and also the one in new zealand, the christchurch shootings, those shootings came off of these websites and the same population a lot of them have become fascist, so deeply disenchanted with their existence that they have decided they want to destroy civilization and rebuild it as a fascist fantasy. The new book is it came from something awful. Watch the rest of his talk, visit our website, booktv. Org and type his name, and the book title into the search bar at the top of the page. Heres a look at some books being published this week. Former secretary of defense jim metis, recounting his military career and his views on leadership in callsign chaos. Former Senior Advisor to bill clinton and Hillary Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal continues his multivolume biography on the life of Abraham Lincoln in all the powers of earth. Defending israel, Alan Dershowitz reflects on efforts to advocate for israel over the last 40 years. Historians recall the life of publishing magnate conde nast. Also published this week in super pump, New York TimesTechnology Correspondent mike isaac examines the rise of uber. Apple bomb profiles the economist who pushed for free market following world war ii in the economists hour. In power grab, former utah republican congressman Jason Chaffetz offers his thoughts on efforts by democrats to undermine donald trump. And proof of conspiracy, abramson argues donald trump has conspired with foreign leaders. Look for these titles in bookstores and look for many of these authors on booktv on cspan2. Booktv recently went to capitol hill to ask members of congress about their reading list. Marylands eighth congressional district. What are you reading . First i am reading this multivolume set by Sidney Blumenthal, the Political Rights of Abraham Lincoln. I love reading all the lincoln books that i can get my hands on. What is great about this is a political journalist as well as political actor and speechwriter. He looks at lincoln in an enormously sym