Let me introduce you to the meaning of “a cult of personality.” Yes, it is a kicking rock song by an awesome band, but it is also a phrase that has been around for a very long time. When a political leader lavishes praise on the people and gets them to do the leader’s will by making outlandish promises and associating the success of the country with the peoples’ belief in the leader, then you have a cult of personality. The United States is a diluted version of a cult of personality, and that is why our political system fails.

I was reading something somewhere recently that Gov. Paterson is an inspirational figure and that is why people should vote for him in the next election. My spine tingled with fear when I read this. Gov. Paterson is an inspirational figure. Because of his success, others feel that they can achieve success in their lives. This is awesome, and I hope Gov. Paterson continues to inspire people with his achievements. However, inspiration is the worst motivation to vote for someone that I can think of. Just because someone inspires you personally does not make them a great leader. It makes them the potential center of a cult of personality.

I am going to explain to everyone how Obama won and McCain lost, and that will hopefully illustrate my point. Look at Obama’s early campaign material. His slogans ran the gauntlet from “Washington outsider” to “man of the people.” He tried them all, and while he was trying all of these slogans his campaign people were gauging the responses to the various slogans. Out of nowhere, Obama became the candidate of change. That word, “change,” clicked with the masses, so Obama’s marketing team flew into action and instantly associated Obama with the popular word “change.”

McCain started as the maverick running with the Washington outsider Sarah Palin at his side. Well, the Obama campaign already established that being a Washington outsider was not popular. By the time McCain’s campaign figured that out and tried to create ties between Palin and Washington, DC, it was too late. Being a maverick is great for people who love western movies and Saturday morning cartoons, and it struck a chord with a large group of people, but the general population didn’t want a maverick. They wanted change. By the time McCain’s people realized this, it was too late.

So that is how Obama won, that is how Reagan won, that is how Clinton won and that is how W won. They found that thing that the masses could grab onto and ran with it. Those of us who can avoid getting swept up in campaign mania are few in number and our votes usually get lost in the shuffle. Sometimes the country gets lucky and the masses pick the better candidate, and sometimes the masses get it wrong and pick the lesser of the two candidates. You can insert your own political beliefs here if you want. I am staying out of that discussion.

So now Obama has asked Paterson to not run for office because Paterson could be ruining the Democratic party in New York state, and those inspired by Paterson hit the media outlets to express their outrage. Meanwhile Paterson’s approval rating is still extremely low and his policies are not popular. So what does that mean? It means that Paterson cannot find that thing that appeals to the general public that would sustain his popularity even through difficult times. He is by himself and fighting for political survival.

Inspiration is incredibly personal. Inspiration should motivate you to succeed, but it should not lead you to believe that the same person that inspires you to make your life better is also qualified to create laws and economic policy that will offer financial security to future generations. When you vote for a candidate, you should vote for the person you feel is the best person for the job. When you vote based on inspiration, you are voting for someone who you would like to see speak at a university meeting hall, or perform live music at the Palace, but you may not be voting for the person who you really think could do the best job.

Next time you cast a vote, ask yourself this question: “Does this person honestly possess the qualities needed to be an effective political leader?” If the answer is no, then vote for the person who does possess those qualities. If more people voted for the person they knew was best qualified to do the job rather than the person that inspires them to achieve personal success, then we may be able to right the ship after all.

George N. Root III is a Lockport resident. His columns appear every Wednesday. Send comments to georgeroot@verizon.net.