>I am saying that a blind following of a leader is a fascistic tendency and we're seeing that with Obama not that we are a fascist state (yet). And I would agree that we have a shallow electorate who judge charisma more than anything else and, IMHO, that's BAD.

Well if it is not for personal charisma and appearance, then it is for number of paid TV commercials. What is the difference really,
weather you have charisma to atract masses by your personality, or you have enough financial support to do stylish presidential campaign. Well Obama did have both and won lanslide (not in numbers but in public determination) , but what would be the difference if between two pale candidates you have choosen better advertised one ?

What looks to me is that this public determination is exactly what you have problem with. This itself does not amount to Fascisam, what does, is circumstances that led to such thing happening. Consider yourself lucky for having Obama as candidate. It could have been much much worse.

If Obama manage revert circumstances to the state of affairs, where you could ellect just enybody (as it was case in the past)
consider he did an outstanding job. If he manages to somehow change way system works, where ellecting people with character
and substance become norm, then then he will become trully historical figure.

I hope he manages second.

Cheers :)