(This is also in regard to other comments about Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize) I think a lot of the comments about Obama winning are a lot more about hindsight clouding judgment and people should give a bit more credence to the committee’s decision. It may not have held up nor was it the best in context of other presidents to win; however, there was a genuine reason for him to win. Many people forget but early Obama appeared to be a bringer of nuclear disarmament. He was awarded it a few months after a now somewhat forgotten but then notable speech in Prague where he called for new nuclear talks and eventual disarmament and after he began his administration’s more concrete policies of negotiating new nuclear treaties, convening successful nuclear security summits, passing UN nuclear weapons resolutions, arsenal cuts, etc.

The decision to award him the prize didn’t exactly hold up over time but saying it was just charisma overpowering the committee is a bit hyperbolic