What experience or qualities make an effective President?
Asked by
janbb (
63257)
September 26th, 2013
Thinking sadly about my disappointment with Obama’s effectiveness, even given the rough hand he’s been dealt. Wondering where the inspirational qualities that led me to vote for him have gone. Clinton seemed to have more of the grit and common touch and be more effective – although he certainly had other issues. And there have been more and less effective Republicans.
I’m not looking for this to devolve into a party squabble; really trying to suss out what personal or political qualities a President needs. (LBJ was a bastard but he got good things done.)
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
14 Answers
None of the above, like anything, one just has to jump in and DO a job.
Regardless of credentials/experience. If we all learn from our mistakes and wish to apply a psychological, philosophical and “spiritual” dimension to our respective paths, we should refrain from judging unless we have walked a mile in the presidential shoes.
I for one, would not ever want the position of president. It is always a damned if you do, damned if you don’t dichotomy, and like all situations, the good is often completely dismissed for any bad.
Armchair politics do not qualify nor hold any credibility unless one has actually been the president themselves, and even then, given the myriad of issues involved, even an ex president may not have the experience of what the current president is facing.
I think that, not unlike armchair sports fanatics, that unless you have been up to bat or running from the defensive, ones opinions of how and what “should” be done are moot.
A high order of reason, intelligence and empathy.
@rojo And yet, I feel Obama has those qualities but is unable to sell his message…or something.
This is a systemic problem. I wonder if even LBJ could accomplish anything in this toxic environment.
I hope this doesn’t bite me in the ass by saying this but I’ve been paying attention to Obama for sometime and I feel he is a one-sided president, reason why I say that is that is that he portrays a man with so much passion and content, but I feel nothing has really been solidified. Now, I have shared my views before and people have said that the issues in the USA are beyond him which is true, which justify his appeals to the American people, however I still feel he can do much more for the USA than what he’s letting on, which makes me question him…........
I feel a president needs an iron hand on issues, backbone, and also passion, Obama has the passion where’s the iron hand?
The presideent has to be a good leader and a good manager. It’s not so much the ideas you bring to the table but rather how you present them, how well you are able to convince those that don’t always agree with you to at least give them a try. Management is a skill like any other. Obama has never been in a position to develope it. He is an opposition candidate. He performs better when opposing the position of his rivals than he does in promoting his own. Unfortunately Obama rose to power too fast. He never learned how to bring people with him so instead has used the power of the presdency to force his position on the populace.
Govenorships have historicaly been good experience for the presidency and provide the management experience required. We’ve had partisan differences before but never on the scale that we see today. Negotiation and management are simply skills he’s never had to develop.
@Jaxk I finally gave you a GA!
@Jaxk I agree with some of what you wrote, but I disagree that “so instead has used the power of the presdency to force his position on the populace.”
Instead, I think he has not tried hard enough to use the power of the presidency to force the populace’s position on the political opposition.
@glacial
I suppose we could argue about which were popular decisions and which were not but that’s not the problem. He tends to use force as the weapon of choice rather than persuasion. That’s the sign of an immature and ineffective manager.
@Jaxk If your government were actually a business, the “manager” would be able to fire all those in middle management who were lazy, belligerent, and deliberately undermining the success of the company. That is not an option here. It’s not realistic to compare the government to a business (as if its goals were even compatible to that of a business).
~The ability to become an effective scapegoat.
An effective president would be a combination of Truman and Eisenhower. We would have a good economy and be financially solvent! I think many old school party loyalties are a little out of touch with reality. People cling to the past when it was done differently. They get a romanticized view and dream of that day again. They remain loyal, foolishly loyal to the absolute garbage and empty suits we see today. It’s over guys, it’ll never happen. Time to move on. Become an Independent. Just saying.
See the greater good and have the courage to say no to (wealthy) special interest groups.
@glacial
Not true. The skills required to run a large organization are the same regardless of the sector. Nothing special about government.
Answer this question