National Journal: Obama Like Ike

[dennis4868]

Barack Obama consistently takes an offstage approach to presidential leadership. Is it serving him well?

In 2008, many of Barack Obama’s supporters thought they might be electing another John F. Kennedy. But his recent maneuvers increasingly suggest that they selected another Dwight Eisenhower.

That’s not a comment on President Obama’s effectiveness or ideology, but rather on his conception of presidential leadership. Whether he is confronting the turmoil reshaping the Middle East or the escalating budget wars in Washington, Obama most often uses a common set of strategies to pursue his goals. Those strategies have less in common with Kennedy’s inspirational, public-oriented leadership than with the muted, indirect, and targeted Eisenhower model that political scientist Fred Greenstein memorably described as a “hidden hand” presidency.

This approach has allowed Obama to achieve many of his domestic and international aims—from passing the health reform legislation that marked its stormy first anniversary this week to encouraging Egypt’s peaceful transfer of power. But, like it did for Eisenhower, this style has exposed Obama to charges of passivity, indecisiveness, and leading from behind. The pattern has left even some of his supporters uncertain whether he is shrewd—or timid. On most issues, Obama has consciously chosen not to make himself the fulcrum. He has identified broad goals but has generally allowed others to take the public lead, waited until the debate has substantially coalesced, and only then announced a clear, visible stand meant to solidify consensus. He appears to believe he can most often exert maximum leverage toward the end of any process—an implicit rejection of the belief that a president’s greatest asset is his ability to define the choices for the country (and the world).

The rest of the article is here...http://nationaljournal.com/columns/political-connections/obama-a-lot-like-ike-20110324

[unblock]

1. he is, first and foremost, a concensus builder, not an ideologue.

he looks at the power and voices around him and finds the middle of the muddle and strives for that. this means he's good at getting SOMETHING passed, but he's easily manipulated in terms of WHAT gets passed.

the health insurance mess is a classic example. on the one hand, it was an impressive accomplishment that ANYTHING passed. even the great clinton(s) failed miserably at this. on the other hand, what we got had some good but many gaps, delays, weaknesses, and controversy because obama decided that he need to get the insurance companies on board early, so he couldn't move them tooo far.


those upset with obama for not staking out ideological positions early just don't get him. for him, ideology is part of the campaign, not part of governance.

[dennis4868]

2. That's a pretty good...

description of Obama....I do disagree that he gets manipulated in terms of what gets passed....he is much more of a fighter than we think he is....I have heard this from people who know him very well......

[VoteProgressive]

4. People that know him very well......

really? Example please. Sounds like "I know a guy who knows a guy".

He started WAY LOW with Health Care and Prescription Drugs.

And caved immediately on raising taxes on the rich without even firing a shot.

Obama has looked really gullible with being friendly with the GOP. And remember, us losing so many house and senate seats was under Obama's leadership! He has to take part of that blame.

[Jumping John]

5. Sounds like the way Fox News reports

[VoteProgressive]

8. Wow, brilliant analysis. Thanks!

[DFab420]

6. Not really

First off, you always lose seats in the house and senate if your party wins the Presidential year cycle.

Also, caved on the tax cuts? For extending the tax cuts President Obama got

- A better tax credit for higher education stays in place. There is good news for parents and students paying college tuition because the American Opportunity tax credit is now available through December 31, 2012. Background

-A higher child and dependent care credit will still be available for two more years. If you have expenses for care of your under-age-13 children while you work, you may be eligible to take a credit

- new payroll tax cut will be created for 2011. Regardless of an individual’s income, the employee share of the Social Security tax withheld from wages will drop from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent up to the taxable wage ceiling of $106,800. Doctors making over the ceiling will realize a saving of $2,136. The new law does not affect the employers matching share of Social Security tax which remains at 6.2 percent up to the ceiling of $106,800.

-Lower tax rates for all individuals will stay in place. For 2011 and 2012, the new law extends individual tax rates at 10, 15, 25, 33 and 35 percent. Without the new law, rates were scheduled to increase to 15, 28, 31, 36 and 39.6 percent, respectively

Source:
http://cpas4docs.com/2011/02/01/two-year-extension-of-bush-era-tax-cuts-payroll-relief-estate-tax-compromise/


So let me get this straight.. You were in favor of letting the tax uts expire for all US citizens, which would have bumped up tax rates for lower class famile 5% to 14% but only the rich 4.9%??

Give me a break, take that meme and go peddle it somewhere else.

[VoteProgressive]

7. LOL......wow, you really are not a fighter either.....

First off, you NEVER mentioned health care or the drug company deal. Figures. And what about his financial team? Proud of them also?

Also, he could have got the Tax deal anytime. How about he actually TRIES to get the tax increase before giving in?

He is too busy talking about Boehners sweeping his dads stores floor to actually call Boenher out for not giving a shit about America.

The guy ran as a fighter and ended up being a caver.

[DFab420]

9. ok.

I didn't mention health care because you didn't even have say anything I could rebuttal other then "Healthcare bad!!" and it's a bit stupid to have to argue something that as a progressive you should see is a helpful and useful law. I avoided it because it didn't warrant a response.

Also. HOW could he have "got the tax deal" any time? Like seriously, I am asking how you see it that the political landscape would have allowed for that?

Your comments are empty and critiques as vague and meme-ish as possible.

If, maybe if, you could come up with an actual argument, an actual factual point, then we could talk.

And what about his financial team? I love that fact that Larry Summers is gone and Elizabeth Warren is now leading the Consumers Protection Board yes, yes I am. I am also proud of the fact that GM isn't bankrupt also. Are you?

[VoteProgressive]

10. This is what I find interesting.....

How the Dems can be like the GOP when their guy is in office. Never complain and love everything.

You can think the health care bill is the best he could have gotten. It is hard for MOST logical people to say that when we didn't try to get anything else.

And the guy I knew who was running in 2008, who looks a lot like the president, who I was a maxed out donor for, seemed like the type of guy who would go on TV daily and tell the american public about the tax cuts for the rich and explain it daily. And not make a deal behind closed doors that he loved without confronting them once!!!

Obama DID NOTHING to dig into the criminal acts by the banking industry. Do yourself a favor and watch "Inside Job". I am sure you will walk away with a even happier version of the story you have in your head. Most unbiased people realize the Obama administration did nothing to go after these crooks. And kept the same idiots on board from the start.

I will never vote GOP, so stop your whining. You have my vote. Just none of my money. I fell for it the first time and am too smart to fall for it the second.

[JoePhilly]

3. It is an effective leadership approach to managing a highly contentious group.

Groups that are highly polarized and divided into camps struggle to make decisions. You end up with lots of ego based activity, posturing, blustering, passive aggressive behavior, so forth.

The "hidden hand" is an effective way to get such a group to make decisions.

I joined an organization that was like this a few years back. Very contentious, divided into camps, unable to make a decision and stick to it.

What I found was that they would regularly go into a room and hold a meeting intended to make some decision. And they would fail. Or they would agree to disagree. Or one side would claim they would do something, then later find a reason not to.

The only way to get them to move forward was to work separately with the factions and get some agreement from them on specific points. Use that to construct a framework for making decisions, get agreement (again separately) on that, and then give the players credit for the solution.

Importantly, this is just one leadership style, there are others, and the right one to use does vary from situation to situation.

Good leaders know which leadership styles they tend to prefer, but also learn other leadership styles because at times you need them.