Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's sort of a silly question. Nobody on here is going to agree fully on anything.
Is Obama a leader?
Right wingers will say NO!
Independents will say that's a stupid question. Of course he is or we wouldn't have come anywhere near being a President.
Left wingers will say he's a great leader.
I'll say it's a silly question and that he's made some big decisions while in office, killed OBL and while you might not like the legistlation, passing Healthcare reform was an achievement much bigger than anything that was passed by Bush and several Presidents before him.
Quote:
Forget the source. Tell me why you believe he qualifies as a true leader. Who would you compare him to? We wouldn't be having this debate if he actually was a true leader, right? Or wrong? Shouldn't his approval rating be more positive if he in fact was a leader?
I think you mean to whom would you compare him. We'd be having this debate regardless. The morons on the right/left will always think that a President who is from the left/right is always a bad leader.
Approval Rating = f(Economy) even if the Economy isn't the President's fault.
obama isnt a presidant hes an idiot the day he stops meeting celebs all the time meeting the queen every 3 months and traveling round the world for nothing rhen il prob start li..........no i wont. and i thought david camren was bad atleast hes a leader
hes also a bounty
That's sort of a silly question. Nobody on here is going to agree fully on anything.
Is Obama a leader?
Right wingers will say NO!
Independents will say that's a stupid question. Of course he is or we wouldn't have come anywhere near being a President.
Left wingers will say he's a great leader.
I'll say it's a silly question and that he's made some big decisions while in office, killed OBL and while you might not like the legistlation, passing Healthcare reform was an achievement much bigger than anything that was passed by Bush and several Presidents before him.
I think you mean to whom would you compare him. We'd be having this debate regardless. The morons on the right/left will always think that a President who is from the left/right is always a bad leader.
Approval Rating = f(Economy) even if the Economy isn't the President's fault.
I get what you're saying, but I disagree. There's a difference between doing the job of POTUS and actually being a true leader....one that the people look at as one who amasses a popular following through natural means, not because of politics. We all know a true leader when we see one. The question is not about policy...the question is derived from genuinely being curious if American's perceive the President as a real leader in the sense that past great leaders have been viewed.
He has stood by healthcare reform, and he was elected largely on that platform. People wanted wider access to healthcare, and that is going to happen.
As for the "War on terror", I think Obama deserves an A+. How many high-profile terrorist attacks have been thwarted on his watch by the federal government? The Xmas tree bomber in Portland was stopped by an FBI sting. This was a direct result of better coordination among the CIA, Homeland Security and the FBI, which Obama supported. And nailing bin Laden was pretty decent, no?
He ordered air strikes on Libya to prevent a massacre in Benghazi. That's a leadership move, period. It was unpopular, but he did it because it was right. Leadership.
The economy is the one area where you'd argue he has failed, but then again, no president has ever been able to turn the economy around by fiat. TARP and the stimulus were needed to save the banking system and prevent unemployment from topping 12% -- this is a view widely held by qualified economists. Obama put the stimulus through, and it was unpopular. Leaders do the unpopular thing if they think it will help the country.
Obama is an excellent leader, and the people largely give him credit for that. Think about it: Under what circumstances would any president have a 50% approval rating while the unemployment rate is over 10%?? I can't think of one since FDR, particularly in the modern TV age where leaders are beat to death, 24/7.
I'll just comment on the things that really stood out for me
Folks wanted a public option with health care reform. And,
to reign in Big Pharm. What happened was no public option and a special deal with drug companies.
What leadership skills did Obama show there, except to say he never campaigned on a Public option
No one wanted dictated mandatory purchase of private
insurance by the government with an IRS fine to boot.
Crossing the line there, big time
On the war on terror, he deserves an F-. Bombing countries like Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and killing more
civilians is not only morally wrong, but it encourages more, not less, hatred toward the US.
For one who campaigned so heavily on hope and change,
he has continued all foreign/war - Bush/Cheney policies,
and then some. He has started another war/conflict in Libya. He is pompous enough to think he neither needs Congressional approval, or the American folks approval simply by stating its a NATO operation for humanitarian effort Of course, Hillary Hawk had to whisper that in his ear
That's not leadership, that's following a continued agenda
already set in place, by previous administrations.
As for the popularity rating during our recent higher unemployment - all I have to say is;
I am no fan of polls and no one I talk to thinks
President Obama is doing an okay job.
His expansion of the Department of Education - that's a whole other thread. I'll simply say: Dollars don't make scholars.
While everyone has their own idea of what a leader is, or
should be, following the status quo and never having a
strong hold on personal convictions does not describe it
for me. You may call President Obama a centrist, a leader - I just call it
Toein' The Line - and I'm tired of it
I get what you're saying, but I disagree. There's a difference between doing the job of POTUS and actually being a true leader....one that the people look at as one who amasses a popular following through natural means, not because of politics. We all know a true leader when we see one. The question is not about policy...the question is derived from genuinely being curious if American's perceive the President as a real leader in the sense that past great leaders have been viewed.
So what you're asking is for everybody to share your subjective viewpoint, where "we all know a true leader when we see one." What makes a leader and what makes good leadership is for most people a highly personal and subjective question. Some want leaders to take control of all details, others want leaders to stay exclusively on the big picture and allow their subordinates to take care of the details. In many ways, which you consider more effective is a personal opinion, because there are effective examples of each.
Your question is as though I posted a thread here saying "Can't we all agree that Chocolate ice cream is better than Vanilla ice cream?" It's a personal preference which you prefer, and whatever seemingly objective standards you have set up for your opinion are not definitive. Reasonable people can have differing objective measurements for what qualities they consider to be examples of good leadership. So when you ask if everybody can agree with you that "Obama is not a leader," what you're doing is asking everybody to adopt your subjective opinion.
So what you're asking is for everybody to share your subjective viewpoint, where "we all know a true leader when we see one." What makes a leader and what makes good leadership is for most people a highly personal and subjective question. Some want leaders to take control of all details, others want leaders to stay exclusively on the big picture and allow their subordinates to take care of the details. In many ways, which you consider more effective is a personal opinion, because there are effective examples of each.
Your question is as though I posted a thread here saying "Can't we all agree that Chocolate ice cream is better than Vanilla ice cream?" It's a personal preference which you prefer, and whatever seemingly objective standards you have set up for your opinion are not definitive. Reasonable people can have differing objective measurements for what qualities they consider to be examples of good leadership. So when you ask if everybody can agree with you that "Obama is not a leader," what you're doing is asking everybody to adopt your subjective opinion.
That's why you have the opportunity to counter my point, of which you have not done. If you read the OP, it clearly poses rhetorical questions that open the subject up for debate. All you've done is taken the title of the thread and based your response off of that. Re-read the post. It will do you some good. And then explain why you think he is or is not a true leader. I have stated my opinion....now...what's yours? That's the point of the thread.
That's why you have the opportunity to counter my point, of which you have not done. If you read the OP, it clearly poses rhetorical questions that open the subject up for debate. All you've done is taken the title of the thread and based your response off of that. Re-read the post. It will do you some good.
I'm objecting to the premise of your question, because you want everybody to agree with your subjective viewpoint.
Anyway, I read your OP before I posted. Here it is in its entirety:
Quote:
The more I think about the last two plus years, the more I struggle to find a domestic or international situation in which President Obama has stood out as a "true leader." This is not to say that the President has not made any difficult decisions. As President of the United States, difficult decisions are certainly part of the job. But there's a distinct difference between doing your job, and actually having the leadership qualities that emanate and resonate with the people you are leading.
Throughout humanity, there have been many natural-born leaders, as well as people who have grown to become effective leaders. With the Presidency, the learning curve is mighty steep for sure, but after more than two years in office, is it safe to concur that Barack Obama is niether a natural-born leader nor a person who has grown into the true definition of a leader?
To me, President Obama is a failed experiment. I'd be more than happy to give him credit if there were elements of his Presidency that convinced me that a true leader was at the helm. I personally have not seen anything that would give me that impression.
What say you?
You asked two questions in your OP:
-"is it safe to concur that Barack Obama is niether a natural-born leader nor a person who has grown into the true definition of a leader?"
-"What say you?"
"Clearly poses rhetorical questions?" Not really. I don't think your OP has a single thought that's distinct from the essence of your thread's title question.
You say that there's "a distinct difference between doing your job, and actually having the leadership qualities that emanate and resonate with the people you are leading," but that is again an entirely subjective standard.
To use an analogy, let's take the NHL. Every team has a captain, and many of the best captains are of course known for their strong leadership abilities. However, some of these captains have had their leadership characterized as leading by example, doing their job efficiently and well, and others are more passionate in the locker room and rile up their teammates emotions. Which of these leadership styles is more effective is an entirely subjective standard, and captains leading teams in both styles (and others) have won Stanley Cup championships.
So your rhetorical question in your OP of "what say you," garners a response from me of "That's a pretty silly and unreasonable question."
I'm objecting to the premise of your question, because you want everybody to agree with your subjective viewpoint.
Anyway, I read your OP before I posted. Here it is in its entirety:
You asked two questions in your OP:
-"is it safe to concur that Barack Obama is niether a natural-born leader nor a person who has grown into the true definition of a leader?"
-"What say you?"
"Clearly poses rhetorical questions?" Not really. I don't think your OP has a single thought that's distinct from the essence of your thread's title question.
You say that there's "a distinct difference between doing your job, and actually having the leadership qualities that emanate and resonate with the people you are leading," but that is again an entirely subjective standard.
To use an analogy, let's take the NHL. Every team has a captain, and many of the best captains are of course known for their strong leadership abilities. However, some of these captains have had their leadership characterized as leading by example, doing their job efficiently and well, and others are more passionate in the locker room and rile up their teammates emotions. Which of these leadership styles is more effective is an entirely subjective standard, and captains leading teams in both styles (and others) have won Stanley Cup championships.
So your rhetorical question in your OP of "what say you," garners a response from me of "That's a pretty silly and unreasonable question."
I"m 45 steps ahead of you. Perhaps I should have stated outright that everyone has a different leadership style so that the slower amongst us could regurgitate and think on that for a bit. But instead, I assumed that everyone knows that every person in a leadership position has a different leadership style. But to be clear...i'm not asking about Obama's leadership style. I"m asking if you believe that he qualifies ....in your eyes....as a true leader. It's really pretty simple. I'm not sure why you've made great strides to say nothing. Is he a true leader according to your standard or not? He does not merit "true leader" status in my eyes when compared to the great leaders in history...I made that abundantly clear in the OP and in subsequent posts. "What say you" was your chance to counter my point, but instead you went into the weeds over nothing.
To use an analogy, let's take the NHL. Every team has a captain, and many of the best captains are of course known for their strong leadership abilities. However, some of these captains have had their leadership characterized as leading by example, doing their job efficiently and well, and others are more passionate in the locker room and rile up their teammates emotions. Which of these leadership styles is more effective is an entirely subjective standard, and captains leading teams in both styles (and others) have won Stanley Cup championships.
So let's take your football analogy. Do you think Obama's
leadership skills are winning anything for America?
I think the "sport mentality" - who looks like a winner, got to be on that winning team;
it is exactly the reason we have ended up with our recent Presidential "leaders".
I use that term "leader" very loosely, when describing them
i remember aeroguy saying something similar about martin luther king awhile back, that he wasnt a true leader.
i just rolled my eyes, said what can you do and moved on, the rest of you should as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course, Hillary Hawk had to whisper that in his ear
