We’ve had Presidents of many personality types over the years.
Carter was a conflicted idealist. He ran as a man Americans could trust but he lacked the confidence to maintain that trust.
Reagan was an conciliatory optimist who focused on the big picture more than on the details. He ran as a man who could bring Americans around to an optimistic vision.
Clinton was a sympathetic accomodating but impulsive figure. He felt the pain of others, sought their approval and often jumped into situations without a clear plan.
Bush was a compassionate no-nonsense guy. He focused on action and didn’t appreciate nuance. He was often focused on the present to the exclusion of considering mistakes in the past or avoiding mistakes in the future.
Each President had their own advantages and disadvantages along with their personality type.
George Bush could choke on a pretzel and no big deal. Carter was attacked by a feral rabbit and his manhood was called into question.
With over a year in office we’ve have a better feel for the personality of the current President. While President Obama is inspiring and authoritative, he does show some personality weaknesses. President Obama’s personality is self-reverential and calculating to an interesting degree. What is interesting is that in natural circumstances he prefers to focus on his own feelings, thoughts and desires. He doesn’t weave stories to make a point like Clinton or Reagan.
Unlike Clinton or Reagan, Obama doesn’t do sympathy, even when that is what’s necessary. In times of disaster or suffering, Obama is authoritative and cold. He never rhetorically or emotionally descends to commiserate with Americans. I don’t believe the President could show sympathy or shift his inward focus without appearing insincere.
I believe Obama’s lack of sympathy, obsessively inward focus and difficulty connecting to those in pain is his Achilles’ heal. However as yet this weakness hasn’t been effectively attacked. John McCain certainly wasn’t the one to do it in 2008.
The question I think Republicans should consider is who can draw a contrast with Obama that draws out his personality weaknesses?
Who would upon standing next to Obama make his lack of sympathy and self-reverential nature more obvious and less tolerated?
I’m of a mind that an individual with a personality more like Bill Clinton’s would be President Obama’s toughest opponent in 2012.
February 27th, 2010 at 1:01 am
Not that this necessarily applies to any of the current GOP candidates, but a candidate with a good sense of humor (and an ability to laugh at himself) would not only draw a refreshing contrast to Obama he would get under Obama’s skin.
I was actually thinking about this earlier today. Remember when Reagan uttered the “there he goes again” line in 1980? Or when he told Mondale in ’84 he would not make age an issue in this campaign because it was unfair to draw attention to Mondale’s youth and inexperience? Those lines worked great against Carter & Mondale, but against someone as brittle and tightly wound as Obama those kind of jabs would be devastating.
February 27th, 2010 at 3:38 am
Doug,
What I think you’re describing there is a classic narcissist. Lack of sympathy, obsessively inward focus, incredibly self-referential AND self-reverential. I’m no psychologist, but it seems obvious to me.
As to your question, narcissists are pretty easily manipulated, given their incredible and unwavering obsession with their own image. I think Sean gives a good example of how one can draw a contrast. In regard to self-deprecating humor, Huck is a natural, of course. In that regard, he and Obama are opposite. I could not imagine Obama ever sincerely poking fun at or mocking himself. On those attempts he has (like at some black tie roast) it is really lame and is always either non-personal, or premised on his awesomeness.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:17 am
I think you are correct on the president’s weaknesses, Mr. Forrester, but I do not think the American public recognizes this yet. His ability to tell emotional and personalized stories still holds sway.
I agree with Sean P- a sense of humor would be best. Huckabee would do well in that particular portion of a debate against Obama.
February 27th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Well what about a former governor of Arkansas with a populist feel, Mike Huckabee anyone?
February 27th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
I kind of peg Huckabee as a narcissist too. How weird. I think a Ron Paul would drive Obama nuts. He drives the rest of us nuts, right?
February 27th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
Seriously now, I think competence would be the ultimate weapon against Obama, not so much humor. Put Obama next to a competent individual, and the contrast would immediately hit you square between the eyes. Remember the health care summit segment where Ryan used real numbers and bold speech to explain to Obama what was actually in his own plan? Obama could only glower and move on. He looked really bad, and bad tempered too.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
A Glenn Beck would use humor against Obama. But it might unintentionally make an Obama type look like the serious-minded candidate. It would be very, very easy to illustrate Obama’s incompetence and rigid ideology in a debate setting that is moderated fairly. (good luck with that)
February 27th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
…illustrate his incompetence by squaring him off against a Paul Ryan or a Romney type. It would be big man, little man.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
Doug,
Of the criteria you laid out, I think Huckabee best fits the bill.