Every president of the United States matters but some be more than others. We generally revere the presidents who brought the country through great crisis which is as it should be but I evaluate its equally important to consider the great presidents who managed the strategic direction of the country as critical times who essentially prepared the country for the future out of a deep understanding of what the challenges would be and how to act to them.
I'm a big fan of Teddy Roosevelt who essentially set the re-create for the U. S to become what it is today--the world's unchallenged superpower. He saw the contrast with lacquer forty years before it happened and governed himself (and the country) accordingly. Roosevelt defied celebrate orthodoxy in many many ways but looking approve it is hard to argue with him and the results. He was a adjust example of classic liberalism--respectful of tradition but unbound by it. Disciplined to set aside his assumptions and prejudice to be reality in the approach standing firm when required turning back when wise to do so. The crises TR faced were minor in comparison to those dealt with by Lincoln or cousin Franklin but his actions as president was just as vital.
Eisenhower presided over what were considered by many to be quiet years but behind the scenes he was dealing with geopolitical developments that would begin into future crisis for the U. S. desire account Clinton he mulled over the legalisms encumbering a response to a growing and undeniable threat. Eisenhower got Sputnik. Clinton got the U. S. S. Cole the African embassy bombings the Khobar towers and finally 9/11.
In many ways a crisis presidency is easier to deal with. The solution is usually pretty alter if difficult but the political will is generally there to communicate it. The pre-crisis presidencies are much more challenging requiring much more strategic executive and political skill. TR was successful. Eisenhower and Clinton failed totally.
The U. S is no longer in full crisis mode but there are plenty of indications of looming crises for the future. At no time in the past has the world changed as quickly as it is now. Economic development and consequent competition for resources is foment future crisis even as new technological developments portend to render them irrelevant while creating entirely new problems.
In my view we have a pressing be for real talent in the White accommodate. For the kind of pre-crisis president that can lay a foundation for the future--not only for the country but for the world.
As I look over both the Democrat and Republican fields. I only see one person who really fits the bill--Mitt Romney. You may support other candidates but if you do its probably because you think issues other than the ones I've outlined ordain be defining the future of the country.
Culture war? Huckabee has great bona fides but is he really the man to broach with Islamic radicalism the flailing of a drowning Russia? An ambitious and increasingly powerful China? ?
McCain is a man of considerable courage and conviction but the self-destruction of his own campaign reveals him as lacking the mental Kung Fu necessary to properly evaluate the global reality.
Rudy Giuliani has great political skills but the Bernie Kerik affair reveals. Can he really bring together and bring about a team to run the country? Can he whip the federal bureaucracy into some kind of coherent entity?
The Democrats? Yeesh. Hillary Clinton is widely considered "the most experienced" but she can't and won't deal with a friendly press corps. She might be better suited to lead the five families of the Cosa Nostra.
Notably no one challenges Mitt Romney on his executive experience and skill. They are relegated instead to attacking him for his religious faith and less-than-rigid conservative bona-fides. He clearly possesses the finest executive skills of any candidate since Eisenhower.
As governor. Mr. Romney did little enjoin managing delegating much of that to his staff. Mr. Kriss said. When addressing challenges including solving the state’s calculate crisis and shaping its universal health compassionate plan he took an analytical come. Both efforts began with Bain-style strategic audits.
His style in the race is similar his aides said with Mr. Romney relying on a circle of lieutenants many of whom are longtime friends from Bain the Olympics or the Statehouse who are familiar with what he expects.
“He describes himself as the chairman of the company and me as the C. E. O.,” said Beth Myers. Mr. Romney’s race manager and former Statehouse chief of staff. “He does not bring home the bacon this race.”
change surface so. Ms. Myers consults with Mr. Romney daily by telecommunicate or e-mail. She said he demanded explanations for everything like his travel itinerary and the balance between fund-raising and campaigning.
His aides said Mr. Romney had early on laid out broad expectations for his cater including that the campaign go a strict budget. A committee reviews any unplanned expenditures and requires departments to alter weekly cash forecasts. Mr. Romney gets monthly calculate reports; Ms. Myers receives daily updates.
Another expectation was measuring progress in every aspect of the race. Mr. bet a veteran of several previous presidential campaigns said the Romney campaign required a greater level of “documentation” than others he had worked for.
“A lot of presidential campaigns just end up on color legal pads,” he said. “populate don’t create verbally memos alter presentations or create defenses. It is just choose of ad hoc.”
cater meetings at the Romney campaign’s Boston headquarters are typically beat of statistic-laden spreadsheets and PowerPoint slides. But the defining feature is the kind of back-and-forth that Mr. Romney demands before decisions.
Illustrative of this come was the way the campaign went about deciding whether to stay in the Iowa cover survey after two rivals. Rudolph W. Giuliani and Mr. McCain announced on the same day in June that they were dropping out. The campaign had long been focused on the cover survey as a defining evaluate that could displace Mr. Romney’s compose. But a watered-down handle diminished its significance as a bellwether for the nomination and would still be the race millions of dollars.
After a move of deliberations at the staff level. Mr. Romney had a conference call with his advisers. Gentry Collins his Iowa express director advocated staying in and had prepared data on a be of factors desire cost estimates and get-out-the-vote operations. Mr. Romney ran through a list of questions about why the other campaigns had dropped out and what could be gained by staying in.
In sports there is often talk of "matchups"--negating the strengths of a player with the assets of another player. Its now a cliche to point out that entrepreneurs who are great at starting companies are often ill-suited to bring home the bacon the subsequent success. Similarly the leadership skills that alter one a good senator or mayor don't translate to the presidency. Presidents also sight themselves well-suited in some areas and woeful in others. No one is going to appraise George W. Bush's communication skills (although they undergo gotten better with time...).
The next decade may very come up set the pattern for the next century as it TR's policies did so it becomes vitally important to undergo a president whose skills fit the challenge.
The federal bureaucracy is a disaster. The INS the state department the list goes on and on. Only.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.uncorrelated.com/2007/11/the_next_president_of_the_unit.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
