Understanding and evaluating presidents’ performance often poses challenges for political experts. The nation votes one president at the time and each presidency faces different tests. The environments surrounding a presidency have a tremendous impact on the success and failure of that presidency. In addition, the president exercises his power through a check and balance system embody in the Constitution. As stated in (Collier 1959), the Constitution created a government of “separated institutions sharing power.” As a result, a president works with others institutions of the government to shape the nation’s agenda. Thus, determining a presidential performance becomes difficult, especially when it comes to comparing the performance among presidencies. …show more content…
Should it be evaluated in term of “success” or “influence?” (Collier 1959), suggested that some studies have chosen to focus on success while others have examined the influence. However, most studies have a focus on the presidential success arguing that, emphasis on presidential influence is too narrow. On the other hand, (Collier 1959) argued that, given the problem of the government responsiveness in a system of separate institutions sharing power, it is important to analyze the conditions that might lead to the presidential success rather the success alone. Nonetheless, to find out why success is studied more frequently than influence, required an understanding of the difference between success and influence. According to (Collier 1959), Success evaluated presidential performance in terms of the passage of the legislation supported by the President. Influence emphasizes the president’s ability to alter the actions of others. In other words, success measures the outcome (Example of Roll call votes) whereas, influence measures the pre-outcome (The president ability’s to gather people behind his vision, ability to control or persuade members of Congress, the ability to convince others to do as he …show more content…
Roll call votes, number of bills signed and the numbers of presidential vetoes present an interesting method of measuring success. They are quantitative in nature and present a statistical relationship . As Dr. Whitlock put it: “There is a reason Americans prefer football over soccer – we love score. “ Although focus on success is frequent and relatively easy to measure, some scholars including (Collier 1959) have argued that it fails to capture the full picture surrounding the passage of a piece of legislation. For example, as (Collier 1959) remarked, the passage of a piece of legislation signed by the president may be different than the original bill introduced in the Congress. Yet, the president can still claim political victory after the bill passes. In addition, during divided government, when party control is divided between the branches, success in terms of outcomes measures may fail to capture the full picture of which player was really preventing the objective of the
Examining the conceptualizations and theories of Neustadt and Skowronek’s in comparative perspective, this essay makes the principal argument that both of these theories only represent partial explanations of how success and efficiency is achieved in the context of the Presidency. With Neustadt focusing saliently on the President’s micro-level elite interactions and with Skowronek adopting a far more populist and public opinion-based framework, both only serve to explain some atomistic facets of the Presidency. As such, neither is truly collectively exhaustive, or mutually exclusive of the other, in accounting for the facets of the Presidency in either a modern day or historical analytical framework. Rather, they can best be viewed as complementary theories germane to explaining different facets of the Presidency, and the different strengths and weaknesses of specific Administrations throughout history.
As the President of the United States, a president have powers that other members of the government do not. Presidential power can be defined in numerous ways. Political scientists Richard Neustadt and William Howell give different views on what is presidential power. These polarized views of presidential powers can be used to compare and contrast the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Of the most powerful people in the world, the President of the United States of America hits the top of the list. Even though the policy agendas that presidents set as they take office often go unfulfilled, the office of President is still one of the most envied spots to have. But why could this be? It is because the United States is the most powerful nation in the world and with the President as the leader, he is said to have the most power in the world ("Top Ten Most Powerful Countries in the World"). With power comes responsibility and with this position he must govern a country while abiding by the rules.
The U.S. president is a person deemed to be the most fitting person to lead this country through thick and thin. It’s been such a successful method that it has led to 43 individual men being put in charge of running this country. However, this doesn’t mean that each one has been good or hasn’t had an issue they couldn’t resolve when in office. But no matter what, each one has left a very unique imprint on the history and evolution of this nation. However when two are compared against one another, some rather surprising similarities may be found. Even better, is what happens when two presidents are compared and they are from the same political party but separated by a large numbers of years between them. In doing this, not only do we see the difference between the two but the interesting evolution of political idea in one party.
success. In many aspects, he can be regarded as the first modern president, as he confronted and
Back in 1980, Republican president nominee Ronald Reagan pledged throughout his campaign that it was his goal to “restore the great, confident roar of American progress, growth and optimism”. Restoration, reinvigoration, and reclamation of values believed to be lost by the presidential treachery he was succeeding. Fast forward to 2008, Democratic president nominee Barack Obama did not see a need for restoration, he saw a need for new waves with his slogan “change we can believe in” after the economic destruction by W. Bush. Being such dramatic foils, the two men represent different eras of American politics. The unprecedented election of Obama severed Reagan’s seemingly everlasting legacy, signaling real changes coming to the presidency. The “Reagan Revolution” is remembered as an era of conservatism and economic peace, while Obama’s terms are viewed with mixed emotions. Obama’s impact can definitely be argued, as political information was more readily accessible in his presidency than any other in history; thanks to new technology and social communications, but since time has passed, so can Reagan’s. The use of their presidential powers is what a president is remembered for. Assessing the ranges in their backgrounds, motivations, policy creation and execution, and overall achievements, one can determine
The president has a significant amount of power; however, this power is not unlimited, as it is kept in check by both the judicial and legislative branches. The president is held responsible for passing legislation that will improve the lives of everyday Americans, even though he shares his legislative powers with Congress. The sharing of power acts as an impediment to the president’s ability to pass legislation quickly and in the form it was originally conceived. However, Americans do not take this into account when judging a president, as they fully expect him to fulfill all of the promises he makes during his campaign. By making promises to pass monumental legislation once elected without mentioning that Congress stands as an obstacle that must be hurdled first, the president creates unrealistic expectations of what he can fulfill during his time in office (Jenkins-Smith, Silva, and Waterman, 2005). A president is expected to have the characteristics that will allow him to efficiently and effectively lead the nation and to accomplish the goals he set during his campaign (Jenkins-Smith et al., 2005). There have been a handful of presidents that have been immortalized as the ideal person to lead the United States and if a president does not live up to these lofty expectations the American public will inevitably be disappointed. Since every president is expected to accomplish great things during his presidency, he is forced to created and project a favorable image through unrealistic promises. The combination of preconceived ideas of the perfect president and the various promises made by presidential candidates during their campaign create unrealistic expectations of the president by the American public.
Political scientists have continually searched for methods that explain presidential power and success derived from using that power effectively. Five different approaches have been argued including the legal approach, presidential roles approach, Neustadtian approach, institutional approach, and presidential decision-making approach. The legal approach says that all power is derived from a legal authority (U.S. Constitution). The presidential roles approach contends that a president’s success is derived from balancing their role as head of state and head of government. The Neustadtian approach contends that “presidential power is the power to persuade“ (Neustadt, p. 11). The institutional approach contends that political climate and institutional relations are what determines presidential power. The last approach, decision-making, provides a more psychological outlook that delves into background, management styles, and psychological dispositions to determine where a president’s idea of power comes from. From all of these, it is essential to study one at a time in order to analyze the major components of each approach for major strengths and weaknesses.
In America, every citizen is guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Although each person is given these rights, it is how each person uses them that defines how successful they will be in America. There are several obstacles that some Americans face on their pursuit of happiness. In this country’s past, Americans lived by a very specific set of beliefs that valued the importance of hard work, faith, and family. As time progressed and America began to evolve as a nation, this capitalistic society no longer devoted itself to family and faith but rather success, and the pursuit of prosperity. The shift from dependence on tradition towards a society that values success and how people struggle to b successful when society makes it difficult marks a common theme in Lorraine Hansberry’s play, A Raisin in the Sun. Two of the main characters in this story Lena Younger (Mama) and her son Walter Lee directly reflect the shift from tradition to a focus on success and capital and the struggles they face in regards to racism. Mama and Walter Lee’s contrasting values about the American dream and the way in which they pursue their own dreams while facing racism exemplifies the shift from valuing tradition like in previous generations in America, to valuing success and prosperity like in more current generations.
Both the Clinton and Obama administrations expended considerable effort during their first term attempting to persuade Congress to pass major legislation which would reform the American Healthcare system. Both efforts were met with considerable public opposition. And yet, while the Clinton effort ultimately proved fruitless, Obama’s endeavor let to the passage of the Affordable Care Act. What can account for these differing outcomes? The history of the Clinton and Obama health care reform proposals indicates both the importance of political capital, and the limits of executive control over the development of legislation. The Affordable Care Act passed because Obama entered the Presidency with a larger degree of political support than President Clinton had, and more importantly, because he adopted a more successful
Robert Kennedy once said “Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total; of all those acts will be written the history of this generation”. Such truthful quotes like this need to be taken into thought, and our current or future presidents definitely need to take this quote into consideration. Our current and future presidents need to think how their actions will effect not only the present but the future of our country as well. Even if their endeavor may be small it will still be remembered in history of the people’s mind as a success or failure. But because our presidents don’t have a way of thinking that is similar to
Ranking presidential greatness is a process, which is largely based upon opinion and personal judgment. With any ranking system, whether based on subjective or objective criteria, judgment and opinion is required to determine which factors best serve as indicators or measurements of greatness. While opinion serves as a major part of the decision-making process, a factual framework is also intrinsic to the process of ranking presidential greatness. This framework serves as the basis on which comparisons are made and can include factors such as those related to historical events, presidential accomplishments, presidential performance, personal characteristics, etc. The central focus of the paper is to discuss presidential greatness. I will begin by examining the American public's general conception of presidential greatness and their apparent views regarding the subject. In the second half of the discussion, I will examine how scholars have attempted attempt to define greatness and rank presidents; I will also include my analysis and criticism their arguments. The subsequent focus of this paper is to present my own definition of presidential greatness and the categorization and ranking processes that I have devised. I will conclude by presenting the president who according to my definition qualifies as the greatest president.
Every citizen in the United States is a principal to one of the most powerful agents in the entire world, the president. And in order to avoid many principal-agent dilemmas, it must be necessary for the people to maintain control of their agent more than once every four years at the ballot box. This control takes the form of public opinion on a daily basis. How exactly does public opinion shape the expansive powers for the President of the United States? Is it more beneficial to the president for achieve policy goals or is it more necessary to constrain the already growing power of the presidency? Over time and through many technological advancements such as radio or internet, the president has become more available to the people and therefore the relationship between the two has become stronger. In numerous situations, this relationship has become a “two-sided blade” for power. Public opinion is inarguably the strongest check and balance of the presidential position and prevents the creation of grossly unpopular policies; however, there are certain situations where public opinion can be manipulated to gain greater informal power.
Based on the three polling outlets, more people disapprove of President Obama’s actions as the leader of the United States. Furthermore, in analyzing more previous polls produced by Gallup, it is evident that the trend has been in the direction of more disapproval among the American people. This occurrence is likely due to the President’s implementation of stricter gun regulation, and also the Affordable Care Act. However, Zogby gave the President a relatively high job performance rating due to a recent spike in job creation.
The true definition of success is the accomplishment of an aim or purpose. Although, many people have different perceptions of success. Success is judged by the individuals themselves. Success can be defined in many ways including: wealth, happiness, fame, etc. Success can be anything from material goods to concepts. It all depends on your concept and how you achieve your goals. You have to have persistence within yourself. Varying on your profession, you will need a certain skill level. Your definition of success can be suitable best for you, but not for others. It is about truly not giving up, reaching your full potential, and self-fulfillment.