Obama's Tricky Character

      Defining Obama's character is quite tricky. He, at first would appear to have the Active-Positive character, but he may also have the Active-Negative character. Since it is such a close call, there must be a kind of neutral character. Picture the President's character like a political compass. A president can be more active or lean less active, or they can be more positive or a little bit more negative. However, on the compass, the closer a president is to the x-axis or the y-axis or the origin of it, the more neutral they will be. Obama seems to try to remain as optimistic as possible. One example of this was, according to PBS Frontline, when he tried to remain optimistic after going to the Republican Caucus in Congress to find out that they wouldn't budge. Staying optimistic was only in Obama's character. He also felt satisfaction whenever he got something accomplished. He also tried to compromise with Republicans and he did that by talking to them in their own congressional caucus and by trying to compromise with John Boehner to avoid the Fiscal cliff. However at the same time, it appears as if he felt discouraged by the Congress and Republicans in the House. He really seemed to be discouraged and, at times a little power hungry in order to take action, which are signs that he has a negative attitude. He also at times is very partisan as shown by his weekly address on February 14'th as shown below, which shows negativity. However, that is a contradiction in that he tries to be as optimistic as possible, which puts his personality in that neutral zone as mentioned earlier. Obama also is definitely an active president. He is very ambitious in that he was, at the beginning of his term, trying to pass bill after bill, and then, according to PBS Frontline, tried to pass Obama care. He, at times, left things up to congress to get things done, but he uses his executive agencies and he suggests bills to Congress in order to take a lot of action. It is for that reason that I say he is active. Also, since he is active while having a neutral, but leaning positive personality based off of his actions, he is an Active-Neutral President. If he were to be in just one quadrant, he would most likely be an Active-Positive president. However, this will not make him useful in the current political climate in Washington. This is because he can be very aggressive towards the GOP and veto any bills they try to pass, which will result in less getting done. Also, Obama can be passive at times when he needs to be active. He also tries to bring compromise where the is none, which is a sign of a weaker leader when he can't bring compromise. It is due to his personality of being an aggressive leader when we need more of a passive leader and his little flaws in leadership skills that I say Obama's character is not a good fit for the current political climate. He especially did not help when he vetoed the Keystone XL Pipeline Bill. Also, he at times uses executive orders to get things done when he should use congress, which bad because he may choose to govern by executive orders instead of laws through congress because of how he is an aggressive leader. Therefore, because he is a bit too active with his leadership, his character is not the character in a  president we need in this political climate.

Now, for 2016, the voters should look for a president that is passive-positive. A passive positive president is one that is agreeable and cooperative, which is what both sides like to see. That was what helped Clinton gain a lot of popularity. They will also help to get rid of partisanship and will not be personally assertive by leaving things up to congress and to compromise. They will also help to keep the country optimistic by being optimistic himself. They may even help to get the economy going by letting compromise take place. However, this whole theory may not be useful to the average voter that will look for issues and vote based on them and not personality. Also, it will depend on the voter, because as we learned there are different types of voters, some of which will vote based off of which candidate looks more appealing. So to most voters, Barber's theory will not help them choose a president.