• Font Size    
E-mail

Close Window E-mail This Page

Good Question: Leadership: Ideals Or Results?

Required fields are marked with an asterisk(*)



The information you provide will be used only to send the requested e-mail and will not be used to send any other e-mail communications. Read more in our Privacy Policy

Send E-mail

   Print     Share +   

Good Question: Leadership: Ideals Or Results?

(WCCO) Politics has been designed as the art of compromise. However, too much compromise and not enough backbone isn't what most Americans say they want in a leader. So what is more important in a president: ideals or results?

"I think I want someone who wants to get stuff done," said one woman at the Minnesota State Fair.

"I'd stick to my principles," said another man.

As leader of the free world, we want the president to stand above mere politics, but we also want progress and results.

"Americans want it all," said Dr. Larry Jacobs, Director of the Center for Politics at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute for Public Affairs.

"We want a visionary to inspire us. On the other hand, we want a practical president, someone who's effective, who will make our lives better," he said.

This conflict shows up in public opinion polls, where 75 percent of people told Pew Research in 2007 they have a positive opinion of politicians who are willing to compromise. However, 67 percent said they have a high opinion of politicians who are willing to stick with positions, "even if unpopular."

"I think you have to have a combination of the two together, one has to serve the other," said a woman at the fair.

"The very good presidents can be visionary and practical. Ronald Reagan is a good example. He'd inspire and then go cut a deal with democrats," said Jacobs.

Of course, the balance isn't easy. If presidents go too far away from the principals toward the practical, it can appear unseemly.

"It does, and we had some Presidents like that," said Jacobs, citing Lyndon Johnson as an example of a dealmaking president that hasn't been held in very high esteem by historians.

"The battle in Washington over health care is a great example of the no-win situation Presidents are in," said Jacobs. "President Obama came in with large Democratic majorities, this great vision, but the reality is, it's not going to pass. He's going to have to compromise and he's going to get a hell of a beating from Democrats," he added.

Some polls have found that although the public expresses a desire for compromise, they tend to elect people who have strong political positions, rather than dealmakers.

"The job of presidential leadership is infinitely more difficult with such a polarized congress. The word compromise is a bad word," said Jacobs.

However, as far as history is concerned: "You need both. You absolutely need principles or you're rudderless. I think of it as 'pragmatic idealism,' said Jacobs.

(© MMIX, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

You need the latest Flash player to view video content.
Click here to download.

Click here to bypass this detection if you already have the latest Flash Player.