Category: President

The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States expresses that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This led to lengthy quarrels as to the length at which citizens can sufficiently critique their civic leaders. Members of the press, the theater, and artists have long utilized their voices to address their grievances by satirically mocking members of Congress and the President. In more recent history, television shows like Saturday Night Live have utilized comedy and satire to mock the President and the government. Different Presidents since the show’s creators have had different reactions to responding to Presidential mockery and humor. While some have shown great restraint and respect for the protection of speech under satire, Presidents like Donald Trump have challenged verbally the right of SNL to mock him and his administration. In this essay, I will illustrate the evolving public persona of the Presidency and how it has helped satirists and comedians. I then will discuss the importance of American satire and how it has evolved in our modern times. Next, we will analyze how different Presidents have responded to satire and utilized it themselves for political support by looking at election data. Finally, we will understand how President Trump has responded to satire and critiques from Saturday Night Live and what his attitude means for our democracy.

To begin, we must understand the evolution of the American Presidency to one that has become more public with the development of social media and the internet. The visibility of the President at our current time is unlike any other. As a result of this, so too has the development of satire and parodies of the President’s actions because the President has become a phenomenon similar to that of celebrities in which we follow their every move and how they spend their days. Presidents have utilized the media to gain public support for their causes by putting themselves out there in press conferences, speeches, and talks that have been televised to the American public. As David Gergen points out in Richard Ellis’ “The Development of the American Presidency”, “there is no weapon more powerful than persuasion by speech” (120). Ellis then points out that “Presidents have expressed great faith that they could boost public support for their policies or themselves through their rhetoric” (120). Through the development of the radio, television, and social media, presidents are constantly attempting to reach wider audiences of the American public by placing themselves in spaces in which they are largely visible and able to be heard. ABC News released a report that found that “On many days, some US news networks devote more than 50 percent of their airtime to talking about the President”. They found that on an average day MSNBC talks about President Trump about 67% of the day, CNN 66%, and Fox News 31%. The media has a growing obsession with President Trump because they know and understand that news about the president increases ratings. We rarely hear about national news without some reference to the Trump administration.

The problem with this is that with Presidents being so public and broadcasting themselves on a daily basis, it has led to the opportunity for incredibly funny slip-ups to occur which comedians and programs like Saturday Night Live quickly exploit. One can remember fondly the many word flubs of President George W. Bush such as “is our children learning” or getting a shoe thrown at him on live television. These moments and speeches, like the rallies of candidate Donald Trump, quickly become mocked and satirized and become viral online. Comedian Alec Baldwin has become President Trump’s impersonator on Saturday Night Live and is routinely featured. Will Ferrell impersonating George W. Bush, Dana Carvey as Bush 1, Darrell Hammond as Bill Clinton, and Chevy Chase as President Ford are just some examples of the ways in which Presidential parody has become an essential aspect of our American culture. We can remember the Presidents just as easily as we can remember their main impersonators on television. Whoever the President is at the time, we expect comedians and programs like SNL to closely watch what they say and do and find reasons to poke fun at the highest office in the world. The other problem with increased media exposure is that political polarization has turned the public presidency into greater harm than good for the President’s image. In his essay “The Public Presidency and Disciplinary Presumptions” Lawrence Jacobs explains the evolution of the public Presidency and the ways in which it has shaped Presidential popularity and accomplishments. He expresses:

The communication revolution-cable stations and social media networking as well as online news sites and news-aggregating services have atomized the shared public sphere into numerous, disconnected cubbyholes that reinforce existing perceptions and attitudes and resist presidential appeals (25).

This fractured nature of our public sphere has allowed satirists and comedians to create content that is catered to specific audiences that are in favor of satire and the mockery of power. It has given satirists and comedians the power to have incredible amounts of access to the lives of the President, much more than ever considered possible under the early days of our republic. It has also made satire more difficult in which rather than changing people’s opinions and educating the public, it has become an avenue for self-fulfilled audiences that watch certain programs based on their political views. For example, those that are unhappy with the job performance of Trump are probably much more likely to watch SNL and Presidential satire than those that support the President.

We must now understand the power of satire in American politics and how it has evolved over time to our current state. The history of American political satire, as Carolina Miranda of the Los Angeles Times expresses, can be traced back to “Benjamin Franklin, who once wrote a sarcastic treatise about the British government titled ‘Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One,’. Satire is often used to challenge the ways in which our country is operating and inform the public. Comedy is often a form of education in this country that has begun to attract more viewership than cable or network news. The Pew Research center 2014 reported on adults that watched “The Colbert Report” and found that “One in ten (10%) online adults said they got news from the show in the previous week, on par with such sources as the Wall Street Journal and USA Today”. In addition, according to a study by the University of Delaware’s Center for Political Communication in regards to the altering of net neutrality rules in 2014, “viewers of satirical shows such as John Oliver’s Last Week Tonight and The Colbert Report are far more aware of the issue than consumers of traditional news sources”. Moreover, viewers of the program “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver” were reported to be the most aware of the changes to net neutrality rules, with 29% of his audience reporting that they “heard a lot” while just 7% of Fox News audiences had “heard a lot”. What was once fringe comedians poking fun at U.S. administrations has slowly become one of the singular ways in which people in this country have become informed. This has created new problems for Presidents as Americans largely believe entirely different things depending on where they are receiving their news. The institutions and journalists that the country has long trusted have been challenged and debated as candidates around the country and the President himself talks of “Fake News” and references the press as “the enemy of the people”.

Moving forward, let’s see how different Presidents since Gerald Ford have reacted to criticism and parody from Saturday Night Live. For example, President Ford, portrayed by Chevy Chase was often portrayed as a clutz who was always falling and hurting himself. They also played him as highly unintelligent. The famous skit of the 1976 presidential debate with Jimmy Carter, played by Dan Aykroyd, featured Ford mistakenly thinking he was on a gameshow and upon the playing of the national anthem, hit the buzzer to guess the name of the song. According to Steve Hendrix in his piece in the Chicago Tribune, while in private it “bothered him to be portrayed as a clutz…in public, Ford’s reaction to the ‘Saturday Night’ send-ups was very different: He laughed.” Hendrix also points out that “Chase was the featured comedian at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 1976, Ford embraced the shtick, scattering papers and silverware across the dais, mostly on Chase’s lap.” The timing of President Ford’s ascension to the office of president is important because in following Nixon, he expressed the importance as Ford’s press secretary Ron Nessen explains, ‘It was a strange time,’ Nessen recalled. ‘It was just after Watergate, the Vietnam War was still going on, inflation was a problem. There was a general feeling in the White House that we didn’t want to spend a lot of time on this.’

President Ford set a precedent of letting Saturday Night Live and comedians engage in comedic acts making fun of his administration in order to prevent backlash. As Nessen points out, with so much of the late mid to late 70s focused on distrust of the White House, it was best not to intervene and make a public reaction to it.

While Presidents Carter and Reagan largely left SNL with little to no public comments about parodies, George H.W. Bush was largely vocal in the parodying of himself. As Hendrix points out in his piece in the Chicago Tribune, he “appeared so often with Dana Carvey on television and at charity events” and “The two became and remained friends well after Bush was defeated in 1992. The Bushes invited Carvey and his wife to the White House soon after his defeat”. This is an example of a President that did not just accept satire in the media, rather, he embraced it and recognized its importance for the country at large to make fun of civic leaders. The ability to take criticism and face parody on national television preserves the importance of the 1st amendment in giving citizens the right to speak freely about elected officials. In terms of optics, it illustrates that the President should be above these satirical programs and instead focus their attention on the different tasks that must be addressed in order to run the country. However, at our moment in history, we are now faced with a President that feels the need to intervene and respond to criticism in the press and on Saturday Night Live in particular.

In response to Alec Baldwin’s impersonation of Donald Trump on SNL, the President tweeted “Nothing funny about tired Saturday Night Live on Fake News NBC! Question is, how do the Networks get away with these total Republican hit jobs without retribution? Likewise for many other shows? Very unfair and should be looked into. This is the real Collusion!”, referencing that he feels the media is liberally biased and attempting to delegitimize his presidency. What was most startling was the President’s use of the word “retribution”. Many questions what this means in terms of the protection of the freedom of speech and actor Alec Baldwin expressed that he “feared for his safety”. President Trump often responds to jokes or satire with an ego the size of a skyscraper. As Michael Nelson expresses in his book “Trump’s First Year”, Trump was incredibly upset at the reaction to “defend the indefensible, such as the president easily refuted assertion that the crowd at his inauguration was larger than the crowd at Obama’s first inauguration” (111). This of course inspired a large host of responses from comedians and inspired the now famous Melissa Mccarthy impersonation of Sean Spicer.

President Trump has shown clear disdain for mockery and slander. In his piece, “The First Amendment in the Era of Trump”, Erwin Chemerinsky expresses in regards to defamation and libel law that candidate Trump said, “that if he became President, the law of libel and slander would be revised to make it much easier for plaintiffs to succeed” (563). Donald Trump has proven in his presidency that he has difficulty receiving criticism on the job. In fact, members of his own party have shown weariness at the President’s need to respond to criticism through Twitter. As Michael Nelson points out in his book, “Trump’s First Year”, Republican senator Ben Sasse, in response to the President’s multiple Twitter rants, said, “Please just stop” and pointed out that “This isn’t normal and it’s beneath the dignity of your office” (107). A large part of being president of the United States is having the ability to contain one’s outrage and emotion in order to appear stoic and unbiased. However, Trump seems to get offended or belittled by jokes in the press and on programs like Saturday Night Live. He has illustrated an ego that is much more fragile than his predecessors who knew when to keep quiet and let comedians perform their craft. President Trump threatens the civil rights of artists who seek to question him by posting threats or rants on Twitter that call to question our rights to satirize and mock the president of our nation.

Above all, the important thing to remember is the freedom that our constitution has granted citizens in protecting their right to satirize and make fun of our elected officials. The United States is uniquely rooted in its founding, as a nation that questioned and challenged authority in an effort to preserve the individual freedoms that we hold close to our hearts. It is important that leaders understand this importance and recognize the artistic institutions that we have created and their legitimacy in entertaining and educating the public. At the White House Correspondents dinner in 2016, President Obama said that “Eight years ago, I was a young man full of idealism and vigor. And look at me now, I am gray, grizzled, and just counting down the days to my death panel” making fun of his own ambition and ability to get things done. It represents a certain humility in the office of the President. Allowing a President to be properly satirized or made fun of, illustrates the strength of our democracy by showing that our leaders are not esteemed kings, queens, or aristocracy. Rather, they are citizens that are held to the same laws that all American citizens are. Finally, in a national tracking poll by Morning Consultant, a majority of Americans surveyed on Saturday Night Live said responded yes to “I have enjoyed the impersonations of the members of President Trump’s administration and I would like to see more of them”. This illustrates the importance of satire and comedy in our political age and how they can healthily influence a democracy by challenging power and bringing America together in dark times with the power of laughter and healing. Satire and political mockery must be preserved for the health of a democracy and the preservation of the 1st amendment.

Bibliography:

1. National Tracking Poll. 2017, morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/170205_topline_Brands_v3_AG_SNL.pdf.
2. Jacobs, Lawrence R. “The Public Presidency and Disciplinary Presumptions.” The Free Library, www.thefreelibrary.com/The public presidency, and disciplinary presumptions.-a0320732039.
3. “Christmas Ceremony for White House Staff.” C-SPAN.org, www.c-span.org/video/?35618-1/christmas-ceremony-white-house-staff.
4. Tilley, Cristen, et al. “See If You Can Guess Which US TV Network Mentions Trump the Least.” ABC News, 13 Dec. 2017, www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-13/donald-trump-news-media-coverage/9125810.
5. “‘The President’s Speech at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.” National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives and Records Administration, obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/05/01/president-s-speech-white-house-correspondents-dinner.
6. Morning Consult. “National Tracking Poll.” Morning Consult, 17 Feb. 2017, morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/170205_topline_Brands_v3_AG_SNL.pdf.
7. US Census Bureau. “Voting and Registration in the Election of November 2008 .” Census.gov, www.census.gov/history/pdf/2008presidential_election-32018.pdf
8. Miranda, Carolina A. “Ridiculing of Leaders through Satire Has a Long History.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 16 Jan. 2015, www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/miranda/la-et-cam-satire-miranda-20150115-column.htm
9. Jones, Chris. “Alec Baldwin Gets Under Trump’s Skin.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 10 July 2017, www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/05/alec-baldwin-gets-under-trumps-skin/521433/.
10. Hendrix, Steve. “’SNL’ Has Skewered Every President since Ford, and All of Them Reacted the Same Way – until Now.” Chicago Tribune, Chicago Tribune, 14 Oct. 2018, www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/tv/ct-ent-snl-presidents-20181014-story.html
11. Ellis, Richard. The Development of the American Presidency. Third ed., Routledge, 2018
12. Holm, Nicholas. “The Political (Un)Consciousness of Contemporary American Satire.” Journal of American Studies, vol. 52, no. 03, 2018, pp. 642–651., doi:10.1017/s0021875818000920.
13. Rollins, Peter C., and John E. O’Connor. Hollywood’s White House: the American Presidency in Film and History. University Press of Kentucky, 2003.
14. Chemerinsky, Erwin. “THE FIRST AMENDMENT IN THE ERA OF PRESIDENT TRUMP.” Denver Law Review, 1 Oct. 2017, web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=9e3288b4-fa36-475b-bea1-abb18ae3ea75@pdc-v-sessmgr01.
15. Gottfried, Jeffrey, et al. “For Some, the Satiric ‘Colbert Report’ Is a Trusted Source of Political News.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 12 Dec. 2014, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/12/for-some-the-satiric-colbert-report-is-a-trusted-source-of-political-news/.

Throughout the world history, almost each nation has been engaged in political games, which have later turned into the implicit or explicit armed conflicts. In most countries, including the US, the presidents are legally the national army’s commanders-in-chief (White House, 2020). However, the major issue concerning the world today is the fact that most of the armed conflicts are executed beyond the nationally accepted law. On the example of the US, it may be explained that despite the President being legally responsible for the country’s military forces, the declaration of any conflict is impossible without the Congress’ decision.

On the one hand, the situation with the US military state is now quite controversial due to various conflicts taken place over the past years. If officially there were no wars and armed conflicts since the Second World War, in fact, the US has been engaged in a series of military affairs (Congressional Research Service, 2020). Such dissonance between the real actions and the information released in authoritative sources make people hesitate everything they hear and see in the news or in the President’s speeches.

On the other hand, however, the official armed conflict declaration can lead to a variety of severe consequences. Many politicians consider declaring a war irrelevant due to the fact that the notion has a strong effect on the world population, while military misunderstandings are not that terrifying to the broad audience (Dunlap, 2016). Hence, implicit military conflicts are created, first of all, to avoid the incitement to hatred. Thus, taking both aspects into consideration, it may be concluded that the international military conflicts, if unavoidable, should be declared as a full-scale war only as a result of considering all the possible implications.

Works Cited

Congressional Research Service. “Defense Primer: President’s Constitutional Authority with Regard to the Armed Forces.”. 2020.

Dunalp, Charles F. “Why Declarations of War Matter.”. 2016. Web.

The White House. “The Executive Branch.”. Web.

World War I was a large-scale catastrophe that swept across Europe and changed the history of our world. This event led to the death of countless people and left behind even more orphans, widows, and cripples. World War I also changed the relationships between countries, which is reflected in the speeches and letters of politicians. The purpose of this essay is to review two historical documents, a letter from Georges Clemenceau and President Wilson’s Fourteen Points speech, to answer questions and analyze the events of those years.

A letter from Georges Clemenceau dated 1919 consisted primarily of a detailed analysis of Germany’s position in the modern world. From this analysis, first of all, one critical thought was deduced – the responsibility for World War I lies with Germany. As Clemenceau wrote, the rulers of Germany sought to establish as much power as possible over Europe. This goal was carried out not only by military methods but also with the help of active propaganda and spy networks.

There were even preparations on the territory of neighbors so that the seizure was faster and easier. When Europe was ready to rise against these threats, Germany unleashed a war, knowing that this would result in a global confrontation. It also refused all attempts at a peaceful settlement of the issue, being fully prepared for consequences. That is why Germany has a massive responsibility for World War I, and it is precisely thanks to the policy of intimidation, espionage, deception, and tyranny that post-war Germany inspired fear and anxiety for the future of the world.

Concerns about World War I tormented not only European but also American politicians as well. In 1917, President Wilson presented his thoughts on the war in his famous speech, which contains 14 points, based on which peace should be concluded throughout the world. Wilson identified two theoretical causes of the war: a struggle for a more just and calm peace and a strive for superiority. The president, in his speech, also deduced a way to prevent future wars in Europe. In the first place, a new stable Europe should be serene and tranquil. As per Wilson, it is the condition for maintaining peace between the countries: the unification of forces and an organized peace.

At Wilson’s fourteen points, there are many worthy ideas, but the following three should be highlighted individually. Firstly, the president called on everyone to establish a world in which all nations and countries will be equal, regardless of their size or power. At the same time, he noted that it is impossible to create equality of territories and resources. Still, the world community is fully capable of creating a balance of rights.

Secondly, Wilson raised an essential and very acute for that time issue of free navigation across all the seas. He stated that all waterways should be open and obey the same laws. Of course, this would require a radical restructuring of the legislation, but the benefits for everyone, per the president, would be worth it. Finally, to maintain peace, Wilson suggested that all countries should stop creating alliances that draw them into competition among themselves. The main idea of the president, passing through all points, was the unification of all countries and an honest policy without deception.

Without a doubt, Wilson’s proposals were very noble and could certainly lead to peace both in Europe and between continents. However, given the situation between the countries and their goals on the world stage, his propositions can be called unrealistic and somewhat utopian. Wilson wanted universal unity and honesty between all countries, both on land and at sea, but this did not correlate with the interests of the other countries. As Clemenceau later wrote, Germany’s goal was to satisfy its lust for war and power. That is why, sadly, World War I has become one of the most terrible and tragic pages in the history of humanity.

The concept of media framing usually has a significant influence on how the audience processes the information. It impacts how different people process the information and how different people look at the same issue. The concept of media frames usually is mainly concerned with how journalists, policymakers and other key players in the information sector relay or present information. The way the information or message is framed influences the impact of information as it determines how different people will process that information; it dictates how the audience will interpret the message (Borg A, 2005).

The newspaper coverage and news coverage on the issue of Larry Summers’s speech contributed negatively to the growing popularity of that speech portraying it as very offensive and provocative even though Larry Summers had been required to be provocative. Furthermore, in his defense Larry Summers that the facts of his speech were indeed based on research which most of the women scientists objected to giving counter facts that supported their arguments (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

The media coverage on the issue heightened the statements issued by Larry Summers to an extent where the public damage caused as a result of the statements became too high such that Larry Summers was forced on numerous occasions to seek apologies to the public since many had been offended. In most of the daily newspapers ranging from 14^th January to late march the issue of Larry summers speech always caught the attention of the media appearing on as headlines, sparking a lot of debate.

The coverage of this issue by the media could be a perfect example of episodic framing which effectively analyzes the event that helps to fully bring out the issue at hand which is the provocative speech by Larry Summers which has been having been made successful by the frequent repetition of the issue in the media as well as giving the public something to think about (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

The political point of view at stake in media frames is an overall mislead of the public who serve as the electorate of a specific nation or state. This is achieved from the fact that the media is primarily responsible for establishing an agenda for which the public can hold discussions. This is achieved from the fact that the media is very influential not only from the fact that they are the sole transmitters of information but also their ability and power to dictate to people what they should think about (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

The media is very significant in shaping the political agenda as they have the innate ability to direct people towards paying attention to some issues at the expense of other issues which may be prevalent in the society or nation as a whole.

The use of certain media frames such as episodic or thematic could have a significant effect in controlling the public and their perspective towards prevalent political issues (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987). This directs the public opinion towards issues that the media wants the public to concentrate on, thus reducing the attention from other important issues and this is achieved by media concentrating on new problems (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

The media also has the ability to structure the public’s perception of the prevailing political issues, therefore, introducing the possibility of prejudice or bias information by determining which issues should be given priority and which ones should be ignored with the major aim of winning public support. This eventually results in a compromise in the purpose of relaying information with the aim of addressing political issues and thus resulting in the overall compromise of the political point of view that should be addressed in order to achieve a good democracy (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

Media frames nowadays usually act and believe on the assumption that human relation to the world is largely facilitated and controlled by the media (Alic M, 1986). This is evidenced by the great influence that media has on the masses and the power it exerts from being able to reflect on the socio-cultural forms.

Media has been used to convey some general belief that gender has a significant effect on the overall success in certain fields of science (Alic M, 1986). This can be seen in the situation of Larry Summers where the media has been very influential and impacted many people to create the belief that some are better in others in certain fields such as science.

Epistemology is mainly concerned with mainly justifying whether certain beliefs are true and if true then it determines how true these beliefs are (Alic M 1986). In the case of Larry Summers his claims that women did not perform as well as men in science and math because they did not have the same innate ability as well as natural ability in certain fields as well as men, he also disclaimed that these were things that still needed to be studied although this assumption that he made were based on research.

Epistemology just like politics views issues as just statements or claims that need to be fully proven or ascertained in order to ensure that they are telling the truth. Media frames usually take advantage of these issues which have not been fully ascertained to make the headlines in order to pass a message which may end up representing bias or incorrect information (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

Such statements or issues usually act as an agenda by which the media uses to invite people to make discussions. It directs the public towards not thinking about the critical issues and concentrates on such issues which are not as important (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

Epistemology in the case of Larry Summers speech has been used to start a lot of politics and debate as to whether his public statements represent the truth. It has also resulted in conflict and controversy as some parties have been offended thereby acting on the issue in a very personal capacity. This was seen with the public protest made by senior women scientists such as Nina Hopkins, Catherine Didion, and Anne C Petersen among others (Borg A, 2005).

To a very great extent, the media through programs and articles influence very much what we ought to think rather than what is. The media frames achieve this by fact that viewers and readers of articles are very sensitive hence making them easily influenced when they reason about significant political, social, and economical issues (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

Their understanding of issues such as war and poverty is dependent on how the media presents such issues not how those issues are impacting society (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

The way issues are framed on television and articles reflects and shapes the way the public comprehends and understands or interprets the cases and possible solutions to problems affecting the nation as a whole (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

Both broadcast and print media dramatize stories however the effects vary depending on the issue at hand.

The media tells us what to think about since they have the power to order and organize what surrounds us appear to be true making us believe (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

Gender has been commonly understood to be oppressive since it has artificially created roles of feminist and masculinity where male supremacy is greatly acknowledged and legitimately recognized as the superior gender. This has a collateral effect when it comes to positions of power where males are recognized more than women thereby enjoying preference and more confidence from the masses (Alic M, 1986).

The need to acknowledge and realize that women have a role to play in the socio-political arena and to enjoy equal opportunities as their male counterparts with no fear of discrimination based upon their gender will go a long way in ensuring that women are motivated to seek and pursue politics (Borg A, 2005).

There is also the need to eliminate the general feeling of doubt on a woman’s capability or ability to perform or handle any political responsibility and position of leadership that may be imposed on her by the electorate (Alic M, 1986).

There is also the need to challenge sexism and feminism which involves a group effort, especially from their male counterparts in order to eliminate any compromise of women’s self-esteem. This will help women to feel more confident and sure helping to motivate women to become more exploratory and determined to pursue the position of power and authority thus encouraging women to engage more in politics.

The need to encourage women to engage in politics has been a further issue to craft a political position on gender with the aim of ensuring that a balance in the gender disparity especially in the field of politics is achieved, it also acts as an example of good governance when women are provided with equal opportunities and chances as their male counterparts in the field of politics.

Politics can be seen to be a very complicated and difficult issue for many people to understand. Most people rely on others to be informed on issues regarding national and world affairs (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

Therefore it is the duty of media to ensure that people are informed about such issues prevailing both in the society and the world as a whole thereby the media plays a very important role in relaying information.

With the public been exposed to such multiple sources of information then they are likely to be greatly influenced by what they see and understand from the media where it is clearly seen the media has a major role in dictating how people ought to think(Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

The media greatly controls how people ought to think as it is responsible for ensuring people relate and react to what kind and specific type of information. They exercise control over information and are in charge of determining what kind of information should be relayed to the public. The media decides which information or news the public should get therefore dictating the issues which should catch the attention of the public (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

The media frames have been widely seen to affect the different opinions and the primary approach that people use to make sense of matters. This is because media frames are usually aimed at dictating how people understand and perceive different issues portrayed by the media. Media frames are mainly aimed at this to ensure that media maintains control of the information that it relays to the public (Borg A, 2005).

Media frames are never neutral in their role and responsibility of relaying information to the public. They introduce important issues to the society at the same time suggesting or mildly dictating how people should interpret the issues being addressed (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

This mainly provides the media with power and the ability to gain control as they play a very influential role by providing people with the information they deem and believe to be important to their own standards which does not reflect the information that the reader would perceive as issues that would need to be addressed according to their perception and importance.

Media frames also go an extra mile in influencing what people think about situations and issues by framing situations and questions in a different way which aims at directing the public’s school of thought toward the direction that they want the public to think (Shaw D C and McCombs E M, 1977).

This introduces a one-way kind of thinking which is directed towards achieving their purpose. This tactic becomes effective in that it limits the people’s options thereby creating a one-sided approach and dimension toward interpreting the particular information relayed by the specific media source, be it print media or broadcast media.

Media frames greatly influence what we ought to think about by ensuring that the type of information relayed is effective to the public to which it is being relayed. This is achieved by ensuring the kind of information being relayed is relevant (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

The media will concentrate on giving the public information that they believe the public would be most interested in wanting to know and desires to know. In so doing the public will relate with that specific information getting an opportunity to greatly influence the public as the public will seek the information (Kindler D and Lynger S 1987).

This eventually results in the purpose of the information losing its credibility as there is room for the media to make adjustments or exaggeration as many people will be motivated to seek the specific information as it is deemed important and relevant (Borg A, 2005).

References

Kindler D and Lynger S (1987) News that matters.

Borg A, (2005) Chronicles of a controversy Institute for Women and Technology.

Shaw D C and McCombs E M, (1977) the Emergence of Political Issues.

Alic M, (1986) Hypia, s Heritage, a History of Women in Science from Antiquity to the late 19^th Century. London, the Women Press.

Introduction

The recent Russian invasion of Ukrainian land left the global community shocked. Different peace organizations and trade unions condemned Russian President, Vladimir Putin, actions. The war was detrimental to the global economy that depends on Ukrainian and Russian exports. Europe was one of the most affected regions since the war took place in two of its countries. Consequently, the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, called the stakeholders to act against the detrimental war. Von der Leyen’s speech sent a message of solidarity through the use of rhetorical strategies.

Speech Brief

President Von der Leyen, the European Commission president, spoke in Brussels on 1st March 2022 at the European Parliament Plenary (European Commission, 2022). Her speech was published on the European Commission website and can be accessed through the link. The president persuaded the European leaders to embrace unity and protest against the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Von der Leyen justified the three economic sanctions against Russia in the wake of the Ukrainian invasion.

Design, Arrangement, and Formatting

Proper organization adds credibility to a speech and the speaker making it enjoyable and easy to understand. Von der Leyen’s used the general format of a speech: introduction, main body, and conclusion (Susan, 2007). The speaker started by greeting the audience and grabbing their attention by use of the words ‘War has come to Europe’. In the main body, she listed and logically introduced the three sanctions against Russia. She explained the economic sanctions with their justifications. After that, she called the Europeans to action by listing the various effects of the invasion on the region. In the conclusion, she summarized the impact of the invasion on Ukrainians and cemented the speech with a message of hope (Hum, 2015). The speech design, arrangement, and format made it enjoyable, easy to understand, and effective among the audience.

Rhetorical Strategies Used

Logos

President Von der Leyen utilized rhetorical strategies to encourage action and persuade the stakeholders affected by the Russian aggression against Ukraine. Logos, one of the most effective rhetorical strategies, was used during the speech delivery. Logos involves enlisting logical reasoning in the fabric of an argument (Han et al., 2019). Consequently, logos allowed the speaker to determine facts and draw evidence-based conclusions. Von der Leyen applied inductive and deductive reasoning during the speech delivery. Inductive reasoning is identified when she said, “Thousands of people fleeing from bombs, camped in underground stations – holding hands, crying silently, trying to cheer each other up.” Furthermore, she used deductive reasoning by saying, “Today, a Union of almost half a billion people has mobilized for Ukraine” (European Commission, 2022). The use of logos made her speech express the war atrocities if not acted against: anarchy and death of the Europeans.

Pathos

Engaging with the audience’s emotions is an effective way of persuading them and calling them to action. Pathos involves engaging the audience through emotions, but not too emotional in conveying a speaker’s logical stance (Han et al., 2019). Pathos should be used as a tactic to further the truth of an agenda, and not confuse the audience with the real message (Adeodato, 2022). Von der Leyen used historical war events to evoke a somber mood in the audience. For instance, the use of the Balkan Wars brought the audience into thinking of the effects of war. In her speech, she said, “Almost thirty years after the Balkan Wars, and over half a century after Soviet troops marched into Prague and Budapest, civil defense sirens again went off in the heart of a European capital” (European Commission, 2022). Further, she used words like ‘a watershed moment’, ‘darkest hour’, and ‘defending lives’, among others to emotionally appeal to the audience (European Commission, 2022). The use of pathos allowed her to emotionally appeal to the audience and justify the economic sanctions taken against Russia.

Ethos

Speakers must deliver a speech that is factual and empathetic by giving a credible speech that can be trusted. Ethos refers to the speakers’ credibility to their audiences and can be enhanced by citing reliable sources, building rapport, maintaining respect, and presenting organized and well-prepared information (Adeodato, 2022). Von der Leyen cited one of the most trusted Ukrainian newspapers, the Kyiv Independent, which was published hours before the invasion began. According to the paper, the invasion was not just about Ukraine, but a clash of two worlds, two polar sets of values (European Commission, 2022). Von der Leyen concluded that the invasion was a clash between ‘the rule of law’ and ‘the rule of guns.’ Furthermore, ethos is identified when she used the word ‘honorable members’ which was respectful to the audience. Ethos made the speech more credible and empathetic showing the seriousness of the aggressive Russian invasion.

Repetition

Speakers employ repetition to emphasize a point and make their speech easier to follow. Repetition is the repeating of words that have already been said, with no particular placement to secure emphasis (Han et al., 2019). In addition to ethos, pathos, and logos, Von der Leyen utilized repetition to emphasize various actions taken by the European Commission. For instance, she said, “We are united and we stay united” (European Commission, 2022). Repetition of the words ‘we’ and ‘united’ emphasized European’s unity of purpose. Furthermore, she said, “Long live Europe. And long live a free and independent Ukraine” (European Commission, 2022). The repeated use of the word ‘long live’ brought an aspect of a peaceful wish for Europe and Ukraine amidst the dreadful events. Repetition helped Von der Leyen emphasize peace-building throughout the speech.

Target Audience, Intended Effects, and Potential Effects

Ursula Von der Leyen’s targeted audience was all the European Commission stakeholders. The audience included European residents, the region’s leaders, various governmental and non-governmental institutions, and anyone affected by the aggressive Russian invasion of Ukraine. The speech’s purpose was to deliver and justify the economic sanctions against Russia as temporary mitigation. The choice of words and the general speech’s design intended to convince the Europeans that the commission’s decision to sanction Russia was prudent. The speaker utilized rhetorical strategies to catch the audience’s attention. The use of historical wars evoked a somber mood among the audience.

The speech also presented some potential effects on the audience. The speech could potentially bring the Europeans together in resisting Russia’s move. The speaker used words of solidarity such as ‘unity’ and ‘long live’ that could evoke anger among the affected persons. Furthermore, the speech could lead to action by civil societies fighting against human rights violations. The speaker alluded to the past wars and listed the effects of the invasion on people and the economy. While the speaker intended to justify the commission’s sanctions against Russia, the speech could potentially evoke unity among Europeans and actions from civil societies that fight against human rights violations.

Effectiveness of Editor’s Choices

The speaker’s choice of words made her achieve the speech’s intended purpose. However, the speaker could have adopted other rhetorical mechanisms like similes to make it more effective. The speech’s organization and design made it flow and easy to understand (Kristaponis, 2014). Furthermore, the use of ethos, pathos, logos, and repetition made the message convincing. Meanwhile, the speaker could have incorporated numeric data to improve the speaker’s credibility. For instance, stating the number of persons killed during the Balkan War could make the audience act quickly. Applying other rhetorical strategies like similes and rhetorical questions could make the audience convinced by the sanctions (Mackenzie, 2011). The use of logos, ethos, pathos, and repetition made the speech effective, but adding more strategies and using numerical data could improve the speech’s effectiveness.

Conclusion

Rhetorical strategies help orators improve their speeches’ effectiveness. The president of the European Commission applied ethos, pathos, logos, and repetition during her speech presentation in Brussels. The speech was well-organized and adopted the general speech format making it easy to understand. The use of rhetorical strategies made the speaker appeal to the audience’s emotions and call them to action. The choice of words made the speech effective in delivering the intended message. However, the speech could be improved by incorporating numeric data and other rhetorical strategies. Ursula von der Leyen’s speech at the European Plenary Parliament was effective.

References

Adeodato, J. M. (2022). Rhetorical construction of legal arguments. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue Internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 1-21.

European Commission (2022). Speech by President Von der Leyen at the European Parliament Plenary on the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Han, H., Shin, S., Chung, N., & Koo, C. (2019). Which appeals (ethos, pathos, logos) are the most important for Airbnb users to booking?International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.

Hum, S. (2015). ” Between the Eyes”: The racialized gaze as design.College English, 77(3), 191-215.

Kristaponis, B. (2014). Five design principles for writers and editors. American Medical Writers Association Journal, 29(3), 100-103.

Mackenzie, J. (2011). Language. The Editor’s Companion, 94–114.

Jarratt, S.C. (2007). Rhetoric. In Nicholls, D.G (Ed.), Introduction to scholarship in modern languages and literatures (3rd ed., pp. 73-102). Modern Language Association of America.

Why the President is a legitimate authority

The President of the USA is legitimate because of his crucial responsibilities as the governmental and state leader. A legitimate President has the majority of the population’s votes and plays a significant role in U.S. political, administrative, foreign, and juridical affairs. Moreover, the President executes and enforces the laws introduced by Congress.

The type of respect the President should be shown

The President should be respected ultimately because his political actions are crucial to the state’s well-being and prosperity. Nonetheless, a person has the right to disagree with the policy of the President but must respect him as the head of the country.

The type of respect the President is currently shown

Without a doubt, many people support the current President, Joe Biden. For instance, U.S. citizens state that Joe Biden would be a transitional president, and his key tasks would include lowering the political temperature and healing a divided nation (Sopel). Nonetheless, some people, such as Republican Party supporters, are not happy with the election results and do not show respect for the current President.

Evidence of respect to the President

According to the Washington Post, Biden’s critics hurl increasingly vulgar insults, such as “Thanks, Joe, for $4-a-gallon gas, inflation, Afghanistan, covid-19,” “No trespassing,” “F— Joe Biden,” and “Joe Blows.”

Rod Johnson, a retired gunsmith, demonstrated a striking example of disrespect. He has hung a blue flag from the roof of his house with abuses written on it and addressed to Biden.

These signs are evidence of hatred and disrespect for the President.

The President faced threats from David K. Reeves of North Carolina, a 27-year-old man who was calling the White House and promising to kill President Biden. He stated, “I’m going to chop your heads off.” Thus, David has been arrested in North Carolina on federal charges.

Essentially, threatening the President of the United States is illegal and refers to a federal felony.

Because of his threats to the President’s life, David K. Reeves received a $250,000 fine and the highest penalty of five years in prison.

The basis of disrespect shown to the President

Typically, people who disrespect or threaten the President disagree with his policies, new laws, and decisions. For instance, citizens show disrespect for a growing list of grievances through signs, strikes, or threats. Nevertheless, disagreements and insults are nothing new for politicians because there are always supporters and opposers.

The appropriate way to voice concerns or disagreements with the President

Essentially, there is a possibility to write, call or send the letter to the White House. This way, U.S. citizens may voice their concerns and disagreements or, in contrast, express gratitude by sending a gift.

According to the website, sending emails when having concerns is the fastest way to reach the White House.

Positive articles, web pages, videos about the President

The article presents that during the last month, Joe Biden invested significantly in the nation’s infrastructure and approved a safe COVID vaccine for kids from five to eleven age-old in order to improve the economy and fight the pandemic.

The President demonstrated his capabilities to work across party lines to serve U.S. citizens.

According to this article, Biden introduced approximately 531,000 jobs in October to enhance the economy, which was affected negatively by COVID-19.

In addition, the President secured the support of the working class with the plan to develop infrastructure and create new jobs.

New job creation is a crucial improvement over the previous month that reflects excellent management of the COVID situation in the United States. Biden’s initiatives show the significance of his strategy to beat back the coronavirus pandemic.

America is the most powerful nation in the world. Therefore, its policies have far reaching effects. Presidency is the highest political office in the U.S. Therefore, the U.S. presidency is the most powerful political office in the world. However, the presidency has undergone several changes. These changes are due to the changes in local American politics and waning global influence of the U.S.

There has been a significant increase in the executive powers of the president. During the early years of the inception of the U.S. presidency, presidents had limited executive power. Oversight by congress and courts helped in limiting the powers of the presidency. Therefore, presidents sought public support on various issues. However, a ‘unitary executive’ has helped in increasing the powers of the Executive Office of the President (EOP).

After the Second World War, the U.S. provided global leadership. The U.S. was had a moral obligation to provide leadership to other countries. However, global conditions have undergone several changes since the Second World War. The U.S. does not have the cultural and social influence it had. In addition, the U.S. economy does not account for a high proportion of the global output. Reduction of the influence of the U.S. on global affairs is due to the rise of other countries.

These countries include China, Russia, India, Brazil, and the European Union. This has reduced the power of the EOP. This necessitates the U.S. to act as partners while collaborating with other countries. However, despite the waning of the influence of the U.S. on global affairs, the EOP is still the highest political office in the world.

Expansion of Presidential Power

Historically, there has been continued expansion of presidential power. Soon after the formation of the presidency, presidents had limited power. Congress wielded so much power. Fear of monarchical tendencies is the main reason that made the Framers limit the powers of the presidency. However, the executive powers of the presidency were enough to protect the U.S. from foreign enemies. The executive powers of the EOP have increased gradually since its formation.

Presidents do not usually belong to parties that have a majority in Congress. This may limit the ability of presidents to pass bills that support their policies. Lack of congressional support is one of the main factors that has necessitated the increase in the executive powers of the presidency. Presidents can use a veto to reject a bill. Congress can overturn a presidential veto. However, to do so, it requires a two-thirds majority. Therefore, Congress has overturned very few presidential vetoes.

Acting against the will the public is the main reason that may lead to the limiting of the executive powers of the EOP. The Watergate tapes case is a clear illustration of how the Supreme Court may limit the powers of the EOP. The Supreme Court ruled that presidents do not have executive privilege to withhold information that was vital in criminal investigations. Presidents have strived to undertake policies that have the support of most members of the public.

This has prevented the reduction of the executive powers of the EOP. Terrorism is one of the major problems facing the U.S. Terrorism has increased the powers of the EOP. This enables the EOP to protect the country more effectively. However, presidents must have justifiable reasons to engage in strikes against terrorists.

The president is supposed to exercise the powers which are granted to him or her by the Federal Constitution or the Congress act in the interest of the public. However there have been divergent arguments among the people holding this presidential office arising from different references and reasoning.

All the arguments insist that each is function best for the public welfare (Cronin and Genovese 43). In the above view, the president has the responsibility to act in the interest of the public, ensure all situations are right for the interest of his people and make right judgments because they directly affect the lives of the ruled.

The president can at any time withdraw any entry into U.S’ public lands and put aside part for forestry, for irrigation purposes and water resources. Jackson Lincoln held the view that the president must be capable of forming judgments for himself and his juniors (Cronin and Genovese 45).

Today’s presidency has both informal and formal leverage to command decisions at any time. They can certainly come up with personal initiatives and decide on whichever matters. Additionally, the role of presidents has seemingly become that of main agenda setters in the making of policies at federal level. The president is also surrounded with a bureaucracy that further extends his mandate and powers.

In the modern days, presidents have the capacity to drive political systems in the way they wish because they are the main actors in the systems hence obscuring the role of their subordinates (Fine and Waterman 25).

The president also has the power to take significant measures that can have dynamic implications on the nation. For example, the president can deploy tactical nuclear weapons. The impact of this executive power is magnified by the fact that their decisions have direct impacts on the general public understanding (Cronin and Genovese 54).

The different views held come from the ambiguity in defining the role of the president. For many years now, presidential practices have varied. Roosevelt for example fostered palace politics, Kennedy concentrated on collegial informality, and Eisenhower assumed the role of building his staff. The ambiguity in defining presidential roles makes it easy for the office holders to shape their roles on personal basis.

‘Great’ presidents

Both presidents that have succeeded and those who have failed are considered as great leaders. For example, most scholars claim that President Lyndon Johnson’s extraordinary legislative system has a record in success. Despite his success, scholars argue that Johnson highly contributed in the disastrous war in Vietnam.

Additionally, Dwight Eisenhower is a president that most scholars consider passive during his reign. However, history credits him with very few significant accomplishments. It is in fact argued that it was during his time that Korea went into war and corruption cases within his administration increased. Woodrow Wilson is also one of America’s presidents that is remembered for the Senate’s dismissal of Versailles Treaty (Pfiffner 25).

These are some of presidents known as great although with remarkable failures during their administrations. A survey conducted in 2000 that ranked 10 different categories of leadership indicated that the public and politicians have different views on what presidents should have and be like.

One expectation that makes one a great president is the ability to function more than just managerial or party leaders. Studies indicate that a president must demonstrate great leadership capabilities because they represent the nation at large. The rating in this context falls between being a weak or a strong president.

This is the view that most presidential candidates rise to power with. However, the divergent views of a successful or a failed president must be defined in consideration of different contexts. To meet this expectation from the public, presidents must function ahead of their times.

There are different political times that presidents function well and avoid getting ahead of their time including reconstruction, articulation and disjuncture periods. In this regard, presidents need to know the expectations accompanying their type of leadership. Studies show that there are further different political period that different presidencies have taken place in America (Pfiffner 35).

The patrician period that occurred between 1789-1832, the partisan time occurring between 1832-1900,the pluralist period (1900-1972), and 1972- to date plebiscitary period. Considering the first period, Americans great presidents Thomas Jefferson and George Washington exhibited great interpersonal skills during their political views with legislators. Additionally, James Madison and John Adams proved weak leaders when gauged against the first political period.

Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Jackson, who led national partisan movements, functioned under the second political period hence relatively advantaged. With the centralization of the economy, American presidency was expected to have strong leadership strengths with much emphasis on economy. This was at the pluralist period and effective confrontation of foreign policy.

This was a further consideration in rating whether a president was great or a failure. More so, the presidents in this period must exert full responsibility for national issues by establishing an expansive bureaucracy. In the present plebiscitary period, the presidents sometimes rely less on political organizations and have less capability to bargain as it was seen in the past regimes. With such considerations, the presidents are therefore expected to directly persuade the public (Fine and Waterman 47).

Most scholars believe that presidential power is the ability to persuade the public, Congress members and other political actors in order to reap positive outcome. However, it argues that a president is not considered powerful on the merit of his/her presidency. It says that cultural, constitutional and political factors also empower these individuals to become successful presidential leaders.

However, political power differs among presidency holders mainly because of the diversity in strategic challenges and political resources available to them. Most of America’s presidents have ruled with the belief that the ability to persuade the public, political actors and Congress members determines whether one is a successful president or a failure (Cronin and Genovese 21).

Presidential Leadership

Scholars argue that the definition of leadership must encompass good leadership. But good leadership does not always result into positive results. There are times when poor leadership has yielded positive outcomes. Leadership is therefore the ability to successfully use one’s political skills and the leverage exposed to an individual to yield satisfactory outcomes.

President’s performance is influenced by various factors that expose them to particular challenges. For example, a good economy contributes to high ratings of successful leaders.

The vice versa is also true. If on the other hand, a president has restricted power to influence the economy, scholars question as to whether such presidents should be termed as failures or successful (Cronin and Genovese 22). Ideally, presidential leadership means persuading other political actors to act for their own interests. This is because a leader is supposed to inspires others to do as they desire hence influencing their behaviors.

The challenge that presidential leaders face while convincing the other political actors is the fact that different situations and contexts call for different qualities and skills. Scholars argue that some personal skills can be useful at certain circumstances while others are not (Waterman and Rockman 23).

In this regard, different presidents encounter dissimilar political scenarios on coming to office, because the circumstances change with time hence the different political leverage during the different terms. More so, successful presidents are measured by the ability to respond and manage political outcomes. The important thing is that which the president is interested in and the personal capability to accomplish it.

Presidential leaders are limited by the resources, tools and political capital present to them. The tools include external political supporters in Congress, economical state, the political stability of the nation and the overall international political mood. With such factors, presidential skills as well as political powers are vital in accomplishing their political ambitions (Cronin and Genovese 23).

Presidents have got copious resources, tools and political capital within their reach. This therefore describes the extent of their ability to structure, slant and adapt organizational functions towards favorable angles that match their political and policy interests.

With the constitutional powers presidents can considerably control presidential appointments to advance their political interests. Another leverage tool is their ability to shape and influence the bureaucratic agencies budget. This is because the federal budget often goes with what the Congress passes.

Therefore, when the Congress is controlled by the party’s president, he or she can shape the budget too fit his preferences. Presidents can also use the veto to shape the final legislature’s budget. Studies show that in the 20^th century, presidents have used this executive power to gain control over particular institutions that are significant to their presidential leadership (Cronin and Genovese 36).

Most people have no demarcation between leadership and its outcomes but scholars argue that there are possibilities of having good leadership systems resulting in poor performances. Scholars argue that personal leadership skills must be differentiated from the outcomes. In an example, if one has a team of ball players that frequently loses in games; this has little to do with the manager’s skills, the fact is that the team’s quality is poor.

This therefore indicates that it is very possible to have good leadership but on the other hand have poor results. This further illustrates that between the outcome and skills, quality is an intervening variable that must not be ignored. The manager can however influence the outcome through his skills hence maximizing on his leverage.

If a president takes over from a recessed economy, the president has limited tools through which he can influence outcomes in his/her leadership. Therefore there are chances of being unelected back to power. Some may argue that the individual failed to demonstrate presidential leadership skills (Waterman and Rockman 15). However scholars argue that no matter the extent of skills and abilities, it is impossible to achieve the desired outcomes.

If the president inherits an economically stable nation but has limited knowledge, then it can be said that the leader was a bad one, however if the economy was stable yet with minimal leadership knowledge, positive outcomes can still be manifested. Therefore, it is important to consider such factors as to why and how the results were achieved.

At some times, a president may be having personal political skills that results into effective policy or political outcomes. Whereas at other times the president may be having no skills yet there are positive results. Additionally, a president may display skills yet the results turn out negative, at other times, a president may be having no skills but the results become unsuccessful (Waterman and Rockman 18). Leverage is an intervening variable in the first and second case that determines the outcomes.

Historic periods and economy state are also intervening factors that determine the success of a presidential leader. Leaders that rule during pacific times have fewer chances of being termed successful leaders than those who rule during periods of change. Therefore if all these factors are combined with the leverage that a president exerts in his/her governing, then the relationship between leadership and success is clearly manifested.

The Indiana Jones Model depicts a scenario whereby the president has considerable skills, but at the same time has no or minimal leverage, yet the outcomes are significantly great. Although the president may seem gifted, the context doest not provide chances for any positive results. However the president just prevails as a result of luck. This is therefore independent of the president’s leverage or skills. At certain times, it is possible to have positive results with no president’s persuasion and skills.

On the Pseudo-leadership model, the president may be having no skills, has leverage then successful results. This is a case that occurred with President Eisenhower. In this case, leaders in Congress contributed in the passing of significant legislations. The president paid little attention to the issues but much credit went to him. The president displayed no skills (Cronin and Genovese 26).

At other times there are chances of good fortune accompanying the outcomes. For example, Calvin Coolidge appeared a lucky president; it was a matter of being at the right place, at an appropriate time. The president enjoyed a very stable economy that left praises for his name yet he demonstrated no skills and had no leverage within his reach in which to exert influence. It was just his lucky period.

On the other hand a president may have skills and much leverage at his disposal but gets no positive outcomes. In the case of Johnson and the Vietnam War, even if he had substantive public support and extensive Democratic support from both houses, chances of successful outcomes were thin.

More so, recent tapes have shown Johnson mourning because he knows that going to the war provides no chance of winning the battle, however, he also knows that if he does not, he will forever be blamed for the Vietnam defeat. This is a no-win situation in which leadership success is independent of the president.

At another scenario, the president demonstrates leadership skills and is exposed to a considerable leverage that gives him/her significant success. This is a common Neustadt’s case of presidential leadership. Franklin Delano Roosevelt maximized on his extra-ordinary political wit and leverage during the economic recession and World War 11 era to design policies for the New Deal hence the positive war efforts. In this scenario, the president’s success was dependent on his skills (Cronin and Genovese 27).

What it Takes for a Candidate to be Elected

For a candidate to be elected as the president in a federal office, the individual must have attained the age of thirty five years, must be a resident for a minimum of fourteen years. The Electoral College has the provisions that the two houses of Congress and the state participates in electing the president. The state chooses the electors (Electoral College) who eventually elects the president. The candidate that garners majority votes of the electors becomes the president.

If none of the candidates attains majority voles, the House chooses the president while the Senate selects the vice president, each state delegate therefore votes once. However, members of Electoral College can be elected from party states and themselves vote for their fellow party nominees hence influencing the strategies of presidential candidates. This will definitely change the conduct and nature of electing a president (Edwards 34).

Critics of the Electoral College system argue that it is often flawed and that the runner up candidates must not become president, this is because the candidate that garners most votes becomes the president. This perspective, they argue, inflicts a serious burden on the minority leader according to the evolving U.S’ democratic values.

However, they argue that America was initially never expected to have pure democracy and neither was it thought that U.S will be guided by the notion of majority rule (Edwards 31). They say that government institution was meant to be a republic with people’s representative in the government. More so, the separation of powers that has checks and balances was supposed to curb hindrances of change.

In this context, Bill of Rights is implemented to regulate majority’s will from going against citizen’s rights. The explanation given for the president to be elected from direct citizens’ votes is because the president and his vice wholly represent the people amongst al the nationals. And that it is the people’s best chosen candidate. However, the critiques argue that it is not enough to say that people’s will must be the only determining factor for the nationally voted government officials.

They therefore argue that because the president must be voted for by the majority of the population does not mean every other element of the government must be popularly elected (Cronin and Genovese 24). The powers of the modern president are the results of initiatives and patterns that have formed over centuries as far as presidential history is concerned. This is inclusive of crises political realignments, economic depression and institutional changes.

The powers of the president, as Thomas E. Cronin says is very powerful but always inadequate. He argues that at certain times it is weak and limited while at other times it is profound and abused. The public is ambivalent about the powers of presidents. They sometimes enjoy seeing this power reduced and their presidents humbled but at the same time desire to have heroic presidents who have the ability to attain Americans dream (Cronin and Genovese 5).

Opponents of the Electoral College argue that in this system the ballots cast are not equal because different states have varying populations.

They argue that this benefits the small states. In their propositions they argue that the automatic plan would significantly do away with faithless electors voting by automatically enabling state’s electors to vote for the most pluralist in the state (Edwards 45). The strength in this process is that individual electors will not vote in person hence minimal probability of votes being cast in unintended directions.

The district plan would grant one electoral vote the popular plurality’s votes within the state in a congressional district. It says that this plan will allow Electoral College vote be specific in popular vote. However the weakness is that the district plan will not completely eliminate chances of runner-up from becoming the president. The national bonus strategy would preserve constitutional and state’s roles in the process of electing a president (Pfiffner 56).

The Electoral College system also proposes amendments to the Constitution so as to allow for direct populace voting for a president. However the objection to this proposal is that popular election would demean the federal nature of U.S government. More so critics argue that direct popular election will reduce the common endless frauds and recounts.

Those who advocate for direct election of presidents argue that federalism is rather necessary but the electoral votes within small states does not command active campaigns of the main candidate in the party. Significantly, the larger states contests will only take place in the case of massive votes being either ways.

Direct popular election will mean that all votes would be required for the candidate to win presidency. More so, minor political actors will also have an opportunity to vie for presidency hence a multiparty system scenario. This will mean that in a contested election a candidate will have to persuade the public to vote for him or her hence garnering majority populace votes.

Critics of the Electoral College are justified in the sense that for a democratic nation there is always the need for checks and balances in order to control excessiveness of power and responsibility. The critics argue that the reforms are meant to benefit the public in their representation in government offices (Cronin and Genovese 25).

Works Cited

Cronin, Thomas and Genovese, Michael. The Paradoxes of the American Presidency (3^rd Ed.). Oxford, Mass: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.

Edwards, George C. Presidential selection: the flawed foundations of the Electoral College. Texas: A & M University Press, 2004. Print.

Fine, Jeffrey and Waterman, Richard. A new model of presidential leadership: controlling the bureaucracy. New York: Roxbury Press, 2005. Print.

Pfiffner, Davidson. Understanding the presidency: historical perspectives of the presidency. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986. Print.

Waterman, Richard, and Rockman, Bert. Presidential Leadership: The Vortex of Power. New York: Roxbury Press, 2005. Print.

Macroeconomics concerns the understanding of economic factors that result to fluctuations of national income in the short-run and in the long run. There the field involves an aggregation of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), price indices and unemployment levels in the country.

Since macroeconomics has the national income as its basis, the government plays a key role in providing an enabling or disabling environment for other sectors of the economy.

The president who appoints a qualified and loyal team to help run it leads government. They include treasury and departmental heads of various government institutions. The government affects business cycles that alter the national income in two ways, by fiscal policy and monetary policy.

The president of the United States plays an important role in formulating the government’s strategy of fiscal policy, which is the main source of government revenue and impacts directly to the aggregate demand in the economy. The government uses fiscal policy to direct spending in a certain sector of the economy.

For example, reducing taxes charged on certain products will theoretically result to an increased consumption of the product, all other factors remaining constant. While the tax policy affects the level of demand, government may also alter the focus on spending in the economy and how resources are allocated.

In order to reduce the unemployment rates in the economy, the president may direct his government to take actions that lead to a reduction on capital expenditures in favor of labor-intensive investments. This achievable using tax rebates for economic sectors and corporations employ a large number of workers in the economy such as the Detroit motor industry.

The U.S. government spends money it collects from the economy by financing several national and regional sectors such as public education, healthcare, infrastructure development and security. The amount of spending for a given in the specific sector of the economy depends on the directive of the president as the leader of government.

Massive spending on infrastructure inspires innovation in the private sectors as introduces costs of doing business and increases the competitiveness of the given sector. On the other hand, an increased military spending at the expense of other development sectors of the economy drains aggregate demand in the economy and leads to a stagnation of most industry that may even cause a recession on the overall economy.

Other than taxes, the state will obtain funds from deficit financing and this impact on the available money in the economy that is left to finance other development and trade of the private sector.

When deficit financing is through borrowing from bonds and treasury-bills then it serves as a withdrawal of funds from other uses in the economy to finance government spending.

When the withdrawal is excess, it leads to a decreased supply of money in the economy and therefore the price equilibrium of the cost of credit shifts upwards. It becomes increasingly expensive to obtain credit that forms the lifeline of business transactions.

The president leads the government intention of providing a robust environment for the private sector to thrive and as a result increase the national income. Monetary policy of the government determines the rate of money supply in the economy.

The president will seek to increase the supply of money in the economy is in a recession to prompt businesses to expand and thus reduce the levels of unemployment. The money supply in the economy may be increased by lowering interest rates. This mandate is given to the federal reserve bank that works in close relationship with the state headed by the president.

According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, self-actualization is the peak of experience when a person reaches understanding and harmony with his/herself and the surrounding people. It means that self-actualized people are usually reality-oriented – they can distinguish between real thing and the fraudulent ones (Montana and Charnov 240).

They are also problem-centered which means that they realize the existing problems and try to find possible solutions. Most importantly, they can easily establish the connection the external environment and feel comfortable when staying along.

All these attributes are applicable to Roh Moo-Hyun, the former South Korean president who died because of head injuries (CNN n. p.). The president was suspected of committed suicide, which implies that some of his hierarchy needs were far from fulfillment.

An in-depth consideration of the case proves the fact that Roh was not in harmonic relations with the surrounding people. He stated that he lost his face and he was afraid of disappointing people. This means he was not confident enough in himself; the president was not a fully self-actualized person. Moreover, the absence of belonging, confidence, and security is the major contributing facto to suicide.

The president, therefore, was deprived of feeling to be appreciated and accepted by others. The accusations of bribery made Roh feel ignored because he did not feel recognition and return for his actions and deed. Therefore, the top ladder of hierarch was unavailable for him because the individuals fail to acquire a sense of personal achievement, satisfaction, and growth.

Judging from the above-presented considerations as well as from the saying in the notes made before his death, Roh Moo-Hyun was at the bottom of psychological needs. Though Maslow’s model is a limited, it places Ron at the third level of accomplishment, which means that he has not reached self-esteem needs and self-actualization.

However, it should also be admitted that some of the previously three established layers are not reached to a full extent either which especially concerns motivation and experience. These conditions are crucial for working effectively (Montana and Charnov 240). Specifically, the concept of belonging and love is also closely associated with work motivation and has much in common with interpersonal satisfactions.

Due to the fact that the lowest layers are more perceived as discouraging factors, individual’s attachment to these behavioral patterns create no ground for goal-oriented behavior.

While evaluating the case in more detail, it can be stated that Moo-Hyun was significantly embarrassed by the convictions. This was especially seen in his saying, “nothing is left in my life but to be a burden to others”. He did not feel any support and encouragement he need badly.

In contrast to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Lasswell’s value categories imply that “psychological pain of being preoccupied with deprivations concerning one value would provoke a shift to preoccupations with other values” (Ascher and Hirschfelder-Ascher 26). As a result, if a person encounters a specific psychological problem, it is often difficult to understand the veritable source of the problem.

Before considering the disparities and similarities between two existing models, it should be noted that Lasswell’s conception is more applied to politicians who, according to the theorist’s study, have a strong feeling of insecurity and damaged self-esteem that is compensated, or “sublimated” by their desire to acquire power contributing to social development and public life. In this respect, the presidents’ influential position failed to contribute to his security and, as a result, the lack of security is substituted by a distress and self-hating.

While comparing these arguments with Maslow’s concepts, it should be stated that Maslow’s focus on the pyramid of needs where one need should be satisfied before moving on to another one. Lasswell’s argument is more concerned with shifting needs where values can be interchangeable and are presented in the form of matrix.

This means that it is not necessarily to acquire security, for example, for achieving self-esteem (Ascher and Hirschfelder-Ascher 27). Referring to the case under consideration, one might assume that Roh dissatisfaction with life could be due to a number of reasons that were disguised by his fear of being despised by people. Therefore, accusations of bribery might not be the actual reason for committing suicide.

In addition, displacement of value categories can be recognized because it explains the shifts in instincts. Pursuing particular values that are unacceptable to a person can lead to self-disgust, depression, and other emotional displays (Ascher and Hirschfelder-Ascher 27). These switches, or sublimations, are often explained by a transformation of less appropriate impulses into more relevant one.

Lasswell’s value category also explains the shifts in the president behavior and his inclination to self-hating. This can happen when one identification is displayed to another, alternative of identification. For instance, the ignorance of self-hatred can be considered a reason for rejecting leading to a distress, just like it happened to Mr. Moo-Hyun.

Despite the existing differences between two theoretical frameworks, there are certain similarities that must be mentioned. To begin with, both theirs largely rely on Freud’s conception of sexual impulses (Montana and Charnov 240). Considering Maslow’s model, sex, along with food, shelter, and water, is considered the basic physiological need of the individuals.

However, unlike Freud that considers sexual desires and impulses as the leading one in human life, Maslow just perceives this as one of physiological needs for an individual to feel comfortable (Montana and Charnov 240).

Similarly to Maslow, Lasswell’s value categories are also linked to sexual impulses being the triggers and original motivators. Sexual nature of identified values can contribute to shifting from one moral value to another.

Another similarity between two models lies in enumeration of needs a person should satisfy on the way to become as full-fledged personality. Hence, according to Maslow’s theory, a person has physiological, social, and psychological sets of need to be accomplished. Lasswell also mentions these three types of needs a person should satisfy, but they are not prioritized as it is provided by Maslow.

In conclusion, though Maslow’s hierarchy of need has a number of problems and misconceptions in terms of motivation and experience, it explains why the president of South Korea committed suicide. His needs are posited in the middle of the hierarchy before the self-esteem needs, which is typical of politicians who often fail to acquire this quality.

Impossibility to receive support and fear to lose trust and sense of belonging made him to give motivation. Such a situation was the contributing factor for suicide. In addition, the accusation of bribery served as the reason for losing feelings of confidence and security, which are the most crucial for people dealing with politics.

Works Cited

Ascher, William and Barbara Hirschfelder-Ascher. Revitalizing Political Psychology: the Legacy of Harold D. Lasswell. NY: Routeledge, 2005. Print.

CNN, Former S. Korean President Roh Commits Suicide. May 2009. Web.

Montana, Patrick J., and Bruce H. Charnov. Management. US: Barron’s Educational Series, 2008. Print.