Vanity Fair: Public divided over caring versus leadership

[andym]

"Voters Desire Mitt But See Themselves Feeling More Stable with Barack"
by Juli Weiner 12:12 PM, OCTOBER 11 2012
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2012/10/Voters-Desire-Mitt-But-See-Themselves-Feeling-More-Stable-with-Barack

"In the quadrennially important states of Colorado, Virginia, and Wisconsin, likely voters perceive Mitt Romney as a superior leader, according to a new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS news poll. (Side note: Is Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS news the most random triumvirate to team up for polling purposes? Is there a University of California–Merced/Elle Magazine/Mad Money poll? A Yale University/Robb Report/Best Buy in-house company newsletter survey?) However, more respondents think Obama cares more about them. So, people think Romney is better, but think they have a better chance of getting Obama’s attention? We’d do a little armchair psychoanalysis, but even that is not covered under the Romney health plan.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in The New York Times, statistics dreamboat and 100-percent babe Nate Silver reiterates what he said to us about Romney having one-in-three shot of winning the election. It is, Silver writes, “his highest figure since August 22 and more than double his chances from before the debate. Mr. Romney may have increased his chances of becoming president by 15 or 20 percent based on one night in Denver.” Note that professional advancement is not a common conclusion to “bro, this one night in Denver,” stories."

-------------------
So how did Mitt Romney increase his leadership polling? The debate.
The aggressive energetic (lying) Mitt is the one who needs to be taken down a few notches at the next debate....

[patrice]

1. "leadership" - translation - War Mongering for American Exceptionalists/PNAC. nt

[andym]

2. One word: "bully"

Bullies are often seen as strong leaders. Romney will be a big bully in foreign and domestic affairs. From "firing" big bird to bombing Iran ASAP.

[patrice]

5. That word DOES relate better to things like going to a party to which he was NOT invited &

being pushy to the point that he introduced himself, AS A POLITICAL FIGURE, 4 times, to someone like the Navy Seal who died in Benghazi, without even bothering to register the young man's face in his memory long enough to recognize his 3 mistakes.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Your OP just got me thinking

When a nation is down and out, they naturally gravitate towards someone who "cares" and will help them out of their mess. And this is where Democrats seem to get their attention. But as soon as times are good (thanks to that Democrat who helped them), they then want someone who essentially is a "bully" who can appear "strong enough" to catapult them to the stratosphere. And this seems to match with the continual shift back and forth between the parties at the Presidential level.

Problem is, the "bully" that they crave for ALSO tends towards reckless behavior, and from the rethug standpoint, will ultimately take the nation down a destructive path leading to distress.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

It's a bit insane but seems to be what is happening.

[andym]

4. Very interesting thought

There is some truth in that, as it explains GWB to some extent, But people who come off as strong leaders often do very well in Presidential elections: FDR, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton come to mind.
FDR and Clinton also projected a strong sense of caring (perhaps Kennedy too).

Obama, when he wants, can project strong leadership in the Gary Cooper mode. He'll need to do so in the next debate.