The Abe Lincoln of 2008

I am often asked which candidate running for president would be the best leader and why. After meticulously sifting through hundreds of articles and personal accounts as well as biographies, I'll share my conclusion after describing my criteria.

Most presidential scholars and leadership aficionados agree that Abraham Lincoln was the country's best president ever. Lincoln possessed a unique mix of strong intelligence, such as the ability to solve problems, as well as core personal character. Presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin chronicled Lincoln's personal character well in her book Team of Rivals, including his understanding of himself and others, ability to take responsibility for mistakes and learn from them, judgment, and faculty to remain hopeful through setbacks.

Unfortunately, campaign commentators rarely glean these nuances in candidates' character, concentrating instead on media-driven narratives. The result can be tragic. In 2000, for example, the media establishment focused on George Bush's self-description as a moderate, compassionate conservative. That appealing narrative ignored a number of personal flaws that would ultimately most impact his presidency, such as his inability to acknowledge his mistakes or learn from them.

During this election cycle, many of the same herd-like, media-driven narrative patterns are repeating. Candidates try to position or sell themselves as the strongest or most experienced, using a variety of relevant or irrelevant narratives from their past. With experience, however, the most critical question is why some people learn from their experience while others do not. That answer is directly linked to a leader's personal character, not the experience itself.

When Lincoln arrived in Washington, he was an outsider, a one-term Congressman with extremely limited government experience, and mostly known as a prairie lawyer. Yet, he understood his weaknesses and, with no close allies, was confident enough to surround himself with a remarkable cabinet. His advisers had vastly different viewpoints and a number wanted to be president themselves. Aside from his intelligence, it was Lincoln's character -- his judgment, self-knowledge and trustworthiness, and ability to understand others' motives and learn from his mistakes - that allowed him to manage the cabinet and lead the country with the strength that he did.

In assessing the 2008 presidential field, several veteran observers have effectively delved beneath the superficial narratives to examine these key qualities of presidential leadership. David Brooks wrote the most insightful piece I have encountered in his New York Times Op-Ed on December 18, 2007 entitled, "The Obama-Clinton Issue" in which he argues that, "[Barack] Obama is an inner-directed man in a profession filled with insecure outer-directed ones," and notes:

Presidents are buffeted by sycophancy, criticism, and betrayal. They must improvise amid a thousand fluid crises. They're isolated and also exposed, puffed up on the outside and hollowed out within. With the presidency, character and self-knowledge matter more than even experience.

Compared to other candidates, Barack Obama stands out in a singular way for having a unique combination of political leadership abilities like Lincoln had. Like Bill and Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney, Obama has strong intellectual aptitude, which he has demonstrated dating back to when he was president of the Harvard Law Review. More uniquely, though, Obama appears to possess remarkable personal character. He understands who he is, exemplified by the comfort he has in his own skin, his past judgments stand up well against the test of time, and he displays strong consistency grounded in a steady adherence to his guiding principles.

At a time when the country deserves and perhaps needs an exceptional president, a Lincolnesque leader may be in our midst.

Peter Sims is coauthor of the nationally best-selling book on leadership "True North" with author Bill George and can be reached at [e-mail].

Follow Peter Sims on Twitter: www.twitter.com/petersims

Comments

[GPM56]

While "Most presidential scholars and leadership aficionados agree that Abraham Lincoln was the country's best president ever," Obama, it appears, would not necessarily agree.

Two years before announcing his bid for the presidency, Obama is quoted in a blog post dated June 27, 2005, as saying:

"I cannot swallow whole the view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator" He goes on to state, "As a law professor and civil rights lawyer and as an African-American, I am fully aware of his limited views on race. Anyone who actually reads the Emancipation Proclamation knows it was more a military document than a clarion call for justice."

(http://westernalliance.blogspot.com/2005/06/obama-lincoln-racist.html)

One also has to seriously question whether Obama has the "core personal character of Lincoln."

I doubt, for example, that, even in the heat of campaign, Lincoln would have ever had audacity to compare himself to any former president then thought to have been "the greatest president ever."

I also doubt that, in order to get elected, Lincoln would ever "publicly distance" himself from his minister (who, in Obama's case, is also his mentor and long-time friend). Indeed, he titled his second book, “The Audacity of Hope,” after one of minister's sermons.

Nonetheless, in the New York Times article entitled "A Candidate, His Minister and the Search For Faith," dated April 30, 2007, Obama's minister states the following:

"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”

When Lincoln was elected president he, like John Edwards, had already lost one son to death. He'd also served in the military.

Unlike Obama, Lincoln was truly a "man of the people," who did not attend an elite private prep school nor did he attend Ivy League universities like Columbia and Harvard, Obama's alma maters.

It appears that a lack of experience may be the ONLY thing Obama has in common with Lincoln!

[Spookcatcher]

We could revisit Lincoln as being the Best President and take a look art "old Hickory", Andrew Jaskson. He literally fought for the poor working class and shut down the 2nd Bank of the United States, and "Warred against the rise of economic slavery by big corporations as industrialization began to displace workers, and understood the advent of "Coprarations" meant they had no accountability to anyine but profits. He was faulted by keeping his slaves but he in fact held the Union together by personally backing down the Southern Aristocrats, particularly South Carolina secessionist leaders. That platform is the one Lincoln learned from. Jackson's bigotry about Westward Expansion, however, was made into his biggest moral mistake by not recognizing the Civilization of the Cherokee, who won Soveriegnty in the U.S. Supreme Court Decision, with which Jackson ignored, and lead to the trail of tears, this was truly genocide just for the establishment of Georgia. If Jackson had not had to deal with these two issues so expediantly and concurrently for preservation of Union: appeasement on slavery while fighting to the point of assassination attempts by the aristocracy for the economic and voting liberty of poor men, and the shutting down of Bankers controlling the U.S. Trasury, Lincoln would not have had a foundation of support to continue the fight for common man to be extended to slaves. Plus Lincoln WAS assassinated for taking on the Elitists and Central Bank interests by abolishing slavery that allowed cheap labor costs. Jackson had spent most of his first term with a bullet lodged in him. We could use an Andrew Jackson today without his traditional bigotry, but with all the fight against Big Corporations and Wall Street Bankers. It was with Jackson Mule became the Mascot of his new party, the Democratic Party, and it caught on because mules were relied upon as a stable of hard work, and revered as suchby the working class and farmers. It got him his second term in office!

[larry278]

Regardless of Sen Obama's record & if he manages to ever get elected POTUS, there are a legion or two of white people who would risk certain death if Sen Obama became POTUS & would try to murder him. Racist whites would prove to be as determined as Islamist terrorists are & probably would willingly become suicide bombers in their efforts to kill Sen Obama if he became President Obama. White racists are wily & mean. This could be a problem for the Secret Service. Dealing with constant attempts by a numberless mob of determined white racists to murder a black POTUS would be a constant problem. It wouldn't be surprising if anything within the beltway became a giant version of Baghdad's Green Zone well before 1/20/09. Maybe the USA would get it right this time-I hope.

[Qbear]

Lincoln did march with Martin Luther King...in a helluva lot more than figurative way, Mittler did.

[WintonyMay]

Mr. Sims:
Thanks for your thoughtful, discerning, post.
WintonyMay.

[outnow]

I like Edwards as a man and in regard to his positions on the issues as currently set forth on his website.

Is it really that important to have a man of character lead us as the correct slate pf policies to guide us?

Reading Pat Buchanan's new book, I was struck by the fact that he is now against NAFTA. Why? Because NAFTA sends manufacturing jobs overseas and weakens our ability to defend against foreign aggressors. Buchanan sees that even those who call themselves Democrats have severely damaged the interests of the middle class by "neoliberal" trade policies and deregulation.

Is this about character? No, it's about the interests of the nation and the interests of the workers in our own country. You can have all the character you want but if you sell out the interests of our ability to manufact5ure things and promote the interests of the investment bankers and commercial bankers on Wall Street and the economic interests of the MIC, are you a person of character or even a patriot?

Ronald Reagan launched a war on the middle class. Wealth was shifted upwards. Bush continued, Clinton followed, and Bush, Jr. increased this discrepancy between the rich and the poor.

Now that the dollar has fallen, exports have not risen. Why? Because of the severe damage done to our manufacturing base and economy by ambitious men who sell out to the very wealthy transnational elites. Hillary and Obama fall into this category.

Character is represented by men like FDR and JFK not those who sell out our middle class and destroy our manufacturing base by outsourcing jobs.

Don't speak to me of "character" while selling out the middle class. It's simple economics. Much of the money made is banking charges and financial in this country. We need a warrior because the right wingers have waged war on the middle class. Obama will compromise us out as did Bill Clinton with Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan to free trade. Good for Wall Street, bad for Main Street.

[OckhamsElectricRazor]

I KNEW Abe Lincoln...­er...guess that won't fly... Abe Lincoln would not have a snowball's chance of being elected in today's world. And he would have probably opted for a respectable job in the judiciary or perhaps higher education. The field now is left to the jackals.

[OhPlease2007]

Peter, no offense, but please answer these two questions:

1. Did Lincoln's state government records mysteriously disappear too?

2. Did Lincoln have a poor attendance record in the senate too?

Character is important, and Obama is a good guy, but so are 'documented records', ... or lack thereof.

[StephenDedalus82]

The best presidents are often considered so because of their accidental place in history- combined with perhaps making the right choices at critical moments. No one can say whether Obama is like Lincoln or will have the opportunity to be. I for one hope we don't have a national crisis of the magnitude of the Civil War (or 9/11 for that matter) in which the next president will either prove his or her greatness or fail (like Bush). At this point I think the idea of electing someone because of some fuzzy maybe-he-w­ill-be-gre­at emotional reaction. Presidents are shaped by their times, and as voters we should be concerned not with symbolism and legacy but with actions and solutions.

[research]

Obama eagerly choose Leberman as his mentor. How can I trust him knowing that?

[westwind]

As much as I would like to see an African American as President, I have serious doubts about Barack Obama.

During the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, he came out with a cowardly response as to which way he was going to vote, saying in effect (paraphrased), 'I'm going to vote against him, but I doubt my view will prevail'. Obama must have known as well as anyone how much of a disaster Alito would be on the Supreme Court, but instead of fighting for what he knew to be right, he kept his powder dry for his own presidential ambitions. He could have filibustered, or he could have tried to persuade his fellow senators to vote against Alito, but all he could offer was a limp c'est la vie shrug of the shoulders. That is not the way a patriot, or an effective president, acts.

He has also conveniently missed a number of key votes, citing his campaign activities, that would have put him on the record in ways he knew would negatively affect his appeal to as many voters as possible.

After his barnstorming address at the 2004 Democratic Convention, I had high hopes for him and his political future, but now all I see is another political hack who hopes to make his way into the highest office by avoiding negative perceptions, even when it means not properly doing the job he was elected to do.

[Jenontheshore]

Yes. A hundred times, yes. That is what I have been trying to articulate about Obama.

He has some positions/qualities that drive me UP the wall. His support of nuclear power - misguided. His relationship with Lieberman - bizarre. His relative lack of aggression regarding impeaching Bush - again, completely misguided. He is not at all everything I want him to be.

BUT his character, his nuanced way of thinking, his clear ethics. That is what attracts me to him and what makes me think he can be a great President, like Lincoln. I feel that even when we disagree, he will not dissapoint me and his choices will be motivated by rigorous thinking. It's almost impossible to think about having a president you can respectfully disagree with, but that's how I feel.

His CHARACTER is what makes Obama great. Compared to Hillary and Edwards (who I am convinced has pulled the con of the century by getting the support of progressives) he is simply in a different league.

[letsmakesense]

Freedom was important to Abe.
Freedom is important to Congressman Dr. Ron Paul.
What other candidates defend liberty and the Constitution?
Surely anyone who voted for the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, both or which are unconstitutional, do not defend liberty.

[Qbear]

The Abe Lincoln of 2008

I've looked over the entire field of candidates in BOTH Parties and I don't get a blip on my 54 yo. gay-dar from any of them. Lincoln lived with Joshua for 4 years in a one room house, and slept with his body guard when Mrs. Lincoln wasn't in the White House. Gay Republicans are called Log Cabin because of Lincoln's LOG CABIN. Even in his life there was yellow journalism making gay rumors about Lincoln.
http://archive.salon.com/books/review/2005/01/12/lincoln/story.jpg

Obama who hired Donnie McClurkin to SPIT on every LGBT american is NO LINCOLN.

[NicoleAnonymous]

Don't forget George Washington. I just read an article about him in WSJ that pointed out refused to be a monarch and changed our history for the better by refusing it. He cried while reading his speech expaining why.

We don't have any politician today like him.