Home of Avid Collectors of Aggregated Ideals...Widecasting via Google+, LinkedIn, Facebook, Tweetcasting, Pinteresting, Meddling, and generally Stumbling Upon and sharing all that's there to learn because an informed voter is a better voter.

Showing posts with label Republican. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republican. Show all posts

Friday, March 17, 2017

Leadership: How Does Trump Stack Up?


We at The Policy Geek think it's high time we had a discussion about Leadership, what makes a good leader, and what we should be looking for in a POTUS moving forward. To that end, we share with you here a piece written by our good friend Dr. Bear as originally posted on Mad Mike's America...

By Dr. Mark Bear

In my other line of work, I am an organizational consultant and trainer. Often, I am asked the million dollar question as to what constitutes “good leadership,” and I must confess it is not only a fair question, but an important one, too.

Sadly, leadership is often misconstrued as the art of persuading others to do one’s will. Looking at several disastrous examples throughout the course of history, it's rather clear that just because one can convince those around him to do his bidding with undying loyalty doesn't automatically designate that person as being a “good leader." Therefore, being able to motivate blind followers should not be the sole litmus test as to whether one is, or is not, good leader material.

Some examples of poor leadership include Richard Nixon, Jim Jones, Adolph Hitler, and a host of other characters littering the leadership literature, and yet it can very well be argued that these men did in fact, successfully and en masse persuade others to do their bidding.

So what does constitute good leadership, and more importantly, how would our current President, Donald Trump, fare if evaluated with the standard descriptors found in mainstream social psychological literature? More importantly, what are the attributes of good leadership?

Here's what we've found. Positive leadership role models include the following: modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the hearts of those around him or her.

Let’s do a brief review of these factors through the frame of Trump. Exemplary leaders stand for something, believe in something, and care about something. They pursue their vision with determination and elegance. They then can easily be held up as role models for all to follow. Well, we already know that in many ways, from imitating a handicapped person at a rally, to inciting violence, to being caught talking about attempting to assault married women, that this man is no role model.

Good leaders inspire a shared vision. They find their voice by clarifying their personal values, expressing those values in their own unique and authentic style, and drawing like minds close. We need to stop right here if we even care to provide an objective assessment of Trump, because at first glance one might be persuaded to believe that Trump does, in fact, “express his values in his own unique style.” Style he has in spades. However, the good leader – or the person one would want to follow – first finds his or her voice – and it is this voice which serves as the catalyst for the leader’s vision. The problem with Trump here is apparent. He has embraced nearly every single side of every single position politically. By having no firm footing in any particular ideology, other than nationalism, Trump makes it quite difficult for those around him, let alone members of his own party, to follow him.

Moreover, while articulating his stances on the issues, he has behaved in such an unprofessional manner at levels of contempt for civil process which are unprecedented. Despite his missteps, Trump daily accuses everyone around him of being questionable, while evidence consistently and clearly points to he himself as being the problem. Most of his staff has to play clean up throughout each day, continuously needing to explain his new positions and absurd statements, so progress toward any particular goal is often sidelined while his advisers are consumed instead with the business of putting out constant fires.

This is not what experts in my field – including myself – consider good leadership. Trump very well may be able to persuade people at a rally, however translating that speech into political governance is quite another thing, as we all are witnessing with the current GOP “Repeal and Replace ‘Obamacare'” effort.

Eloquent speeches about admirable beliefs – not being part of the “establishment” – aren’t nearly enough. Being an "outsider" does not a productive civil servant make. Words and deeds must be consistent for leaders to have integrity. Leaders wishing to be effective must set the example by aligning their personal actions with shared values. To date, Trump has told his base that he would “drain the swamp,” only to turn around and state at one of his celebration rallies how that statement was now "hokey to him.” And instead of following words with deeds he instead provides evidence to any casual observer that he's filling the swamp instead of draining it by surrounding himself exclusively with so many billionaires in his cabinet positions.

There is no freeway to the future, folks. No paved highway from here to tomorrow. There is only wilderness! Only uncertain terrain. There are no road maps, and no signposts. Pioneering leaders – those that are considered the greatest in our social psychological literature – rely on a compass and a dream. They dream of what “might” be, and they passionately believe they can make a positive difference. But here is where things go awry again with Trump and if we are not careful, we might find ourselves believing him to actually possess this attribute. But does he?

Visions seen only by the leader are insufficient to mobilize and energize. One may argue that Trump was quite able to mobilize, as evidenced by the turnout for the previous election cycle, but Russian interference notwithstanding, this standard still misses the mark. Leaders enlist others by appealing to their shared aspirations. Publicly he's promised jobs, to bring back coal, and that he'd make Mexico pay for a wall. In reality, Trump's aspirations mostly involve tearing families apart, removing health care coverage from millions and millions of people, gutting social safety nets, and destroying the established governmental departments that run our country.

Currently, Trump is reaching out only to those within his base, and is neglecting to appeal to the entire electorate - that is those within the ranks of the Democratic and Independent groups of our electorate. If he is to experience any level of success – long term – he will need to go beyond his mere rhetoric offered on the night of the election, and actually try to meet people in the middle. If he doesn’t, he will be a failed leader.

On the average, the work of leaders is to accomplish change. That's how their success is measured. To them the status quo is unacceptable. Leaders search for opportunities by seeking innovative ways to change, not seek out ways to tear the entire system down. He's not trying to rebuild our system at all, but rather it seems to be his goal to simply destroy it. In fact, Steve Bannon, the very man who has Trump’s ear the most, is on record as stating how he wants to tear down the entire system.



Good leaders seize the initiative to make things happen, realizing they have no monopoly on good ideas, and they constantly scan the environment seeking other people – regardless of party affiliation – to assist in creating ways to do new things. They research all the options. They listen, they learn, they grow. This takes time. It takes measured resolve to make educated choices. It takes input from every direction so every base is covered.

In other words, one cannot get from here to tomorrow in one giant leap. Extraordinary things get done one step at a time. The greatest leaders in our history have experimented and taken risks by constantly generating small wins and by learning from mistakes. And, despite persistent opposition – which is certain to come – and inevitable setbacks (which need to be admitted to versus denying they occur), leaders demonstrate the courage to continue the quest.

Let me be clear here folks: Trump very well may take risks, however those risks seem to be irresponsible and self-defeating. Sending your staff out to argue how the former President spied on you is nothing more than petty, and worse, when most folks realize it to be untrue, you as a leader risk losing all credibility. In fact, already, the world has decided his office holds no veritas, generates no truths that can be relied on. This is not something Trump should be surprised about because he began losing credibility when he entered the race, by seizing on the lie that our former President was not born in the United States, going so far as to tell an interviewer that, and I’m paraphrasing “I have people in Hawaii right now and they are finding things which are not all that good.” Of course, none of that every happened.

Finally, when a leader suffers a setback he or she doesn’t go out of his way to exact retribution upon the dissident. Threatening to “keep a list of those who wronged you,” or worse, calling those who did not support you the “opposition party” or "the enemy," are unproductive ways to bridge the gap. It's a funny way to govern when you actively seek out a constant enemy within, when you begin by fighting against more than half of your electorate, when you call our cherished fourth estate "the enemy of the people."

Leaders also know they cannot do the task alone. It takes partners to get extraordinary things accomplished in organizations and that challenge is even greater in government when having to deal with various factions with specific ideologies. In other words, it takes compromise. So, leaders foster collaboration by promoting cooperative goals and building trust. They develop teams with spirit and cohesion, being careful not to select each person with the mentality it be essential they all agree with you, for doing so endangers one’s leadership terribly. Unfortunately, in Trump world, there are only yes men and sycophants. And where there is an independent voice to be heard, it is immediately asked to resign.

Trump has violated the public’s ability to trust him, and now he has violated any modicum of trust which may have existed between his most important ally; the current Speaker of the House.

Lest you missed the news, Breitbart – the very online publication where Trump's Bannon comes from – published a story yesterday trying to portray the Speaker in the worst terms because Ryan had told his caucus (the day after the Access Hollywood tape surfaced in our media) that he would "never support Trump.” Now, Trump is using that statement made several months ago against the Speaker, this at a time when Trump NEEDS the Speaker more than ever to get his health care bill passed. But this President has a pension for revenge, and that need overrules common sense or big picture vision.

Good leaders promote positive reciprocity between all players, something Trump is unable to do, as reports of infighting and backstabbing leak daily. As the sands shift under Trump, he really could care less. Despite the obvious fact that good leaders cannot do the task alone, Trump told the entire Nation he “alone was the person who could fix the nation.” Given his lack of research and his shooting from the hip style of command, we're in for a long bumpy ride. Not only does he seem to have trouble getting his team to work together, he actually seems to enjoy watching them fight each other - like this is all one big episode of The Apprentice to him. With the White House playing out Oval Office politics like a story line from The Survivor, who knows who will have his ear even this time next month.

On every winning team, members need to share in the rewards of their efforts. So good leaders celebrate the values and victories by creating a spirit of community. That means expressing pride in the accomplishments of the leader’s team, but when governing in the position Trump holds, it means he acknowledges EVERY person, every citizen’s accomplishment, regardless of their political support or affiliation. It is this obstacle which persists in plaguing Trump as President and prevents him from being effective and good as a leader. If you aren't a Trump supporter, and don't sing his praises, you're out, and a target for his scorn.

So how does Trump stack up? You can make the decision for yourself. However, when doing so perhaps we all should compare Trump to our previous President. Ask yourselves a question: How many of these attributes did our former President possess? Did he serve as a role model? Did he walk the talk? Did he inspire us with a shared vision of HOPE? Did he challenge the process, promote transparency, and generate new ways of incorporating input like creating the petition page on the whitehouse.gov website? Did he enable others to act, provide roadmaps for change? Did he and our former first lady encourage the hearts of those around him or her?

As I have made clear throughout all of my writing, our former President was not perfect, but at least he had the character essential to bring the country together. At least his style and process was role model worthy. Just because there was a group of people in this nation who decided to believe lies and myths about the former President in no way mitigates his basic leadership style which very well can be argued met the above criteria, and in many cases far exceeded that criteria.

In closing, my personal and professional evaluation of Trump as a leader of the free world, utilizing the objective criteria outlined above, tells me he is more of a slick salesman – able to motivate large groups of people to HIS vision – versus being a “good leader” who embraces a shared vision of ALL citizens in this nation. Leading often requires supporting the populace in accomplishing their goals, not forcing the populace to assist in accomplishing your own goals.

Unless he alters his course radically, something I do not see occurring, I do not remain hopeful. Anyone, anyone at all, if trained to be successful can be a salesman, but it is quite another to be a “good leader.” Being a dictator is easy. Leadership skills take years of incubation coupled with layers of a complex and ever learning character; both criteria which he seems to lack. I hope for our Nation that Donald J. Trump will be the exception to the rule, that bumbling into the office will somehow prove to be a growth opportunity for Donald, but fifty days into his Administration is showing otherwise.

Follow Dr. Bear on Facebook here, and on Twitter.

Source: Kouzes J.M & Posner, (2004). The leadership challenge. Josey Bass, SF, CA.

Friday, September 9, 2016

What's Up With Hillary Clinton?

What's Up With Hillary Clinton?

I have been paying attention to Hillary Clinton my whole adult life. No politician I have ever watched has ever gone through what I see her going through and yet she is still standing.

 

Friday, January 10, 2014

Angry White Men


One of the enduring legacies of the 2012 presidential campaign, and some may argue the 2008 campaign as well, was the demise of the white American male voter as a dominant force in the political landscape. On election night, after Obama was announced the winner, a distressed Bill O'Reilly lamented that he didn't live in "a traditional America anymore." He was joined by others who growled their grief on the talk radios, the preferred bellow ground of angry white men. The racist-like din that had previously been stored in back rooms, and spoken of quietly and with a slight look around, has bubbled over and become a ranty ragey roar.

Why are they so angry? Sociologist Michael Kimmel, one of the leading writers on men and masculinity in the world today, spent hundreds of hours in the company of America's angry white men--from men's rights activists to young students to white supremacists--in pursuit of an answer. So we recommend Angry White Men as a part of our continuing study into the mind of the obstructionist.

Perhaps here is the answer as to why there has been unpresidented push back against this seated President. By any measurement, this President has had it harder than most when it comes to filibusters and blocked nominations. More often than not the calculated lack of productivity on the part of this Congress is simply chalked up to racism or partisanship. These angry white congressmen see through brown colored glasses when viewing the troubling issues at the forefront of America today and, when asked for solutions, they just lay down in the road and nap. Angry White Men provides useful insight we so sorely search for: What are these Congressional Republican obstructionists made of and how have their damaging selective perceptions not dissipated when confronted with our current reality?

(Funny or Die, 2012)

Kimmel locates this increase in anger in the seismic economic, social, and political shifts that have so transformed the American landscape. Downward mobility, increased racial and gender equality, and a tenacious clinging to an anachronistic ideology of masculinity has left many men feeling betrayed and bewildered. Raised to expect unparalleled social and economic privilege, white men are suffering today from what Kimmel calls "aggrieved entitlement": a sense that those benefits that white men believed were their due have been snatched away from them.

(Savvy Silver, 2012)
Angry White Men discusses, among others, the sons of small town America, scarred by underunemployment and wage stagnation. When America's white men feel they've lived their lives the "right" way--worked hard and stayed out of trouble--and still do not get economic rewards, then they have to blame somebody else. Even more terrifying is the phenomenon of angry young boys. School shootings in the United States are not just the work of "misguided youth" or "troubled teens"--they're all committed by boys. These alienated young men are transformed into mass murderers by a sense that using violence against others was their right.


The future of America is more inclusive and diverse than that. The choice for angry white men is not whether or not they can stem the tide of history: they cannot. Their choice is whether or not they will be dragged kicking and screaming into that inevitable future, or whether they will walk honorably alongside those they've spent so long trying to exclude. By explaining their rage, Kimmel is able to point to a possible future that is healthier, happier, and much less angry.

Can we all evolve? Yes We Can.

Recommend: Angry White Men

The Policy Geek

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

OCCASSIONAL REPOST: We're On The Right Track

www.groundup.com (2012)
With permission from out new friends at Ground Up, reposting.
We're On The Right Track

I’ve been quiet lately about Mr. Romney and his running mate. That’s because this pair has been so awful, they stole my thunder in trash talking about them. All is not lost. We had the first debate and a marvelous jobs report and here’s my take.

The First Presidential Debate. Or, more aptly titled, “The Ghost of Reagan Past.” Is it just me or did anyone notice that Romney’s new hair cut looks just like former Pres. Ronald Reagan? Romney even mimicked some of Reagan’s body language. And he made a rather awkward attempt at Reagan-style bluster. I’ll bet the preparation Romney did was primarily focused on watching old Reagan speeches and debates, mimicking the former President as best he could.

It wasn’t good. At times, it was painful to watch because clearly, Romney was not comfortable with his new persona. He fluctuated between anger and frustration, coupled with feeble attempts of being compassionate but then rather animated and a bit jerky. It was like watching a white guy with two left feet trying to perform hip-hop at the Apollo Theater on Amateur Night. The only item missing was the long hook to remove Romney off the stage. Had he something of value to say, we would have forgiven his rather odd new look and stance. Instead, none of what he said had any substance or truth to it. He lied, over and over again.

I went to a local restaurant to watch the debate. Some of the people there were Independents and conservative Democrats. They came because they were undecided on who to vote for and felt that perhaps the debate would help them to come to a decision. It did. They were disgusted with Romney’s performance — especially what they saw as blatant lies about everything. As they left, they said, “we’re voting for Obama.”

The Jobs Report. 7.8 percent, 144,000 jobs: I have one suggestion to anyone who wants to pooh-pooh the latest jobs report. Complain to the people who found a job this time around and listen to what they have to say. Moreover, that folks are still getting jobs — not losing them — is profound encouragement; it says we’re moving in the right direction.

Just think about where we are. In just four years President Obama, despite unfathomable odds, has managed to keep us from total free fall and gain back the half the jobs we lost. We truly are in the green column. Were Romney President, he would have “let the auto industry fail” and the “housing market go bankrupt,” both of which would have benefited companies like Bain Capital. No wonder he and his supporters are doing their best to water down the American people’s positive results. This is no time to turn the country over to someone who doesn’t care about the middle class. Remember this:


 

Monday, October 8, 2012

The Empire Of Philip Anschutz

Let's talk for a moment about money. Capitalism. Geek style.

See Promo
Fierce Debate
Saturday night attended the well-publicized Rumble 2012 Debate between Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly. It took place on the George Washington Campus in DC. One and a half hours of pure wonk heaven. They were both amazing. Stewart and O'Reilly discussed immigration, taxes, welfare, disability, social security, socialism, The Olympics, helping the least of us, the troops, jobs bills, Congress, FDR, the deficit, housing subsidies, the GI Bill, and even quoted the bible.

Yes, of course, I thought Stewart won, but one of the best takeaways of the night was when O'Reilly said, "Capitalism is our biggest problem." Now he was making a broader point about how people love to hear outrage, so money is thrown at producing shows promoting fear and anger, ergo anger/fear mongers in all arenas get paid a pretty penny to say things they don't even believe themselves. Yes, he said that too.

Following The Money
Starting with Capitalism, and assuming Papa Bear is spot on, it would naturally follow (into the rabbit hole) that in the game of Capitalism, whoever has the most money wins. N'est pas? A search through the top donors behind Republicans this election cycle leads to Longtime Republican Party Financial Backer brother Anschutz, that is to say, the Multi-Billionaire Phillip Anschutz.

Anschutz (UPI, 2012)
Who is Philip Anschutz? Forbes says, : "[Philip bought dad's drilling company out in 1961, and moved into stocks, real estate, and railroads. A regular Monopoly player.

Tulsa World says, "The Anschutz Co., now encompasses the empire of billionaire Philip Anschutz and includes oil and gas drilling, railroads, telecom communications, entertainment, professional sports and publishing.[9/16/11 emphasis added]

Part of the Anschutz portfolio includes AEG Holdings which owns and operates, among other things, venues like The STAPLES Center (Los Angeles, CA), The O2 (London, UK), Best Buy Theater (Times Square, New York), Sprint Center, (Kansas City), O2 World (Berlin, Germany), Mercedes-Benz Arena (Shanghai, China), MasterCard Center (Beijing, China), O2 World Hamburg (Hamburg, Germany), Allphones Arena (Sydney, Australia) and the Ericsson Globe Arena (Stockholm, Sweden). Need more? Cause we could go on...and on....and on. 

In 2010 Forbes rated him the #123 wealthiest man in the world at $6B and now, in 2012, rates him #84 in the world. This guy's movin' on up. Just in case you think this was all just great luck, be it known that Anschutz was named "The Greediest Executive of 2002" in Fortune Magazine.

Anschutz (Slate, 2012)
Mr. Anschutz has donated massive amounts of money to the RNC through his companies' pockets this election cycle, and who knows how much more he has donated to the Super Pacs supporting the GOP candidates. It must hurt to wake up every day and see the percentages on all the polls showing Obama in the lead. How far will a man go to protect his investment? When you are Phillip Anschutz, that's pretty far.

Again, there's the money. Entwined in most of Anschutz's holdings is MBNA Bank. There are so many listings, one signed deal after another, on google, that they are too many to list here. The simplest example we can post is the relationship between Randy Lerner, Chairman of MBNA Corporation, and Anschutz. Together they own the MLS, domestic soccer league. Just the two of them. 

MBNA is a worldwide Bank (2012)
MBNA Worldwide
There are literally hundreds of other business connections between MBNA, Anschutz Holdings, and the GOP. In '93 Lerner joined MBNA. In 2001, President George W. Bush appointed Lerner to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. Now Lerner (estimated worth at $1 Billion) runs MBNA. In Anschutz's ledger, MBNA financed this, supported that, helped set up this, and executives from MBNA and Anschutz Holdings have been jumping back and forth for over a decade. They both play the sports ownership game that Romney refers to when he says, he has "a lot of good friends who are owners of the NFL and Nascar teams."

Single largest campaign donor to Bush? MBNA Bank.  Single largest corporate donor to Romney this campaign? MBNA Bank.

(PoliticsUSA, 2012)
On Top Of Bullshit Mountain
Philip Anschutz also owns The Examiner franchise and dozens of other newspapers. These publications have consistently been called out for printing outright lies on issues before state legislators and Congress, only taking positions that support GOP ideals...more money in oil and all that goes with it.

Here's a great piece on how The Examiner and its franchised papers have been distorting the truth on fracking to help out the oil holdings of the parent company:http://mediamatters.org/tags/philip-anschutz.  No one can do it like Media Matters. You should always make them a stop on your daily journeys through the cloud.

Now how can we possibly wrap up this long and diverse set of facts we've been laying down into one coherent rant? According to O'Reilly, money drives our problems in the form of distortions and sometimes in the form of fear mongering:
We know it's a stretch, but bear with us.

(Civicus. 2012)
The Examiner, in addition to running articles about how Obama wants to take away every one's guns, recently spread the rumor that hollow points are being bought up by Homeland Security. Be afraid. Be very afraid. After the story broke in The Examiner, it was picked up and quoted on all the underground fearful sites, those who tend to be interested in 9/11 theories, etc. Now, it's supposedly the truth. Obama is buying up 'cop killers' just before the election. Big scary Obama is going to take us all down. Does that sound like reality to you? Or does it sound, as Stewart put it Saturday night, like more manure from bullshit mountain? 

Following the Examiner's stories, which we don't recommend anyone do, you will find a trail of misinformation designed to get Romney elected and that trail leads directly to Anschutz. It's such a shame that anyone feels they need to lie to get into office, but even more sad because this is our American system of government for sale.

Remember, an informed voter is a better voter. Do your own research!  After all, this is why Gore invented the Internet.

The Policy Geek

[Update 10/9/12: After this flurry of email activity and FB noise about the end of the world, in the last 48 hours, Romney has taken the lead in most polls across the U.S. In addition, today, The San Francisco Examiner, now under new ownership,  just endorsed Obama. In 2008 they endorsed McCain.]