Eisenhower, Kennedy, and the Significance of Presidential Leadership

The Kennedy administration foreign policies were less rigid and had an ideological approach. His policies displayed and promoted ‘Liberalism, Diplomacy and Military action’. His Foreign policies were popularly

One of the key elements of Eisenhower’s legislative style was to keep up a great relationship with the members of congress. He did not think that personal relationships with congressional members was that important, but harmful to be an effective leader. He hoped that “personal acquaintance would help out difficulties inherent in partisanship.” He is mostly given awarded for creating the first office in the White House only for the relations of congress.

Even before John Fitzgerald Kennedy began his presidency in 1961, he viewed foreign policy as one of the most important aspects of our lives. In one speech he said, “Foreign policy today, irrespective of what we might wish, in its impact on our daily lives, overshadows everything else. Expenditures, taxation, domestic prosperity, the extent of social sciences — all hinge on the basic issue of war or peace” (JFK Library). As the first president born in the 20th century, the youngest president to be elected to office, and the youngest president to die in office, John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s time in office was brief, but full of difficult challenges in foreign affairs. I feel that he

John F Kennedy's first leadership trait was articulating a vision. Kennedy had a vision to not just finish the cold war but win it. America ended up winning the cold in 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down. This is a quote from John F Kennedy, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” ( John F Kennedy). John F Kennedy said this at a speech he was giving. He said this to the people of the country when they were in the cold war and he was hoping that they would end up winning and finish the war. Another quote from John F Kennedy. “Let us think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation.” (John F Kennedy). John F Kennedy had a vision to build schools for

A leader should be able to diagnose problems in his country and effectively navigate his people safely through that trouble-spot. President John F . Kennedy was a great leader, who was able to lead the United States through several crises. One prime example of his navigational skills through such hardships is in his dealings with the rise in steel prices in 1962. In his news conference, on the issue of steel price, President Kennedy uses parallelism and juxtaposition to create the idea that the increase in price from the steel companies is detrimental to the United States' economy.

“Dwight D. Eisenhower was a master craftsman in the demanding art of leadership. For twenty years, first as a soldier and then as a statesman, he bore the daily responsibility for difficult decisions that had far-reaching consequences for the nation.” (WS) He had been promoted lieutenant colonel and was an obscure officer until the US involvement with World War Two. The US had been attacked at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese on December 7, 1941. Soon after the attack, Congress declared war and they entered on the Allied side. Until the war Eisenhower had no real chance of distinguishing himself through war. However, he still worked hard to be prepared for whatever task came to him. This preparation and hard work helped him, as he caught the eye

When thinking about the numerous, dynamic leaders that America has had over the course of the nation’s history, it can become troublesome to fairly compare these respective heads of state. Though each American president has unquestionably left their own unique legacy from their time in office, when comparing leaders from similar times, certain consistencies can present themselves. While the Presidency is of course beholden to constructs of political normativity subjective to the era they presided in, by choosing two POTUS’ from the same era, we can more adequately synthesize comparable actions and philosophies between the two. To this end, we will analyze the terms of Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft, cutting through narratives of their tenures to truly delineate their comparability. Through a comprehensive analysis of these two leaders on the subjects of foreign policy, we begin to parse out many similarities and differences between these two early 20th century leaders.

Eisenhower then uses his military tactics, strategies, experience, and title to help build a strong campaign, and ran for president of United States. Dwight D. Eisenhower was the most influential ruler in history due to his military impact on World War II, and his domestic accomplishments contributing to the growth and strength of America. Eisenhower creates and enforces military plans making a significant impact on World War II, which benefits the world and lead to the fall of Hitler. Europe, during World War II wasn't a pleasant environment for military, social, and economic reasons. The military was expanding rapidly and taking over all parts of Europe.

Dwight D. Eisenhower was a man full of brains, and always used his communication skills to help his country. This came in handy during World War II. “He argued that this war, more than previous conflicts, would require careful planning and logistical precision—skills at which he excelled” (American Decades). Better than most officers, he understood that politics and the military were closely entwined. On February 10, 1943, he became a

With the end of World War Two and the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt, the United States emerged on the global stage as one of the planet's great economic and military powers. It is safe to say that with America's change in status, and in conjunction with profound industrial and technological change, that presidential leadership would necessarily have to transform yet again to meet a new era; nowhere could two different styles of leadership to meet the age be seen than in the Cold War administrations of Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy. Both men would exhibit a unique style of leadership suited to the personality of each, and each style could be considered to characterize the administration of each president, but nevertheless, both men would also use very similar leadership styles when necessary in order to attain certain policy goals.

difficult decisions--like what to do about the missiles in Cuba. Others admire his ability to inspire people with his eloquent speeches. Still others think his compassion and his willingness to fight for new government programs to help the poor, the elderly and the ill were most

The purpose and the intent of this paper are to compare and contrast the leadership styles and scope of influence of two historical leaders. This paper will capture what made this historical leader effective looking at these points of interest one) Integrity, two) Knowledge, three) Sincerity of purpose and four) Care for others. This paper will also view how the historical leader influenced the lives of others in a positive or negative way. How will or has this leader been remembered in history? In my personal opinion would I consider this leader a servant-leader and how did these leaders use their communication skills gain the support for their ideas doing the time of leading others. It is the hope that the reader will be able to make a

John F. Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States, has become one of the most famous presidents in the nation's history due to his oratory skills and eloquence (Biane,2011). In this paper, we present an analysis the inaugural speech that he delivered in January 1961. Even though his Inaugural speech lasted less than fifteen minutes, the message that he saliently delivered was one that has continued to resonate in the very hearts of American citizens.

Khrushchev fervently believed in communism and the prospects of the Soviet Union as a world power. He was much older and more experienced than Kennedy, but in global relations, the United States held the upper hand. Khrushchev was well aware of the Soviet Union as the weaker power and used intimidation to create a sense of apprehension within the United States. The threat of nuclear war for Khrushchev was not to reach a boiling point with Kennedy, but to give “the Americans a taste of their own medicine” (Dobbs 37). Therefore, the American and Soviet people felt unremitting trepidation because of possible nuclear war.

This span of time allows for the analysis of how a president changed throughout his presidency in terms of their decision making. Such an understanding is relevant because it can determine the strengths and weaknesses of a person in power that can either be exploited by political opponents or improved upon by future commander-in-chiefs to determine the overall effectiveness of the president. This topic was of interest because an analysis of the both of the events can present the way in which John F. Kennedy changed in relation to his foreign policy between 1961 to 1962.