The Presidency Of President Obama Presidency

In the article, “Unilateral Action and Presidential Power: A Theory,” Terry M. Moe and William G. Howell, two political science instructors from Stanford University, investigate a source of presidential power, which is the president’s capability to act individually and make his own law, that has been unacknowledged yet essential to presidential leadership that it defines how the modern presidency is distinctively modern. The authors’ purpose in the article is to outline a theory of this feature of presidential power by arguing that the president’s powers of unilateral action, which is developed from the ambiguity of the contract, are strengths in American politics since they are not mentioned in the constitution. They also claim that presidents push the ambiguity of the contract to make their powers grow and that Congress and the courts would not be able to stop them (Moe and Howell, 1999, p. 1-3).

To start off there are many different ways this topic came to be, the first one being I thought about the topics that interest me which includes categories such as politics, current events, religion, and war. Then the worst thing that could ever happen to a student happened, my thinking process came to a crashing halt but quite honestly helped me but also did not. That then encouraged me to think about a topic that included those categories which brought to the conclusion that every event had happened during modern-day U.S. history happened during a presidency. While I thought about presidents the only president that I could think of that had something happen during their presidency that falls under every one of this categories was George W. Bush. Events such as the September 11 airborne terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, and the capture of the “Butcher of Baghdad”, Saddam Hussein.

The election of 1980 marked a ‘new political era’ that was ushered in by President Reagan and that followed on through the presidencies of George H. W. Bush and William Jefferson Clinton. These presidents were inaugurated at different times and succeeded the successes and the failures of their predecessors. Having came from different political backgrounds and having unique political and social beliefs, Bush, Reagan, and Clinton can only be analyzed through their foreign policies, domestic policies, achievements as well as shortcomings, and legacies.

To a fairly large extent, the Obama presidency is more ‘imperiled than imperial’ seems largely true, with Obama suffering from major constraints such as Congress. The theory of the imperiled Presidency suggests that rather than being too powerful, the President does not have enough power to be effective. In contrast, imperial presidency is characterised as when a president has greater power than the constitution allows. One can argue that his pursuit of major domestic policy goals has been much more aggressive than his predecessor, Bush, suggesting Obama’s presidency as imperial. Obama once quipped, “I’m the President of the United States, not the emperor of the

Since the end of the Second World War the United States has arguably been considered the greatest country in the world. The supposed leader of the free world, strongest and most powerful country in the world. The definition that the United States is the ‘greatest country’ in the world is open to discussion and can be compared at many different levels, however, for the purpose of this essay, the term ‘greatness’ is measured by its economic prowess and its hard power. The term ‘hard power’ is defined as ‘a coercive approach to international political relation, especially one that involves the use of military power’. After eight years of Obama doctrine, is it time to make America great again” must be broken down into two parts. What is Obama Doctrine, does it exist and then compare his Doctrine also tackle the quote of ‘making America great again’. This essay will argue that Obama Doctrine does exist and is linked to his foreign and domestic policies. It will also argue that America is still great but for different reasons. It will provide evidence that with the Obama doctrine it has moved from the historic use of hard power to a soft power footing. ‘Soft power” is defined as ‘a persuasive approach to international relations, typically involving the use of economical or cultural influence’. However, even with this switch in posture, the United States has remained great. Albeit for

The position of president has evolved in the almost quarter millennium since the framers created the Constitution. The main issues facing the framers included the position’s structure, independence, and power. Although the modern presidency is different from the framers’ design, they would approve of it, since the concerns that the framers had with the executive still have been prevented. When creating the presidency, one issue the framers decided quickly was the structure, particularly having one president. This satisfied the needs of both the Conservative and Radical Republicans, by allowing for quick action, while still providing clear accountability.

Throughout the course of American history, we have seen a complete sway in the pendulum as we discuss each and every U.S. President and how they impacted America at a certain time. We see similarities and contrast between the different administrations even if they are both far out or close together. In class, the analysis of Presidents John Tyler, Andrew Johnson, and Chester A. Arthur was quite interesting their comparativeness. Although separated by party affiliation, origins, policy outlooks, and evolving timeline in US history, they uniquely share a comparative touch to each other. I will analyze what these comparisons are and why these comparisons are important not only to their administrations, but how they have affected the American

The United States since its adoption of the Constitution in 1787 has accumulated total amount forty-five presidents over two-hundred and thirty years. These forty-five presidents as history and the United States continues, will be the subject of analysts throughout history, who will try to rank them from the best to the worst. The book written by James Taranto and Leonard Leo, ‘Presidential Leadership: Rating the Best and the Worst in the White House’ is one of these analytical books shoving the presidents into a ranking by using a survey of professors of history, law and political science to rate them. This book by Leo and Taranto focus on a handful of prime objectives for the readers to overserve while reading the book. The first is to

In the admittedly short life time of the Presidential branch its occupants have taken massive strides in empowering and strengthening their office. At times a case could be made that the executive has aspired to too much; threating essential American political values, such is the case of President Franklin Roosevelt who secured a third term of office ignoring precedent and tradition. However, evidence would suggest that for any significant step a president takes towards increasing their power; often results in an equal and opposite reaction. That is not to say that our presidents are weak, in actuality we see that our presidents have significantly increased their power to wage war

In this paper we will compare the formal and informal powers if the President and we will explore how and why the Presidential powers have increased over time. The history of the Presidency is an account of aggrandizement; one envisions, today, a President with far reaching power, however, when looking at the Constitution alone we find a President with significant limits. Is the President of the United States the most powerful person in the world or merely a helpless giant?

The President of the United States is granted numerous powers when they assume office. Some of these powers are listed and explained in the Constitution of the United States. Some are not, and this often leads to Presidents stretching their duties too far, or until someone brings a complaint against them. The powers that are being spoken of are formal, implied, and informal powers. All can lead to good and bad. This paper sits out to discuss the successes and failures of these powers through the lens of a specific president, in this case Lyndon Baines Johnson or for short “LBJ.” Throughout the paper the reader will learn of various policy objectives, how the powers enabled passage or non-passage of the objectives, and some constraints Presidents

President Barack Obama will be seen as one of “the great presidents” by Historians. President Obama’s presidency will be seen as Historic because he was the first African American President. He served four years and was reelected for a second term with a high number of votes. He will be seen as great for his important accomplishment with the economy, healthcare, national and international leadership and more.

The modern presidency has in a sense become a double-edged sword in that presidents have become beneficiaries of anything positive that can be attributed to government, but also can be blamed for anything bad occurring in society. Quite simply, the modern president has become the center of our political system (The Modern Presidency, 2004). The men who have dealt with this double-edged sword known as the modern presidency have often walked a very fine line between effectiveness and ineffectiveness, but all have attempted to use their power in one way or another.

The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be

To conclude, it is rare both in American and World History to find presidencies and administrations that can go down in history as periods of great innovation on foreign policy. International relations are very complex and volatile and thus difficult to adjust and manage. Therefore, the only way for policymakers and politicians to acquire the necessary intuition in order to deal with the complex nature of international politics, is via the detailed comprehension of their predecessors foreign policy failures and achievement. Thus, the next American government in order to achieve its main goals must learn for Obama’s mistakes while at the same time to continue his successful political