Presidential Temperament

Vincent J. Curtis

5 Aug 2016

The decisive advantage Hillary Clinton is said to have over Donald Trump lies in temperament.  Trump is uncontrolled, talks about everything off the top of his head, and is apt to attack those who attack him.  Hillary doesn’t do these things, and that makes her superior.

The baldness of this comparison shows the weaknesses in the argument, that Hillary is superior because she appears to act in a more restrained manner than Trump.

Trump is an idyllic New Yorker.  He is brash, confident, boastful, aggressive, a risk-taker, tough, liberal, and in the city’s way, non-judgemental.  Among New York’s construction workers, Trump seems unusually normal, and reflective of their own values, attitudes, and judgement.  When Trump attacked the Khans, he probably was giving voice to twitter feed he was getting from New York.

Trump is famous for building a multi-billion dollar fortune beginning with a million dollar loan from his father more than 35 years ago.  Trump’s business is family run; he did not acquire a fortune by selling equity in his company.  He built many structures, built casinos, and golf courses.  He has his lines in food, clothing, and for years ran TV shows.  A person does not achieve all this without intense determination, focus, hard work, the building of an excellent team, and a bit of luck.

In short, it took a lot of good personal qualities for Trump to have achieved all that he has.  And rashness is inimical to long-term success.

One cannot have a lousy temperament and succeed in the diverse fields he has.  Somehow, the spectacle one sees on TV managed to build a team around himself that led to all this success over a very long time.  Steve Jobs, the guru of Apple Computers, is a person who had a terrible temperament, and he fell into and succeeded in one narrow field because for all of his terrible personality he was able to drive a team into financial success.  If Jobs were not financially successful, then he would have personally achieved little because without big money, nobody would want to work with him.

Trump has been successful in diverse fields and on numerous projects not only because he represents money to his team, but from all reports people actually like working for the man.

Thus the rashness and irascibility one sees on TV should be seen, not as examples of his considered judgement, but as the means of gaining and holding attention of the electorate while he says things that they relate to.  In office, without the pressure of having to win the news cycle each day, the Donald Trump of the office of Trump Tower will be found in the Oval Office.

Now, what of the non-Trump, Hillary Clinton?  What about her temperament?

From all reports, Dee Dee Myers (former press secretary of President Bill Clinton), George Stephanopoulos (former Clinton campaign consigliere) and from Secret Service Agents close to the Clintons, Hillary can easily turn into a screaming witch.  Those angry, bulging eyes, that loud, angry, screeching voice those are signs of the private Hillary when things don’t go her way.  The depositions of Huma Abidene and Cheryl Mills (Hillary’s closest confidants) for the Judicial Watch lawsuit seem to be those of beaten wives in respect of their relationship with Hillary.

Hillary is also reconfirmed on a daily basis as being a congenital liar.  Of the four classical virtues, courage, temperance, prudence, and justice, Hillary is clearly lacking in courage, justice, and prudence.

Temperament is not a proper criterion for judging suitability for office between Hillary and Trump.  Judgement is.  While Trump is temperamentally a New Yorker, Hillary is temperamentally dishonest and self-serving.  What judgements will the two make that separate each other?

Trump’s judgement concerning of his own self-interest in business have been excellent.  Hillary’s judgement concerning the interests of the United States have been bad.  Trump’s argument that the acumen he developed as a businessman can be usefully employed to pull the United States out of the rut in which it finds itself has a certain merit.  If only the merit of the untried but reasonable.

Hillary’s argument that she is not going to be the one to send America into another military misadventure is belied by history.  She was the one behind the Libya intervention, she voted for the Iraq war, and her husband used military strikes to divert attention from domestic problems he had.  It is further belied by Trump’s resolution to stay out of wars that aren’t important to America’s direct national interest.

If Trump can settle down and focus like a laser beam on the issues that matter to America and do not concern his personal vanity, he can win.  Hillary has nothing except that she is not Trump.  She needs to be carried over the finish line by the Democrat party, as Obama said in his speech to the DNC.

On the question of temperament and judgement, Trump has the advantage over Hillary.

-30-