By Capricorner
He convinced the majority of Americans that: YES WE CAN: He won the presidency and got set to do it, but was soon brought down to the realities of “Washington”, whose culture is vehemently resistant to change. He, inadvertently, divided the nation to for and fiercely against his endeavor. To compound the problem he made himself largely non (or) mis-understood. He secluded himself from the public, presumably believing that Americans understood what he was up to. They did not, as the midterm elections of Nov.2 showed. After winning the election he did not engage with the people of America, he did not put on the act of a president, he did not give America his vision, he did not stir the emotions of even his supporters. He did not communicate. He accomplished much in the two years of his presidency and thirty four million Americans love him for the medical insurance coverage they now have. He did not however “sell” himself as he should have. WHY? He is beyond doubt a very intelligent person, a man with a very high I.Q but a low Political I.Q. Once in office Political I.Q. alerts the official to the direction he/she should follow, helps the official prioritize the issues and problems, sense what the public would like to see, what it expects of him/her, decide on how to present the issues of national importance, how to gain acceptance for unpopular measures that should be taken and maintain visibility, contact with the public, c o m m u n i c a t i o n. President Obama has not displayed such Political I.Q. (acumen)
Political I.Q. is not only a prerequisite for high office holders but also for those aiming to one. Aspiring leaders should prepare for the day they are in office by carefully laying the ground for a successful performance once in office. This presupposes that the aspirant has not only a high I.Q. but an equally high Political I.Q., as well which guides his/her political stance and attitude, so that the aspirant creates an atmosphere of trust with the public, showing full understanding of the issues/problems and a clear idea about how they should be tackled/resolved.
In Greece the late Constantine Karamanlis was noted for his Political I.Q. He realized that construction could boost the economy and sold the idea to the people, with the ensuing benefits to the Greek economy. Later he gave the Greeks a vision, an objective … participation in the European Union, of which Greece became a member in 1981. His successor, Andreas Papandreou, father of the present Prime minister, displayed a very high Political I.Q. He gained the enthusiastic support of the people with his socialist rhetoric and the money he threw at them. Money borrowed and money granted by the E.U. which, instead of being invested to create new sources of wealth, was spent on the consumption of mostly imported goods and services. People loved him. He knew how to sell himself to the people, how to enthuse them. Corruption grew in his days; people understood how to get around rules and regulations and how to circumvent inconvenient laws. His Political I.Q., however enabled him to endear himself with the Greeks, because he engaged with them, stirred their emotions, made himself visible, accessible, popular.
His successor, Constantine Simitis, was not a “benefactor” to his country but he displayed Political I.Q. He gave the Greeks an objective … inclusion in the Eurozone (no mater how this was attained).
Constantine Karamanlis, nephew of the late premier and then President of the Republic, a gifted man but with no Political I.Q. was seemingly “absent” from the Government. He just let things take care of themselves, public debt to keep on swelling, gave no sense of direction to the country, no sense of leadership. People needed a leader so they turned to George Papandreou, son of the late Andreas Papandreou, the founder of the socialist party. Just like the father the son is a populist, but without his father’s Political I.Q. In his pursuit of electoral victory he followed his father’s routine … NO to everything (good or bad alike) but the circumstances of present times are not what they were in his father’s time. Having aligned himself with every kind of demand, denial, objection, he laid the minefield over which he now has to walk. Obviously out of touch with the realities of Greece’s current situation he wasted valuable time after taking office thinking he can get by without hurting his carefully nurtured image. When reality gave him a rude awakening, he reacted with total lack of Political I.Q. Even his comportment in the period preceding the elections for local Government (Nov.7&14) has upset people, even members of his Government (according to the media). Presumably a man with a high I.Q. he none the less appears with no Political I.Q. He has not inspired confidence in his ability to turn the fortunes of Greece around. He has failed to give the Greeks a plan, to share with them his vision for the country. He keeps mumbling about “green development” but has failed to make himself understood. The average Greek, more than a year after he gained the office he craved, still has but a vague perception of what “green development” is. He appears to be unperturbed, happily going about his duties as Chairman of Socialist International and his personal activities. He does not seem to sense the public mood, nor does he seem to stoop and consider the alternatives to the policies of his ministers. He has no Political I.Q.
