This brief, thought-provoking text evaluates the performance of recent presidents from Johnson to Bush, finding that, overall, each has failed to live up to public expectations. Written by one of the top presidency scholars today, The Presidential Dilemma reflects on the idea that as our country's problems grow, our politicians seem to shrink. Arguing that American presidents of the last 40 years have largely failed to meet the needs, expectations, and responsibilities placed upon them, the book discusses how presidents might better maximize their opportunities for leadership and suggests a distinctive theory of presidential politics: presidents, facing a system of multiple veto points, seek to maximize power and influence. The third edition of Genovese's stimulating book is thoroughly updated to reflect presidential development in recent years, and a new introduction brings his arguments current. As he demonstrates, the emergence of democracy as a new social and political paradigm undermined traditional authority and legitimacy. Subjects no longer automatically follow; now citizens must be persuaded. They may give to a leader their authority and power, or not. As Genovese notes, in a world of mass consumerism, those wishing to lead have precious little to offer by way of inducement. Genovese's goal is to examine the reasons why the performance of recent presidents has been underwhelming, discuss how they might maximize their opportunities for leadership, and ask a key question: Can presidents be both powerful and accountable? The book follows a clear format and tries to show why America's officeholders have so rarely been leaders and how presidents can become leaders instead of mere officeholders.

This brief, thought-provoking text evaluates the performance of recent presidents from Johnson to Bush, finding that, overall, each has failed to live up to public expectations. Written by one of the top presidency scholars today, "The Presidential Dilemma" reflects on the idea that as our country's problems grow, our politicians seem to shrink. Arguing that American presidents of the last 40 years have largely failed to meet the needs, expectations, and responsibilities placed upon them, the book discusses how presidents might better maximize their opportunities for leadership and suggests a distinctive theory of presidential politics: presidents, facing a system of multiple veto points, seek to maximize power and influence. The third edition of Genovese's stimulating book is thoroughly updated to reflect presidential development in recent years, and a new introduction brings his arguments current. As he demonstrates, the emergence of democracy as a new social and political paradigm undermined traditional authority and legitimacy. Subjects no longer automatically follow; now citizens must be persuaded. They may give to a leader their authority and power, or not. As Genovese notes, in a world of mass consumerism, those wishing to lead have precious little to offer by way of inducement. Genovese's goal is to examine the reasons why the performance of recent presidents has been underwhelming, discuss how they might maximize their opportunities for leadership, and ask a key question: Can presidents be both powerful and accountable? The book follows a clear format and tries to show why America's officeholders have so rarely been leaders and how presidents can become leaders instead of mere officeholders.

The American public hungers for a heroic leader. From John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush, every American president has left office either under a cloud or as a failed leader. Michael A. Genovese argues that presidents are set up for failure; it is not specific presidents but the presidency itself that is the problem. The presidency was designed to prevent tyranny through a system of separation of powers that inhibits presidents from exercising sufficient power to meet the demands and expectations that developed over time. Each new president dreams of success, only to be crushed by the paralytic weight of vetoes and roadblocks. As they fail to meet expectations, Americans turn on them, making their already precarious position much worse. Given the perilous nature of the office, Genovese examines the skills required to achieve success and the roles of power and persuasion. He also examines how globalization and the rapid pace of change contribute to the decline of presidential power. This accessible synthesis of scholarship is geared toward an audience that is hungry to unravel the dilemmas of presidential leadership. Students of the presidency will find it insightful; general readers will find it illuminating.

The American public hungers for a heroic leader. From John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush, every American president has left office either under a cloud or as a failed leader. Michael A. Genovese argues that presidents are set up for failure; it is not specific presidents but the presidency itself that is the problem. The presidency was designed to prevent tyranny through a system of separation of powers that inhibits presidents from exercising sufficient power to meet the demands and expectations that developed over time. Each new president dreams of success, only to be crushed by the paralytic weight of vetoes and roadblocks. As they fail to meet expectations, Americans turn on them, making their already precarious position much worse. Given the perilous nature of the office, Genovese examines the skills required to achieve success and the roles of power and persuasion. He also examines how globalization and the rapid pace of change contribute to the decline of presidential power. This accessible synthesis of scholarship is geared toward an audience that is hungry to unravel the dilemmas of presidential leadership. Students of the presidency will find it insightful; general readers will find it illuminating.

This book offers an accessible and compelling guide to the American presidency by exploring a series of key questions. How powerful is the American presidency, and to what extent is presidential power dependent on persuasion? Do the personal qualities of presidents drive events, or does the institution of the presidency shape their choices? Is the presidency a "unitary" office or a limited and circumscribed institution? Which is more important, character or competence? Is presidential success a matter of skill or opportunity? And will future presidencies turn away from checks and balances in favor of illiberal democracy? Michael A. Genovese, a leading scholar of the presidency, provides a clear overview of the core arguments and debates over the essential characteristics of this contradictory institution. Ideal for classroom use, this book provides insights into what the presidency was designed to be, what it has evolved into, how it has been reshaped to respond to new demands, and what its future might hold. Engaging and reader-friendly, The Modern Presidency gives students the tools to think critically about the nature of this complex office and how its powers can be wielded.

This book offers an accessible and compelling guide to the American presidency by exploring a series of key questions. How powerful is the American presidency, and to what extent is presidential power dependent on persuasion? Do the personal qualities of presidents drive events, or does the institution of the presidency shape their choices? Is the presidency a "unitary" office or a limited and circumscribed institution? Which is more important, character or competence? Is presidential success a matter of skill or opportunity? And will future presidencies turn away from checks and balances in favor of illiberal democracy? Michael A. Genovese, a leading scholar of the presidency, provides a clear overview of the core arguments and debates over the essential characteristics of this contradictory institution. Ideal for classroom use, this book provides insights into what the presidency was designed to be, what it has evolved into, how it has been reshaped to respond to new demands, and what its future might hold. Engaging and reader-friendly, The Modern Presidency gives students the tools to think critically about the nature of this complex office and how its powers can be wielded.

Attacks against the pursuit of profit in eighteenth-century Britain have been largely read as reactions against market activity in general or as critiques of financial innovation. In The Problem of Profit, however, Michael Genovese contends that such rejections of profit derive not from a distaste for moneymaking itself but from a distaste for individualism. In the aftermath of the late seventeenth-century Financial Revolution, literature linked the concept of sympathy to the public-minded economic ideals of the past to resist the rising individualism of capitalism. This study places literary works at the center of eighteenth-century debates about how to harmonize exchanges of feeling and exchanges of finance, highlighting representations of communitarian, affective profit-making in georgic poetry as well as in the work of Joseph Addison, Daniel Defoe, Richard Steele, Sarah Fielding, Henry Fielding, David Hume, Samuel Johnson, and Laurence Sterne, among others. Investigating commercial treatises, novels, poetry, periodicals, and philosophy, Genovese argues that authors conjured alternatives to private accumulation that might counter the isolating tendencies of impersonal exchange. However, even as emotional language and economic language arose together in the 1700s, the attendant aspiration to form a communitarian economy in Britain was not fulfilled. By recovering an approach to moneymaking that failed to thrive, The Problem of Profit argues for the relevance of an unfamiliar narrative of capitalistic thought to today's anxiety over the discord between personal ambition and public good.