MBTI of presidential runners

[jacob]

For those who think the MBTI goes beyond astrology:

Trump: ESTP - the internet agrees with this a lot.
Hillary: ??TJ - the internet is confused
Sanders: IN?? - the internet is confused

[Dragline]

For comparison and amusement:

http://thoughtcatalog.com/lorenzo-jense ... iggs-test/

Since I think Hillary has a similar persona to that of Nixon, I go with ISTJ

Sanders INFP -- an idealist.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

The thought catalog link seems to over suppose the number of introverted presidents. E.g., What It Takes by Richard Ben Cramer portrays George H. W. Bush as a relentlessly outgoing, student-body president type who couldn't help getting into conversations with security guards, secret service agents, helicopter pilots, etc. etc. Loyal to a fault though, so SJ I could buy.

Sanders as INFP makes sense -- he's basically been an activist his entire life, and is more activist than politician.

Legend has it that Hillary Clinton has self-identified as an INTJ. Some googling seems to reveal this is only MTBI-fanatic legend, but it makes sense to me. It explains her lack of relatability, perceived iciness before crowds, and her discipline in sticking with what seems to be a life-long determination to get as close to executive power as possible. Female INTJs have it extra tough as well, which explains why every time she runs for President she loses to men with fewer qualifications.

[stand@desk]

I'd agree with Dragline.

On another note: I don't understand how world leaders can be INTJ..Do INTJs really want power over countries? I doubt it. I think INTJs want power over themselves and their micro concepts and worlds. I don't see them as having as much interest in the macro. And INTJs like to manipulate things easily under their thumb which is usually objects and the abstract, not people IMO.

[GandK]

Since I think Hillary has a similar persona to that of Nixon, I go with ISTJ

Sanders INFP -- an idealist.

I second both of these.

Not sure Trump is a P.

[C40]

I'd agree with Dragline.

On another note: I don't understand how world leaders can be INTJ..Do INTJs really want power over countries? I doubt it. I think INTJs want power over themselves and their micro concepts and worlds. I don't see them as having as much interest in the macro. And INTJs like to manipulate things easily under their thumb which is usually objects and the abstract, not people IMO.

INTJs do supposedly like building systems of people. I test INTJ and I definitely like doing that. I imagine a President can do a lot of that. Us INTJs also like telling people how things should be done (and those people taking your advice and trying/doing it), and the President gets to do that also. Supposedly, according to those forums and cute little MBTI pictures, INTJ would be a bad world leader before a good one - a super villain, dictator, warlord, etc.

[stand@desk]

@C40 I think it is reason for debate..what you describe to me sounds more like an ENTJ. They love building systems and companies and being CEOs. INTJs get tired around too many people or small talk and prefer to shut themselves in. (Unless talking about hobbies or recent developments etc) I don't deny there could be some world leaders that would test INTJ, Putin is often recognized as such. But for me I think the introversion side tends to like the micro worlds and extroversion likes the macro. INTJs being more of focusing on the details to make things better and ENTJs ignoring those little "meaningless" details and focusing on the big picture items.

As an INTJ myself I've experimented a bit with the politics side of things and I found it too taxing to try and shepard and herd people to do what I wanted or hoped from them. My need for acceptance is fairly high which INTJs are often described needing a lower level of acceptance which I find as a bit hard to understand. I find it hard in telling others to do something I would not want to do myself just because I said so etc. Now as a parent I might be a bit different regarding such! But this is my view on the I vs E side of things.

[Lovelife]

I completely agree with ESTP for Trump. Hilary is a tough one.. I could see any of the options that were suggested, though I do think she seems to lean more towards Introvert than Extrovert. As for Sanders being an INFP. I actually disagree with that one. As an INFP myself he doesn't seem like one to me much at all. I could see INFJ or maybe even ENFJ. He seems to have the idealism (though his "idealism" is more pronounced bc this is America and in many European countries he would be considered much more moderate) and compassion that is common with the NF group, but he expresses himself really well while talking and that is VERY uncommon and difficult for INFPs. Having the Te function last makes it extremely difficult for us to do that. We are MUCH better at writing, but even then it can take practice and refining to be concise (and clear) in any shape or form. Anyways, I think he seems closer to an INFJ or ENFJ, but I also wouldn't rule out something from the NT group or maaaaybe something from the SJ group.

@stand@desk I don't think your need for acceptance is actually very odd for an INTJ. Though online most INTJs seems to have a lower need for it and seem to express things in ways that would imply they do... I've recently seen that many actually have quite a high need for it. I think they just don't often (or ever) mention it. Looking at these answers from INTJs it's pretty obvious it's very important to them....
http://www.personalityhacker.com/intj-s ... -as-teens/

[Ego]

The Mind of Donald Trump. Interesting reading.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... mp/480771/

[jennypenny]

The Mind of Donald Trump. Interesting reading.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... mp/480771/

I always wonder if scoring high on the extrovertedness part amplifies a person's scores on the other parts. It follows, doesn't it? McAdams points out how extremely low Trump scores in agreeableness, but could it be the sheer amount of material by which to judge makes him appear more extreme? Trump gives the press more quotes in a day than Clinton does in a week. Does that sway judgement at all? An introvert can be hard to judge accurately based solely on public statements. This isn't an attempt to defend Trump's behavior. I just wonder if a loud narcissist would seem more narcissistic than a quiet one in this kind of public analysis, regardless of how narcissistic they really are.

In what regard does personality matter when governing? Is it more important how a psychologist might judge Trump or how other leaders might? If the world stage is currently filled with 'warriors' to use that classification, is America better served by having a warrior as president or having a different 'type'? If the big concern with Trump is that he would get us into conflicts, than it seems to me that the way other leaders perceive him is more important. I also wonder whether it's more important to have a leader who connects with other rational leaders or with the irrational ones. If European leaders hate Trump, but his grandiosity keeps the Iranians and Russians in line, then is that really the worst outcome? If Trump is going to misread a foreign leader's intentions, I think I'd rather it was Sweden than Syria, but I don't really know.

The other question I have is about the near-obsession the press has with narcissism. Look at the list of narcissistic presidents McAdams listed ... Nixon, Kennedy, LBJ, Jackson, Clinton, both Roosevelts ... not exactly universally detested or impotent in office. Are McAdams and others overstating how relevant a person's level of narcissism is? Are they wrong in assuming narcissism negatively affects a person's ability to govern effectively?

I don't really have any answers. Just thinking aloud after reading the article.

[Ego]

Is it more important how a psychologist might judge Trump or how other leaders might? If the world stage is currently filled with 'warriors' to use that classification, is America better served by having a warrior as president or having a different 'type'?..... If European leaders hate Trump, but his grandiosity keeps the Iranians and Russians in line, then is that really the worst outcome?

Reminds me of Nixon's Madman Theory during Vietnam/the Cold War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory

Since it stems from Machiavelli I would imagine Nixon was not the first to employ it as a wartime tactic. Trump may be the first to use it to get elected.