A Dynamic Leader Or An Experienced One? Which of these qualities should be sought in a leader candidate?

Should a leader be dynamic,

Today’s perception of country presidents varies from person to person, however, many would agree that they are usually old males. This view, in fact, is not flawed at all considering that the average age of the U.S. presidents is 55, for Türkiye it is 61.35, being not very different in other countries. However, I believe this system is problematic, the people who decide the faith of nations should be dynamic and young, which are qualities that clearly outweigh the importance of experience when ruling the country.

To begin with, I strongly argue that young, dynamic presidents would end the reign of populism. A president must make decisions that are not only to save the day, but also and more importantly to benefit their country in the long term. Although generalising all old presidents to be populist would be blatantly mistaken, it is also okay to consider that letting a person decide our future whereas he/she clearly has not long left leads to populism. Someone who is not concerned with their country’s long-term conditions might of course make serious decisions that can harm the country in the long run, when it is too late to judge them. A clear example of this situation in my own country Türkiye is the military coup leader General Kenan Evren, who then was elected as the president. In his time, 48 people were hung, much more were tortured. However, when a government finally removed the bylaw that protected him from jurisdiction, he had already passed due to old age, and his decisions never had a consequence to him. On the other hand, a young leader would likely be aware of the fact that his/her decisions will also affect their future, if not enough, they could be judged for their wrong policies long after their presidencies.

Not only that, but also young and dynamic presidents have more individual will power compared to the old ones. Instead, the decisions old leaders make usually belong to the people behind them, funding them, or advising them. However, since young dynamic leaders have their thinking skills well-functioning, it would be more difficult to control them or use them as puppets. To give an example, ask this questions to yourself: In America, whether I support republicans or democrats, do I geniunely believe that Biden is the one to make the decisions?

Lastly, for the counter-argument stating that life experience cannot be replaced in a leader, this is what advisors are for. Although there is no harm in having a president that is experienced, it has not enough benefits either to compansate the lack of youth and dynamicy. Today, the Turkish president Erdogan has 21 (were 36 in 2018) advisors who contributes to his decisions by sharing their lifetime experience with him. Consequently, a dynamic president can outweigh the value of experience in terms of leadership, and whereas experience is an important component when making decisions, it cannot compansate for what it takes from a leader.

Or is it all about experience,

We can not just deny the importance of experienced presidents over bureaucracy ruling and their effect in the solving of complex and frequently chaotic realm of politics.Presidents with extensive experience provide an extensive amount of information, stability, and demonstrated leadership abilities that are essential for efficient government. It is very crucial for the sustainability of a balanced government.

Years of experience and a deep understanding of governmental institutions and procedures have given them the ability to simply overcome the complexities of legislative procedures, administrative frameworks, and judicial systems which result in more efficient governance. They are frequently put to the test as leaders because of their extensive experience dealing with crises, which has given them the expertise and confidence necessary to handle every kind of emergency, including disasters caused by nature, economic crises, threats to national security and any other potential risks that threaten the unity of the government.

Effective crisis management can mean the difference between an undesirable result and a successful outcome, depending on their capacity to maintain control under pressure and respond quickly and intelligently. Their familiarity with global political dynamics and long-standing relationships with other world leaders enable them to compromise effectively, form alliances and handle international conflicts which is crucial for preserving national security and advancing global stability.

They also provide the advantage of continuity in policy and a long-term outlook, which enables them to build on previous achievements and draw lessons from past errors. This guarantees the creation and execution of sustainable policies that resolve long-term issues like healthcare reform, economic inequality, and climate change. In order to achieve important legislation, they must be able to create agreement, work across party lines, form alliances, and find common ground. This is demonstrated by Joe Biden's efforts to push his legislative agenda. Furthermore, their proficiency in navigating through the federal bureaucracy enables them to handle administrative challenges and execute policies with greater efficiency. As evidenced by Bill Clinton's practical approach to administration, experienced presidents also bring a sense of realism and pragmatism to leadership, setting realistic goals and skillfully managing public expectations. In contrast, the Paris Agreement, which is very significant to avoid the world from climate change, could not be valid because of the short term ruling of Obama even if it was signed by him. This situation is a great example of a long term experienced president’s importance in executive agency.

In conclusion, experienced presidents have an undeniable advantage in delivering constant educated, and successful leadership, even though dynamic leaders can bring new ideas and energy. They are well-suited to handle the complex issues of contemporary politics because of their extensive institutional knowledge, crisis management abilities, diplomatic experience, capacity to maintain policy continuity, gift for reaching agreement, and practical approach to government. As a result, choosing experienced leaders is frequently the best course of action to guarantee stable and efficient governance that can handle the various issues a country faces.