What MBTI Type is President Bush?

[CeSoirNoir]

I don't know if this has been discussed or not...but what type is he?...He seems somewhat of an ESFJ to me, but I'm probably wrong. Anyone know?

[s]

I have read that he is an introvert and relied on drugs and alcohol to be so... um social in college.

ISTJ (I know T doesn't sound right, but...) "Duty Fullfiller" and the description does sound like him. Take into account he is on the duller side of whatever type he is ;)


ISTJs highly value the cornerstone institutions of society such as Family, Work, and Church. Their hard-working, dedicated nature is especially well-suited for holding up such institutions.


An ISTJ has a "stick to it" attitude


ISTJs have great value for the "tried and true" approach, and are reluctant to adopt new systems until direct experience proves the validity of the new system.


Excessive love of food and drink
Lack of interest in other people, or in relating to them
Occasional inappropriate emotional displays
General selfish "look after oneself" tendencies
Uses judgement to dismiss other's opinions and perspectives, before really understanding them
May judge others rather than themselves
May look at external ideas and people with the primary purpose of finding fault
May become slave to their routine and "by the book" ways of doing things, to the point that any deviation is completely unacceptable
May have difficulty communicating their thoughts and feelings to anyone

[CeSoirNoir]

I can definitely see him as an ISTJ now after reading the description...I know a female ISTJ and she matches all of the characteristics.

[s]

I have read his father is an ISFJ, but "W" seems to be typed all over the place, by different people.
I am not an expert, but I think ISTJ sounds right. :)

[Universal]

J.W. Bush is an ESTJ, read it a mounth ago.

[s]

ESTJ's are known for being responsible, hard workers, natural leaders, and good strategists. George W. Bush hopes to project these ideals, but with his resume I am not seeing it. He is a lackey slacker, who relies on the masterminds behind his administration. I have seen him typed as as ESTP and a few other types as well. However, George W. Bush, does not seem to be a true extrovert to me from his desire to be alone on his ranch to his unease at articulated his thoughts aloud. He may not be wildly genius, but in a new article I read he scored a little over 1200 on his SAT, so he is hardly mildly retarded. People who worked with W, have often said they never would seen him as a leader... much less of our country. Also, he is quite good at running businesses into the ground and vacationing, not the hallmarks of an ESTJ (also note that his father was offically typed as an introvert).

MacGuffin's signature would befit the young W quite well.

[booyalab]

I'm pretty sure he's an ESTP. It's obvious that if he has any intelligence it's tactical. He uses words for how they sound, is obsessed with exercising, uses his demeanor and 'folksy' charm to his political advantage, etc. If anyone's an ISTJ it's Cheney.

[s]

All modern presidents show off by excercising and even NYC born Howard Dean says, "idear" to sound folksy. I do not think these are unique traits to W.

[booyalab]

1. I never said they were traits unique to W., but just because someone has an artisan trait that is shared by others it does not mean they aren't that type, if that was the implication. Otherwise I don't even understand the point of mentioning it.
2. It's common knowledge that Howard Dean's personality is more similar to President Bush than different. I'd wager he's also an SP.
3. SP's have 'tactical' intelligence and Bush's defining characteristic used as a political tactic is his 'everyman' persona.
4. If John Kerry tried to play the part he'd be laughed out of the race, so it's pretty clear that not every candidate can use this technique (key word, artisans pride themselves on technique) and get away with it.
5. How do you define "modern"? I don't recall Clinton being as well known for his workout regimen as Bush, and neither do I recall the same of Bush sr. It doesn't matter with Clinton anyways, since It seems pretty clear to me that he is also an artisan but probably a feeler.
6. As the political sphere more closely resembles hollywood with each passing election, the same skills that are required for acting will more closely resemble the skills required in politics. It began with Kennedy and Nixon.

[KentOhio]

Clinton made a big to-do about his jogging routine. I guess it didn't really help his heart much...

[Wrath Mania]

http://www.braintypes.com/news_in_brief.htm

BTI types Bush as an ENTJ. He's been a good business man through his whole life... but for more recent proof, just look how he handled himself in the debate last night, such as when he interrupted the questioner so he could continue talking.

Also, note Bush is extremely reluctant to every admit a mistake. When he makes a plan, he is hellbent on sticking with it.

[Claverhouse]

He's been a good business man through his whole life...

What was it, three times he crashed a company ?

Still, when you've got a brother like Jeb, who needs smarts ?



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[GraviTass]

People, I gotta tellya- he's ESTP!

[HairlessBluetick]

http://www.braintypes.com/news_in_brief.htm

BTI types Bush as an ENTJ. He's been a good business man through his whole life... but for more recent proof, just look how he handled himself in the debate last night, such as when he interrupted the questioner so he could continue talking.

Also, note Bush is extremely reluctant to every admit a mistake. When he makes a plan, he is hellbent on sticking with it.

Those are both qualities found in Extraverted-Judgers in general, not just ENTJs. I'm almost positive (without actually knowing the man personally) that he's a Sensor. And probably a Feeler too, but I'm less sure on that.

[int]

I grew up with an ENTJ. Bush is no ENTJ.

[booyalab]

People, I gotta tellya- he's ESTP!

hello! I just said that several posts ago AND I gave decent reasoning for it. I have some more reasons though.
Did anyone see the second debate? He can be very impulsive and shows an SPs regard for tact. He interrupted the mediator several times to rebutt Kerry. Also, he has an ESTP's tendency to resort to stereotypes to describe his opponent. (whom he refers to as too liberal) One characteristic about him that is often alluded to as proof of his lack of intelligence is his verbal ability. Language is an abstract endeavor and is therefore usually more developed among intuitives than sensors. One thing I can't reconcile with my opinion that he's an SP though, is his ability to see through rhetorical questions. For example, one of the questioners in the town hall style debate asked him to name 3 mistakes he's made during his term. He called her on the fact that she really wanted him to admit Iraq was a mistake, which is a pretty intuitive leap. The same kind of thing happened in the Gore debate, with Al's rhetoric. I think that definitely shows he's a thinker, but he's too emotive and down-to-earth to be an NT.

[Dunearhp]

Rhetorical training is pretty much to be expected in high level politics. It is probably a trained rather than an inate ability.

[booyalab]

Rhetorical training is pretty much to be expected in high level politics. It is probably a trained rather than an inate ability.

You know that favorite conundrum of Michael Moore's? He asked Bill O'Reilly, and has posed it on several occasions in different ways. "Would you sacrifice your kid in Iraq" I've been able to recognize that as rhetoric without having any 'training' whatsoever. I was also able to recognize the question asked in the debate as rhetoric. I'm sure there is rhetorical training in high level politics, but the only reason i can see for someone assuming it was a trained ability is if they knew Bush before he received the training or if they are also assuming he's inherently unable to see through rhetoric.

[Wrath Mania]

There's not a doubt in my mind he's an E or J (just look at his decisions with Iraq and tell me he's not a J). I think he's a fairly strong T, which leaves us with the S or N. He's not good with words, obviously, but he shows enough intuitve traits (such as seeing through rhetirocal questions as you already mentioned) that I think he's a weak N.

Bush isn't a figurehead. I USED to think that, but upon closer inspection I think he really is in charge of what he's doing. That isn't to say he isn't being influenced by his obvious ENTJ running mate, of course.

The fact he interrupted the mediator a few times is more evidence to me that he's definetly a ExTJ.... the fact he's so bad at speech though, still leaves the N in question. I wouldn't outrule ESTJ.

[Miss Padfoot]

I say ESFJ. E-FJ types are known for having their inferior Ti function "serve" their Fe. In other words, they only use logic when it supports the conclusions that their feelings have already brought them to. Any T type, even an ESTJ, is more objective than Bush.

[booyalab]

Any T type, even an ESTJ, is more objective than Bush.

well, since you said it, I must be compelled to believe it. Even though more evidence has been given to the contrary and you haven't given any.

[Wrath Mania]

I don't see Bush as a feeler. His snark attacks on Kerry seem very TJ to me.

I'll trust braintypes with this one and go with ENTJ.

[nobarcode]

What type would be attributed to reluctant actors or expressively fake? Or which type would be most likely be willing to follow an agenda set forth by "other's" and sell/pawn themselves out to suit their own need (-not to face fear) and still be able to sell a concept with no appearant conscience?

[Claverhouse]

What type would be attributed to reluctant actors or expressively fake? Or which type would be most likely be willing to follow an agenda set forth by "other's" and sell/pawn themselves out to suit their own need (-not to face fear) and still be able to sell a concept with no appearant conscience?

Oh, come on now. The little guy's not a semi-moronic shill, hired to present the beliefs and desires of some shadowy dubious group trying to take over the world. He's a highly respected statesman with a mind of his own and has a deeply-held religious faith in a higher being.*




Claverhouse :ph34r:


* Donnie.

[INTrPosr]

I can't say truly what he is possibly a T, but I would have to consider that, with his bumbling of words in public, he may not be extraverted. He is definitely not intuitive or judging. I would have to agree that Bush is E or ISTP. Then again, I recall some film footage in 2000, where he was dancing around with a lampshade on his head and appeared inebriated.

[booyalab]

I can't say truly what he is possibly a T, but I would have to consider that, with his bumbling of words in public, he may not be extraverted. He is definitely not intuitive or judging. I would have to agree that Bush is E or ISTP. Then again, I recall some film footage in 2000, where he was dancing around with a lampshade on his head and appeared inebriated.

I don't think ISTPs go into politics, they seem to be too independent to be staunchly partisan enough. On the other hand, ISTPs are good at juxtaposing what someone said with what they did, and that's been Bush's most persistent attack on Kerry.

[INTrPosr]

I don't think ISTPs go into politics, they seem to be too independent to be staunchly partisan enough. On the other hand, ISTPs are good at juxtaposing what someone said with what they did, and that's been Bush's most persistent attack on Kerry.

In general, I would agree Booylab, but do you trully believe that daddy (Bush, Sr.) had nothing to do with him going into politics? I think that he would have been perfectly happy remaining a jet setter and in business. In all fairness, he appears to have okay leadership ability, but I never believed that he was a politician.

Okay, you convinced me, he is............

[INTrPosr]

He's a highly respected statesman with a mind of his own and has a deeply-held religious faith in a higher being.*

If mommy and daddy said that they were taking my inheritance, I would develope a faith too. BTW, during the debate last night did anyone notice him frothing out the right side of his mouth? MAD DOG!!! :rofl:

[KentOhio]

Ok, a summary:
He is, according to you or other sources:
ENTJ
ESTJ
ESTP
ISTJ
ISTP
ESFJ

How can one man, known by all the world, not be known?

[MacGuffin]

Ok, a summary:
He is, according to you or other sources:
ENTJ
ESTJ
ESTP
ISTJ
ISTP
ESFJ

How can one man, known by all the world, not be known?

Because a public persona is not always their real personality. Public figures are hard.

[booyalab]

Ok, a summary:
He is, according to you or other sources:
ENTJ
ESTJ
ESTP
ISTJ
ISTP
ESFJ

How can one man, known by all the world, not be known?

Because a public persona is not always their real personality. Public figures are hard.

It's impossible to keep up a charade for all of 4 years. Their personality will inevitably show in what decisions are made, which party they choose and the extent to which they stick to that party, and which one of their traits are exaggerated in the campaign to appeal to the voter. Although there is some illusory quality to each president's persona, they don't all choose the same image to portray.

[cjs55]

I am leaning towards ISTJ. He is not an N. He is possibly an ESFJ or ESTJ. I don't really buy the other possibilities, because I just haven't seen much evidence of him being a P.

[booyalab]

I am leaning towards ISTJ. He is not an N. He is possibly an ESFJ or ESTJ. I don't really buy the other possibilities, because I just haven't seen much evidence of him being a P.

If Bush is an ISTJ what the hell is Cheney??? a robot??

[cuspuser]

People, I gotta tellya- he's ESTP!

One thing I can't reconcile with my opinion that he's an SP though, is his ability to see through rhetorical questions. For example, one of the questioners in the town hall style debate asked him to name 3 mistakes he's made during his term. He called her on the fact that she really wanted him to admit Iraq was a mistake, which is a pretty intuitive leap.

Are you sure this was an "intuitive leap" and not just Bush not wanting to answer the question ... it is well known that Bush sees admitting of mistakes as bad for his campaign and possible as a weakness in general. Also, pretty much all that Kerry and Bush had talked about up to that point was Iraq, every two seconds, Iraq - so perhaps the person was thinking that yes there was a mistake or two in Iraq, i don't think they would have thought for a second that they would make Bush, of all people, call Iraq a mistake, that would just be dumb to think that would happen. On the other hand, him saying you want me to admit that Iraq was a mistake shows me that either, he knows the public opinion about the war and thought it was a question from a Kerry-supporter, or he really does have problems with the war.

For someone to be exposed to something day in and day out and having it foremost on their mind does not make it an intuitive judgement, instead i'd call it a kneejerk reaction ... he could've answered the question and gone somewhere else with it - but if you ask Bush he's never made a mistake ... and thats true for just about all politians ... either that or their mistakes are about trivial things. It would've been just as possible that the lady who asked that was a Bush supporter who had listened to all the news that "bush can't admit any mistakes" and wanted him to look good by admitting something (tho not probable) which is the direction he should've taken the question in.

So intuitive leap, obvious based on news/climate of the country, kneejerk reaction, or perhaps paranoia? The truth is most likely somewhere between the extremes

In any event i'd say ESTJ, and i've written enough so i'm not backing it up now ... well, at least i think the E and J are safe ...

[jimkopelli]

Cheney is a zombie. He's actually died three or more times in office already. (The suspicious "undisclosed location" was some sort of lab to bring him back to life.) He might be some sort of robot zombie, but I think that that opinion might be a little far-fetched. ;)

[HeyBooU]

So intuitive leap, obvious based on news/climate of the country, kneejerk reaction, or perhaps paranoia? The truth is most likely somewhere between the extremes

I would tend to beleive someone simply told him that this question would be asked one day(it has been asked more than once) and he was also told what they were trying to get out of the question. Most of the answers are rehearsed anyway.

[cuspuser]

Sounds about right Ben

[booyalab]

People, I gotta tellya- he's ESTP!

One thing I can't reconcile with my opinion that he's an SP though, is his ability to see through rhetorical questions. For example, one of the questioners in the town hall style debate asked him to name 3 mistakes he's made during his term. He called her on the fact that she really wanted him to admit Iraq was a mistake, which is a pretty intuitive leap.

Are you sure this was an "intuitive leap" and not just Bush not wanting to answer the question ... it is well known that Bush sees admitting of mistakes as bad for his campaign and possible as a weakness in general. Also, pretty much all that Kerry and Bush had talked about up to that point was Iraq, every two seconds, Iraq - so perhaps the person was thinking that yes there was a mistake or two in Iraq, i don't think they would have thought for a second that they would make Bush, of all people, call Iraq a mistake, that would just be dumb to think that would happen. On the other hand, him saying you want me to admit that Iraq was a mistake shows me that either, he knows the public opinion about the war and thought it was a question from a Kerry-supporter, or he really does have problems with the war.

For someone to be exposed to something day in and day out and having it foremost on their mind does not make it an intuitive judgement, instead i'd call it a kneejerk reaction ... he could've answered the question and gone somewhere else with it - but if you ask Bush he's never made a mistake ... and thats true for just about all politians ... either that or their mistakes are about trivial things. It would've been just as possible that the lady who asked that was a Bush supporter who had listened to all the news that "bush can't admit any mistakes" and wanted him to look good by admitting something (tho not probable) which is the direction he should've taken the question in.

So intuitive leap, obvious based on news/climate of the country, kneejerk reaction, or perhaps paranoia? The truth is most likely somewhere between the extremes

In any event i'd say ESTJ, and i've written enough so i'm not backing it up now ... well, at least i think the E and J are safe ...

I'm sure it's not just him declining to answer the question. I know a little about the history of his political campaigns, and he doesn't ponder a decision like Kerry does. (Neither ESTPs nor ESTJs are reflective, btw, so this alone does not make either type out of the question.) He knew the lady wanted him to admit he made a mistake about Iraq, the "three" (as in 3 mistakes) figure was arbitrary and could plausibly be construed as a way of making the president think she just wanted 3 mistakes in general. Since obviously every president in history is going to make at least 3 mistakes, this question would be considered absurd in any other presidential debate scenario. Since the major disagreement about the president's actions has been centered around Iraq, it makes sense that she wanted to indirectly cause him to show some sign of weakness in this issue. This is what makes it a rhetorical device and this is why intuition is required to interpret those kinds of questions. If it is answered at face value, you are falling into a kind of verbal trap. I think I should mention something else which he said that indicates his answer was not entirely rehearsed, besides the fact that he's shown this ability in all of his other debates over the course of his career. Although everyone has said he admitted to no mistakes. He really just insisted that he didn't regret deposing Saddam, but he said he regretted putting some people in certain positions. I don't think anyone would have told him to say that.
Maybe he's an ENFJ, but he's mocked the conservative status quo too much to be an ESTJ, or any SJ.

[t]

i think bush has a lot more going on in his head than he leads on. i think the "dumb" routine is an act & that the guy really knows EXACTLY what he's doing and pulling at the heartstrings of americans is all a part of how he knows he'll keep his job as president. i don't doubt he's a T over an F. honestly, i think most people in the limelight are T's over F's because to act and also deal with being in the public view constantly, you can't be overly feeling and caring what others think. to act like someone else, you have to be able to turn off your feelings in a way. i don't know, that's just my theory.

i also strongly feel he's an S & maybe a J - though, correct me if i'm wrong b/c i'm just learning about all of this, but doesn't a J usually have a set plan of action & isn't one of kerry's biggest criticisms about bush that he went to iraq almostly impulsively w/o any real plan? however typically a J would have been as successful in a field where organizational skills and scheduling is key. then again, bush was born into a political family and has a lot of people helping him out. i'm rather torn here.

i'm also rather torn between the E & I. i find that unless you are an extreme of either one, it's hard to tell with anyone. personally, i'm always looked at as sociable when i am in a social setting, but deep down inside i am uncomfortable, not connecting, and wanting to be by myself the entire time. however, unless you really paid attention, i doubt it would appear that i am an introvert. on the other hand, i do shy away from any recognition or attention brought to myself & having a job in the public eye would be one of the most grating things i could do to myself. this is why i am inclined to say that bush is an E w/ poor speaking skills. though i don't necessarily see him as having a very strong E.

[booyalab]

I totally agree with you, t, about him being smarter than how he's portrayed. There's far more to intelligence than eloquence. "wit is the salt of conversation, not the food".

I recently saw a documentary on PBS that juxtaposed the lives and careers of Kerry and Bush until this election. I learned a lot more about each guy from it. It's amazing how pop-culture and the campaigns have distorted the character and personality of each candidate to the point where we really have less of an idea of who they are than when it all started.

[t]

i'd like to see this documentary.

know what else i wonder? do more T's than F's vote for kerry over bush? it seems like the majority, if not all, of my F friends are voting for bush b/c he's using the compassionate approach that wins them over. they've complained that in the debates, kerry seemed more cold and factual while bush seemed like he really did care about the country in his heart.

however, a bunch of the T's i know were comforted by kerry's approach in the debate and are completely dissatisfied with bush's presidency thus far.

i wonder what the actual statistics on this would be... i may have to do some research. ha!

[Claverhouse]

This is kind of weird.

Some chap made a representation of the amount of money in dollar bills stacked up, so far projected by the Bush admin for the War on Terror/Iraq/Whatever ( $87 billion + & counting )

One-Hundred-Sixty-Six Billion dollars ... this equals the total amount of money President Bush wants to spend in Iraq & Afghanistan by the beginning of October, 2004 : the $87 billion he wants, plus the $79 billion he's already spent.

$87 billion (http://www.crunchweb.net/87billion/)

So far, it scarcely bothers me. It's only money I haven't got.

But check out the replies:


Then again, why not use quarters? Or better yet, pennies? I'm quite sure that 100 pennies takes up significantly more room than a $1 bill, which is even increased since there is "wasted" space around the pennies when placed next to each other. Let's go with this for a minute... 100 pennies is approximately 3/4" by 3/4" by 6" (two rolls of pennies). Placed in a stack the same size as the $72,000 stack one one dollar bills, the pennies add up to only $640. That means that you need 112.5 times the space in pennies. Now consider the $87 billion pile of ones. The pennies would take up 112.5 times as much space! If you were just going for an exageration of how much physical space that much money takes up, I would think that pennies would be the best choice.


Referring to Your visualisation how much or how little is 87e9 Dollars ( 87 000 000 000 US Dollars....)
( President Bush needs this 87 e 9 Dollars money to keep fighting and fight and finish, terminate and really end and fight and fight and fight and fight terrorism, and any sort of terrorism and also the money laundring narco terrorism )

Fight, finish and then keep on fighting ?

mail (http://www.crunchweb.net/87billion/mail.htm)

and in Crunchland, more criticism

Crunchland thread (http://www.crunchland.com/ubbs/Forum22/HTML/000198.html)


Here’s something fun:

Take one of those $9M blocks. Now, take another. Take yet another.

With $27M you still don’t have as much money as Bush is spending for every single person killed on 9/11. Even if this had something to do with the war on terror, and it most certainly does not, it would still be excessive.


A friend writes back:

A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into perspective in one of its recent releases:

A billion seconds ago it was 1959.

A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.

A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.

A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate Washington spends it.


DSF
and someone just emailed me telling me that my measurements are all off, because I haven't accounted for the compression due to the weight of all those stacks of bills.

Demeter
feh.
tell mr/ms physics major to fark off.

Samurai
But isn't the compression offset by the extra space created by the crinkly folds and spaces of a used bill?

Tell them to get a life.


Some poor souls just love math. ( And if a few other tyrants of the past had had that kind of money we'd be speaking in Russian or German. You can't help wondering at the poor returns democratic govs get for pouring money into their pet projects ).



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[booyalab]

i'd like to see this documentary.

know what else i wonder? do more T's than F's vote for kerry over bush? it seems like the majority, if not all, of my F friends are voting for bush b/c he's using the compassionate approach that wins them over. they've complained that in the debates, kerry seemed more cold and factual while bush seemed like he really did care about the country in his heart.

however, a bunch of the T's i know were comforted by kerry's approach in the debate and are completely dissatisfied with bush's presidency thus far.

i wonder what the actual statistics on this would be... i may have to do some research. ha!

You thought Kerry was cold and factual? I think he's clearly an IxFJ, if you look at the 'big picture' of his policies and his career, he definitely uses the 'feeling' function to make decisions. I think Kerry might be an INFJ, a type that is often described as "cold on the outside, warm on the inside". He really sensitive to what other people think of him, and he makes 'value based' decisions that mostly come from his (subjective!) experiences in Vietnam.
It's hard to know what Bush is because he has very strong principles that he adheres to in spite of public sentiment. For instance, when he was the Governor of Texas there was a woman on death row who was getting the death penalty but had become a Christian while in prison so while there were a lot of people protesting her death sentence in light of her becoming a 'new person', Bush didn't overturn the law for this 'extenuating circumstance'(<--key feeler criteria for making decisions). On the other hand he's also good at 'connecting' with people in the audience or those he meets on the street. That could just show his extroversion though.

It may be possible that more thinkers than feelers that you know are favoring Kerry, but overall in our country the people who favor Bush are men (usually thinkers). Also, Kerry's policies are CLASSIC liberal policies, and while I'm not saying no thinkers are liberals, the democrat party is often called the 'mommy party' for a reason. Except in this election you can't really make generalizations of those on either side, since more people are voting for Kerry because he's "not Bush" than voting for him because he's Kerry. Also, there are certain things about Bush's policies that would tend to be more popular among feelers than thinkers. Although not as much as Kerry's, in my opinion.

[sbw]

I only read half of these posts, but he HAS to be an "S"

Scott

[Nighthawk]

That sounds exactly like my mom. ;) Yes, she is an ISTJ.


I have read that he is an introvert and relied on drugs and alcohol to be so... um social in college.

ISTJ (I know T doesn't sound right, but...) "Duty Fullfiller" and the description does sound like him. Take into account he is on the duller side of whatever type he is ;)


ISTJs highly value the cornerstone institutions of society such as Family, Work, and Church. Their hard-working, dedicated nature is especially well-suited for holding up such institutions.


An ISTJ has a "stick to it" attitude


ISTJs have great value for the "tried and true" approach, and are reluctant to adopt new systems until direct experience proves the validity of the new system.


Excessive love of food and drink
Lack of interest in other people, or in relating to them
Occasional inappropriate emotional displays
General selfish "look after oneself" tendencies
Uses judgement to dismiss other's opinions and perspectives, before really understanding them
May judge others rather than themselves
May look at external ideas and people with the primary purpose of finding fault
May become slave to their routine and "by the book" ways of doing things, to the point that any deviation is completely unacceptable
May have difficulty communicating their thoughts and feelings to anyone

[Anacaona]

Im kinda late to reply to this thread, but I think he's either an ISTJ or an ESTJ. There 's no way he could be an NT. NT's are intellectuals, they like theory and abstraction... Bush, doesn't seem to have a lot of intellectual curiosity. On the other hand Im pretty sure Kerry is an NT.

[abiyoyo]

GW Bush is ISFJ.
He has a very slow verbal wit when required to give off the cuff remarks, or read without a script. If he was an E, or a P, he'd be better at spontaneity and quick comebacks--but he is pathetically slow on the draw, verbally, and has to resort to cliches.
GW Bush is ISFJ.
And the exaggerated, hackneyed "tough guy" cliches he uses, like the gazillion times he's "gonna smoke 'em (terrorists) out", is perfectly in keeping with a Feeling male. Feeling males, much like ISFP Hemingway, are the guys who feel the need to exaggerate their macho-ness. T males are cooler, calmer about being assertive.
GW Bush is ISFJ.
Bush does not react well spontaneously to ANYthing--as everybody saw when he sat on his duff for 20 minutes, reading kiddie stories in a kiddie classroom, after being told about the CIA-orchestrated 911 terrorist strikes. And then, for the next two days, Bush flew around in a plane, terribly slow to react, before being "prepped" by his handlers, no doubt. This shows how wrong Keirsey is when he mistypes Bush Jr. as estp. Just the fact that Bush was in a class of kiddies reading kiddie books belies the fact that he is ISFJ.
I laugh when I hear people say how Bush "had to pull himself up by his bootstraps, estp-style, or entj-style" in this or that industry. What a crack up. We must not confuse the media image of the man with the actual man. Like ANYbody who's dad was already president and head of CIA, and ANYbody who is a member of Skull and Bones, ever had to pull himself up out of ANYthing. The guy was handed everything he has.
GW Bush is ISFJ.
If you've ever studied hours of the 2000 republicrat presidential debates, and saw how INFP Alan Keyes ripped Bush and all the others a new one, you would see how horrible Bush is without a script, when he is called upon to be E-or-P spontaneous. The man is no P, and no T, and no E, and no N.
GW Bush is ISFJ.
During 911, Bush acquiesced the duty of handling the "nuclear football" to TJ handler Dick Cheney. No entj would give up that authority; no estp would do that. But an ISFJ might do that.
GW Bush is an ISFJ.
The fact that GW Bush used to be a drunk or something does not mean he was a fun-loving P, either. Remember: Bush has been handed everything he has. ANY teenager with that kind of silver spoon is likely to get into trouble. And, on a personal note, I have five brothers and I have typed them all. One of them is an ISFJ, and he drinks more than any of us.
BTW, I do believe an ISFJ could make a highly competent leader (see Tom Hanks' role in "Saving Pvt. Ryan").
I just don't think Bush is even remotely competent. His ineptitude to think and speak articulately without a script is quite telling, once you've weened yourself off the hypnosis of the major media.
So I don't believe the man is competent; But I do believe he is an ISFJ. And I've listed a heckuva lot more reasons than most of you guys. And yes, I could go on. The man's an ISFJ. It's pretty clear.
To list him as a T, you might as well make the mistake of casting gruff, "tough guy" Ernest Hemingway as a T. You need to look more deeply into Type than that. And please, for heaven's sakes, ween yourselves off the major media, which includes nearly all TV, Radio, and Newspapers. The Internet, for all its wackos, is the last bastion of the 1st Amendment, and our only hope of finding Truth apart from the fascist corporate oligarchy now running the U.S. (mind you, I say that as a CONSTITUTIONAL conservative!)
Bush Jr. is a puppet, a rich and privileged one, but a puppet nonetheless, and nothing more.

[abiyoyo]

Ok, a summary:
He is, according to you or other sources:
ENTJ
ESTJ
ESTP
ISTJ
ISTP
ESFJ

How can one man, known by all the world, not be known?


You failed to list ISFJ, which is what Bush Jr. actually is.

[meshou]

You failed to list ISFJ, which is what Bush Jr. actually is.He strikes me as neither emotional nor an introvert.

[abiyoyo]

[QUOTE=booyalab] I think Kerry might be an INFJ


If Kerry has an N bone in his body, donkeys are flying out of you-know-where

[abiyoyo]

He strikes me as neither emotional nor an introvert.


I understand that. But could you respond with logical reasons?
I have listed several above.
Hemingway wasn't very emotional nor introverted, either.
And yet every Type expert I've ever read has him down as ISFP--a psychologically damaged ISFP reacting like insecure Feeling males do: acting as what they perceive as "tough." But the key is that they overdo it. A true T male is calm, cool, and assertive.
Bush Jr. is not calm. His idea of tough is to resort to tough-guy, macho, hackneyed phrases--which are in truth all his limited intellect and vocabulary is capable of when forced to think and read without a prompter.
Neither does Bush react well in crises--he does NOT keep his cool.
He stayed in that darn school for 20 minutes reading goat stories, excreting his pants, not knowing what to do after 911--making those poor kids a very real, potential terrorist target.
Why? Because Bush Jr. is neither a calm, assertive T, nor is he in real charge of anything. He needed to be clued into what the CIA orchestrated to happen on 911 before he could react, and that took two scared days of flying around in media silence, allowing ENTJ-handler Dick Cheney (who holds more real power than puppet Bush Jr.) to control the nuclear football. People forget that, and yet it is an established, unprecedented FACT.

[meshou]

I understand that. But could you respond with logical reasons?
I have listed several above.
Hemingway wasn't very emotional nor introverted, either.
And yet every Type expert I've ever read has him down as ISFP--a psychologically damaged ISFP reacting like insecure Feeling males do: acting as what they perceive as "tough." But the key is that they overdo it. A true T male is calm, cool, and assertive.
Bush Jr. is not calm. His idea of tough is to resort to tough-guy, macho, hackneyed phrases--which are in truth all his limited intellect and vocabulary is capable of when forced to think and read without a prompter.
Neither does Bush react well in crises--he does NOT keep his cool.
He stayed in that darn school for 20 minutes reading goat stories, excreting his pants, not knowing what to do after 911--making those poor kids a very real, potential terrorist target.
Why? Because Bush Jr. is neither a calm, assertive T, nor is he in real charge of anything. He needed to be clued into what the CIA orchestrated to happen on 911 before he could react, and that took two scared days of flying around in media silence, allowing ENTJ-handler Dick Cheney (who holds more real power than puppet Bush Jr.) to control the nuclear football. People forget that, and yet it is an established, unprecedented FACT.1) Cheney seems to me an ISTJ.

2) T definately does not mean emotionally stable nor emotionally secure. T does not mean smart. F and T are both thinking processes. F is value based ("What fact is more important than another?" requires F reasoning). T is systematic catergorization.

3) In person, he is reportedly talkitive and charming. The Fs I know are more spontaneous than Ts. The lack of spontenaiety to me says he is an ST, and does not speak to how extroverted he is.

3) If the president was in danger that day, he'd have been bombed before he even knew about 9-11. The important thing right then was to make sure he had a place to go the second he walked out the door and not alarm the few hundred people in the school. Their president panicking and walking out the door before he had a place to go would have been much more stupid.

If the secret service, whose job it was to keep him and those kids safe, wanted him out of there and he didn't want to go, they'd have carried him out kicking and screaming. They obviously wanted him to stay, and had better information than he could have at that point.

4) I am pretty sure that he did the smart thing waiting to know what was going on and deferring to someone who did before acting. He may be stupid but he's not darwin-stupid.

While I am about as liberal as you can get, I can't help but roll my eyes at the puppet-Bush bullshit. All "proof" on that front strikes me as horribly biased propeganda.

5) He resorts to solgans because the SJs of the world LIKE slogans and cliche. It tells them what to think without working. It is much more effective to use a cliche than be origional if you want to convince the sheep of the world. It doesn't mean you are stupid to do so.

6) He is not charming nor spontaneous when proforming scripted in front of a crowd-- that does not mean he is not smart. I have known Es who can't act and do shitty when scripted and watched by hundreds of people.

7) You seem to forget Bush's strongest debate form (which he always trounces his opponants in is unscripted.

He's not good at improvising on a script, but in cold improvisation, he's very very good.

And remember, he was a great deal more spontaneous, even funny, when compared to Al Gore. I have met Al Gore (who strikes me as an INFJ). He's funny and spontaneous in person. Bush can outwit and outcharm an intilligent N in an unscripted setting. That's not dumb.

So, personally, I think he is a very smart ESTJ. I just believe he is also evil. And yes, I do believe in evil, and I mean that quite seriously (although my morality is weird).

[MaroonBells]

He strikes me as neither emotional nor an introvert.

His frequent trips back to his bordered up ranch in Texas are a good indication that he is introverted.

I have not seen him provide any logical reasons for his actions, they are all very much based on interpersonal issues such as society's sense of good and bad and seem much more F than T.

[booyalab]

I have not seen him provide any logical reasons for his actions, they are all very much based on interpersonal issues such as society's sense of good and bad and seem much more F than T.

where our society does not have a consensus on good and bad is where politics comes into play, so you dont know what you're talking about......but where he does reference morality, that's called a political tactic

A prime example of why Bush is a T was the incident when he was governor of Texas and there was a lot of emotional hype surrounding a woman who was on death row because she had become a good person in jail or whatever. If someone like Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton had been in that office, they'd have no qualms with trying to save this woman...ignoring the precedent it sets and ignoring everyone else who is simultaneously on death row but doesn't have the label of having a spiritual rebirth so it's ok if they die. Bush ignored all the emotions of the protestors and understood and heeded more the cons of making a decision based on extenuating circumstances than on principles

[MacGuffin]

A prime example of why Bush is a T was the incident when he was governor of Texas and there was a lot of emotional hype surrounding a woman who was on death row because she had become a good person in jail or whatever. If someone like Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton had been in that office, they'd have no qualms with trying to save this woman...ignoring the precedent it sets and ignoring everyone else who is simultaneously on death row but doesn't have the label of having a spiritual rebirth so it's ok if they die. Bush ignored all the emotions of the protestors and understood and heeded more the cons of making a decision based on extenuating circumstances than on principles
One could just as easily spin it the other way. That his values say that those sentenced to death deserve it no matter what logical argument is made in opposition.

[MaroonBells]

where our society does not have a consensus on good and bad is where politics comes into play, so you dont know what you're talking about......but where he does reference morality, that's called a political tactic

how enlightening.

i have a MSc in Sociology and Political Science. you don't have to waste your 3,000-plus-posts-lessons on me, i'm just interested in your logic and for now, you have not convinced me that the positions he takes are pure tactics and not guided by his personal views.

[kikthinking]

i am very very very sure that he's an ESTJ.

[MaroonBells]

this guy surely has us rolling in the mud! impressive in itself

[euterpenc]

i am very very very sure that he's an ESTJ.

I quite agree.

[meshou]

His frequent trips back to his bordered up ranch in Texas are a good indication that he is introverted.

I have not seen him provide any logical reasons for his actions, they are all very much based on interpersonal issues such as society's sense of good and bad and seem much more F than T.Yeah, but XSTJs make decisions based on the good of society as well. That's an SJ thing.

[SgtWalrus]

i am very very very sure that he's an ESTJ.

His media image is that of a ESTJ, but that is formed from a group of spin doctors. I like abiyoyo's theory that he's a pychologically damaged, insecure ISFP. His bravado seems to be fake, as if he's overcompensating for insecurity. Still, if I had to bet I would say ESTP.

Before he was a politician Bush was a hardcore party boy with a drug & alcohol problem. His thrill-seeking ways were very ESTPish. And besides his family connections, his rise to power came through total gamemanship and a fierce competitive streak. It's safe to say NF and NT are both ruled out, cause unlike Clinton, Bush uses little or no diplomatic, intellectual or empathetic skills.

Remember the second debate between Kerry & Bush, the way Bush suddenly became bold and aggressive, almost to comical effect? This struck me while reading an ESTP description:


"Shock effect" is a favored technique of this type to get the attention of his audience. ESTPs love to be at center stage, demonstrating feats of wonder and daring.

This also seems very Bushish . . .


As do other SPs, ESTPs reserve a certain "gut" sense of timing and luck. When repression and stress empower the Shadow, it likely finds expression through intuition in stereotypic perceptions of groups and individuals whom it perceives and hostile or hurtful.

Sure, Karl Rove and co. spin Bush into a ESTJ to appeal to a largely SJ voter base, but the attention-seeking ESTP comes bubbling through again and again.

[Lee]

ESTP

[booyalab]

One could just as easily spin it the other way. That his values say that those sentenced to death deserve it no matter what logical argument is made in opposition.

It's not a 'logical argument' to say that a particular person on death row should be an exception to the rule because she's started reading her Bible every day. That's called extenuating circumstances . It's called valuing mercy over justice. It's called basing a decision on your feeling function.

[booyalab]

how enlightening.

i have a MSc in Sociology and Political Science. you don't have to waste your 3,000-plus-posts-lessons on me, i'm just interested in your logic and for now, you have not convinced me that the positions he takes are pure tactics and not guided by his personal views.

I dont recall referencing the # of my posts, whereas you seem to think that telling me about your MSc in Sociology and Political Science will make me respect that opinion more. Ironically it makes me respect it less since I've only had one college class in politics and I seemed to know more than you about the basic definition of it.

[meshou]

It's not a 'logical argument' to say that a particular person on death row should be an exception to the rule because she's started reading her Bible every day. That's called extenuating circumstances . It's called valuing mercy over justice. It's called basing a decision on your feeling function.However, it is logical to be against capitol punishment, and therefore pardon anyone who comes up for pardoning.

It's also an F-based decision to believe that Justice trumps Mercy in that case. It's a difference in quality or value, an F-decision no matter which way you handle it.

So the question isn't whether Bush makes Feeling based decisions-- all people, feelers and thinkers alike, have to make feeling based decisions. The question is whether he makes them well as compared to his T-based decisions, and whether he avoids or prefers using thinking as a crutch in F-based decisions (or vice versa).

I think that it's difficult to type Bush for me because both feeling and thinking are cognative processes. I honestly can't say which he's... uuuh... better... at.

/snark

But really, I think he's deceptive enough about his reasons for doing things that it'd be really difficult to know which he uses. And since I'm more convinced he's calculated and planned than irrational and moody, I'm going with the T.

[meshou]

how enlightening.

i have a MSc in Sociology and Political Science. you don't have to waste your 3,000-plus-posts-lessons on me, i'm just interested in your logic and for now, you have not convinced me that the positions he takes are pure tactics and not guided by his personal views.Whoops, botched your charm roll.

Waving your edu-cock around doesn't convince others you're correct, and is a definate social turn off. Just so you know, in the future-- bad idea.

[booyalab]

However, it is logical to be against capitol punishment, and therefore pardon anyone who comes up for pardoning.

It's also an F-based decision to believe that Justice trumps Mercy in that case. It's a difference in quality or value, an F-decision no matter which way you handle it.


I didnt say that someone can't build a logical argument against capital punishment. I know what you people are trying to say but you're not taking the context and the law into account here.

It was NOT necessarily an F-based decision to believe that justice trumps mercy in that case because the law was already established. It would have been an F based decision if this was the only human being in Texas who was presently convicted of murder and waiting to get the chair. He'd have to let everyone else go too, so the eventual cons of letting that woman go outweighed the pros.

[meshou]

It was NOT necessarily an F-based decision to believe that justice trumps mercy in that case because the law was already established. It would have been an F based decision if this was the only human being in Texas who was presently convicted of murder and waiting to get the chair. He'd have to let everyone else go too, so the eventual cons of letting that woman go outweighed the pros.There's another level to it. A political officer always has the option of deciding morality trumps the law in that case or not, an F-based decision (and one I think should be considered more often). If he did not consider it, then yes, it was T-based.

I think it's best to look at that sort of problem on the broadest scale. In that case, I think that's a Feeling decision. If he did not use feeling, I think he made his decision on foolish grounds.

I don't think he does have to let other people go. I think that criminals who he dicided should die would whine slightly louder all the way to the chair if he did let one person go, but I don't think it's a block pardon. Could be mistaken.

[moni]

out of all those types that people mentioned, how come no one thinks he's an intp??

heh heh. i think, he's an isfp...

[sasapurdue]

The whole down-home, traditional values things seems very SJish to me. Like maybe ISTJ. But I don't know the guy personally. I am sure the face he shows the world isn't how he really is.
I do not in any way shape or form see Bush as an NT. He is very much a blind follower of traditional values and I just don't think that goes along with an NT's questioning nature. He doesn't seem like a questioner to me at all, nor does he seem like a person who is particularly reflective. He seems much more concrete and "in the world" than he does cerebral or intellectual.

[MacGuffin]

It's not a 'logical argument' to say that a particular person on death row should be an exception to the rule because she's started reading her Bible every day. That's called extenuating circumstances . It's called valuing mercy over justice. It's called basing a decision on your feeling function.
I think meshou answered this:


It's also an F-based decision to believe that Justice trumps Mercy in that case. It's a difference in quality or value, an F-decision no matter which way you handle it.
Just because one rejects an F-based argument does not mean the decision was based on a T preference. He very well could have values that say once the legal system comes to a final conclusion that is the final conclusion no matter what. That is not logic.

[MaroonBells]

Yeah, but XSTJs make decisions based on the good of society as well. That's an SJ thing.

I agree, that's where he is so tricky.

my wife's an xSFJ and I see so many overlaps in the way how she can present emotional views as "matter of fact" but when you question the logic, it is not as solid as it appeared at first, maybe that's why I gear towards the F versus the T

[MaroonBells]

Whoops, botched your charm roll.

Waving your edu-cock around doesn't convince others you're correct, and is a definate social turn off. Just so you know, in the future-- bad idea.

i know, i know, sorry about that

i just felt the remarks were a little condescending and misplaced, like we weren't discussing the topic but making value judgements, that's all, guess sometimes i am a baby...

[sbw]

Whoops, botched your charm roll.

Waving your edu-cock around doesn't convince others you're correct, and is a definate social turn off. Just so you know, in the future-- bad idea.

edu-cock. HA!

Scott

[Claverhouse]

A prime example of why Bush is a T was the incident when he was governor of Texas and there was a lot of emotional hype surrounding a woman who was on death row because she had become a good person in jail or whatever. If someone like Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton had been in that office, they'd have no qualms with trying to save this woman...ignoring the precedent it sets and ignoring everyone else who is simultaneously on death row but doesn't have the label of having a spiritual rebirth so it's ok if they die. Bush ignored all the emotions of the protestors and understood and heeded more the cons of making a decision based on extenuating circumstances than on principles You overestimate the ( fake ) loving anguish of liberals:


Clinton returned to office as Governor in 1983, granted no commutations to anyone on death row, and presided over all four of the state's executions in the modern era.*1


The Death Penalty Information Centre contends that 44 mentally retarded people were executed between 1976 and last year. In one instance, Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas left the 1992 presidential campaign to fly home for the execution of Rickey Ray Rector, a murderer who shot away part of his brain in a suicide attempt after he had shot and killed a police officer. Rector was so brain-damaged, his lawyers said, that he asked that his pecan pie be put aside for him to eat as a snack after his execution. Clinton rejected his final appeal for clemency.*2

and the cold rigorous intellectualism of the pro-death penalty people, particularly in Texas...


The 1990 governor's race in Texas presented a variety of candidates vying to demonstrate their greater support of the death penalty. As populist Democrat Jim Hightower put it, the race boiled down to one issue: "Who can kill the most Texans?"(59) Former governor Mark White portrayed his toughness by walking through a display of large photos of the people executed during his term. Attorney General Jim Mattox insisted that he was the one who should be given credit for the 32 executions carried out under his watch. Meanwhile, the Republican candidate, Clayton Williams, showed pictures of a simulated kidnapping of young children from a school yard and then touted his backing of a separate law to impose the death penalty for killing children. His ad ended with the slogan: "That's the way to make Texas great again."(60)

In the end, the campaigns succeeded only in gaining embarrassing notoriety for Texas as Democrat Ann Richards became the eventual winner. Richards has continued Texas' leadership in carrying out the most executions of any state. However, while Texas is spending hundreds of millions of dollars on the death penalty, it is having to release other prisoners early to avoid overcrowding. Inmates serve only an average of one-fifth of their sentences. In Harris County (Houston), arguably the death penalty capital of the country, 67 percent of those arrested are recidivists and crime is the people's number one concern.*1

Both sides for and against the death penalty are driven by emotionalism; but both governors would do what they think their constituents would approve most. That's how they get re-elected by the sovereign mass.

The only difference between these people is that Bush would eat the pecan pie afterwards.




Claverhouse :ph34r:

*1 High Costs of the Death Penalty (http://www.fnsa.org/v1n1/dieter1.html)

*2 Countries Take Different Approaches (http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/prisons/countries_different_approaches.htm)

[sowega]

Perhaps it might have been easier for me to type GW Bush if I wasn't a Canadian, but I would say that he is either an ISFP, or an ISTP.

I have often heard that he is an ISTJ, but the implication I see is that GW was too obnoxious and irresponsible in his younger days to be an SJ-type. He was quite wild and drank a lot, but at the same time struck me as an extraverted wannabee and is a terrible public speaker, and it is for that reason that I say that he is an introvert. Introverts are also known to drink excessively and act up if they become too desparate to belong to a particular social group; and are not totally concious of their lack of social skills. It is also much easier for us P-types to feign J-typse than the other way around.

A lot of people also said that Bill Clinton was either an ESFJ or an ESFP, but again I don't agree there, either. In fact, I wouldn't be too surprise if he turn out to be an INTP!!

In fact, I have this one very close friend whom often drank excessively, organized lots of socials, claimed that he was an extravert, but when he took the MBTI, he turned to to be a strong ISFP.

[Architectonic]

It seems old Georgy is a popular guy.....

http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=2805

[Gracchus]

ESFP, he's like my dad, he jokes around with people alot, and in his younger days he just partied and had no direction, did things like get drunk and piss on people's cars. As far as I can see, the TJ part of his mind didn't develop until later. Why do people think I?