Presidential Power: The Power of PersuasionPolitical scientists have continually sought methods to explain presidential power and the success that results from the effective use of that power. Five different approaches have been proposed, including the legal approach, the presidential roles approach, the Neustadtian approach, the institutional approach, and the presidential decision-making approach. The legal approach says that all power derives from legal authority (US Constitution). The presidential roles approach maintains that a president's success depends on balancing his or her role as head of state and head of government. The Neustadtian approach maintains that “presidential power is the power to persuade” (Neustadt, p. 11). The institutional approach argues that the political climate and institutional relationships determine presidential power. The final approach, decision-making, offers a more psychological perspective that delves deeper into context, management styles, and psychological dispositions to determine where a president's idea of ​​power comes from. Among all these elements, it is essential to study them one at a time in order to analyze the main components of each approach to determine the main strengths and weaknesses. The approach on which this analysis will focus will be the Neustadtian approach; a theory presented in Neustadt's seminal work Presidential Power and Modern Presidents. An article by Matthew Kerbel, a follower of the Neustadtian approach, which offers an empirical analysis that supports Neustadt's work, will also be analyzed. The first three chapters of Neustad's work outline his principle of persuading presidential power. Each chapter brings major points essential to its theory. For example, the first chapter i...... middle of paper ......tadt created a viable theory that modern presidents can think about and use to their advantage. Presidents can also look at the case studies found in Kerbel's article and see how disastrous inflexibility will be for the president's policy agenda. The reason this theory is so viable is because it is so difficult to argue against a concept as simple as the power of persuasion. Moreover, people seem to adhere to the simplest principle that best explains presidential power. ReferencesKerbel, Matthew R. (1993). An empirical test of the role of persuasion in the exercise of presidential power. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 23 (2), pp. 347-361. Neustadt, Richard E. (1990). Presidential Power and Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan (Rev. ed.). New York: the free press.