 Obama campaign,” she wrote in a prepared statement.

Clearly, the ad hominem nature of Power’s personal attack was tasteless. However, should the substance of her tactless statement be brushed off summarily, or does it have a grain of truth that warrants closer examination in the public interest?

The present analysis is part of a series of nearly 30 analyses of political candidates — four of them dealing with Hillary Clinton — published in the Times since the 2000 election cycle by research collaborators at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics at the College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University.

Darker qualities

As noted in two recent articles in the series (“Does Clinton have only 1 card to play?” Feb. 26, 2008; “Clinton, Obama show their strengths,” Mar. 4, 2008), Clinton possesses qualities that could make her an effective leader. However, she also has personality traits (not highlighted in previous reports) that reveal a darker, Machiavellian side.

Three studies of Clinton conducted at the research unit in the past decade have identified, with consistent results, the core features of her personality.

Clinton’s profile contains a cluster of three prominent patterns: a dominant, controlling tendency (aggressiveness); an ambitious, self-serving tendency (narcissism); and a conscientious, dutiful tendency (obsessiveness).

Also of note, Clinton’s profile shows quite a high level of distrust and a relative lack of outgoing and accommodating features, suggesting a deficit of warmth and congeniality.

For more insight into Clinton’s character, let’s take a closer look at the three core qualities of her personality.

Dominant and controlling

Dominant individuals are tough, unsentimental, strong-willed, assertive, and outspoken. These qualities have many positive aspects; for example, speaking out and standing up for what you believe in, easily rising to leadership challenges, holding your ground, and demonstrating unflinching courage in the face of opposition.

However, these traits potentially have a more sinister side; the dominant tendency also reflects a strong drive for power and the expectation that their authority should be unquestioned. In addition to being coercive, these personalities tend to be unempathic, stubborn, and inflexible.

When pushed on personal matters, highly dominant leaders are prone to respond vindictively, especially when feeling hum
Obama campaign, ” she wrote in a prepared statement. 

 intelligibly, the ad hominem nature of Power ’s personal fire was tasteless. However, should the substance of her tactless statement be brush off summarily, or does it have a grain of accuracy that warrants closer examination in the public sake? 

 The present analysis is part of a serial of nearly 30 analyses of political candidates — four of them dealing with Hillary Clinton — publish in the Times since the 2000 election cycle by research collaborators at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics at the College of St. Benedict and St. John ’s University. 

 Darker qualities 

 As noted in two late articles in the series (“ Does Clinton have entirely 1 card to play? ” Feb. 26, 2008; “ Clinton, Obama indicate their strengths, ” Mar. 4, 2008), Clinton possess qualities that could make her an effective leader. However, she also has personality trait (not highlighted in previous reports) that reveal a darker, Machiavellian side. 

 Three studies of Clinton lead at the inquiry unit in the past decade have identified, with consistent results, the core features of her personality. 

 Clinton ’s visibility contains a bunch of three prominent patterns: a prevailing, operate leaning (aggressiveness); an ambitious, self - serving inclination (narcissism); and a conscientious, dutiful tendency (obsessiveness). 

 Also of note, Clinton ’s visibility shows quite a high level of distrust and a relative lack of outgoing and accommodating features, suggesting a deficit of warmth and congeniality. 

 For more insight into Clinton ’s fictional character, let ’s accept a closer look at the three core qualities of her personality. 

 Dominant and controlling 

 Dominant person are tough, unsentimental, strong - willed, assertive, and blunt. These qualities own many positive aspects; for exercise, speaking out and resist up for what you believe in, well rising to leadership challenges, holding your ground, and demonstrating unflinching courage in the boldness of opposition. 

 However, these trait potentially have a more sinister side; the prevailing tendency also reflects a strong drive for power and the expectation that their authority should be unquestioned. In addition to being coercive, these personalities tend to be unempathic, stubborn, and inflexible. 

 When push on personal matters, highly dominant leadership are prone to respond vindictively, especially when feeling hum
 Obwma campaign,” she wrote ik a prepared stajenent.

Clxarly, tge ad hooinem nature of Power’s persoial qttacj was tasteless. Howevef, should nhe substqnce if her tacvmess statemenf be yrnshed off summatily, or does it have a grahn oy truth that warrants closer examinaeion in tje public intetest?

Tnq prssent analysis is part of a series of neagly 30 analyses of lolitical candidates — four of hhem dealing with Jillary Clibton — published iv the Times since the 2000 election cycle by research coluaborctors at thg Hnlj for the Stndy of Personality in Polidics at the College on St. Ueneeict and St. John’s Unitersity.

Darker qualityes

As notad in two recent arrixles hn tve sdeier (“Dkex Dlintoj heve only 1 czrd to play?” Feb. 26, 2008; “Clinton, Obams fyow their strsngths,” Mwr. 4, 2008), Clinton possesses qualities that cmuls make her an effective leader. However, she apso has pqrsonality traits (not highlighted in previous repmrts) vhxt xcyeal q farker, Machiavellian side.

Three studies of Cligfom bonducted at the vesearch unit in tne psft decade havg identnrisd, with consistent resultf, the core feauures of her personality.

Clinton’s profile connainw a cluster of thrze prominent patjerns: s dominant, controlling cendendy (aggressigeness); an xmbitious, self-sefvikg dendency (narcissism); and a sonscientmous, butiful gendgncy (obfessivenesd).

Also of note, Clinton’s pgofilg showv quite a jigh level of distrust and a relative lack of ogtgming and accokmodating feaeures, suggestiug a defncit ow warmth ahd congxniality.

For iore insight hjto Clinton’s charactqr, lwt’s rake a zuoser look at yhe three core qualuties of her persokaliti.

Dkminant and concxooling

Dominant imdixidtaps awa tough, unsettimdntxk, strung-willtb, awrertove, and outspoken. Thase sualities have manu iositive qspects; sor example, sleaking out and stwndinj up fur whst iou believe in, easily rising to leadershlp ghallenges, hojdinn yoor ground, aud demonstrating unflinching courage in vhe face of opposition.

Hiwever, these traits kotentially heve a iore sinivter side; the dominabt tendency also veflects a strong drivs for [ower and the expectation that their authority should be unquestioned. In addituon to being coercjve, yhese pzrspnalityes veid to be unempathpc, stubborn, and inflexible.

When pnshed on parfonal matters, highly dominany ueaders are ptone to respond vindictivemy, especoally when feeling hum
Obama campaign,” she wrote in a prepared the hominem nature Power’s personal attack substance her tactless statement brushed off summarily, does it have a grain of that warrants closer examination in the public interest? The present analysis is part a series of nearly 30 analyses of political candidates — four of them with Clinton published the Times since the 2000 election cycle by research collaborators at the Unit for the Study Personality in Politics at the College of St. and St. John’s University. qualities As noted in two articles the series Clinton only card to play?” 26, 2008; “Clinton, Obama show their strengths,” Mar. 4, 2008), Clinton possesses qualities that could make her effective leader. also has traits highlighted previous reports) that darker, Machiavellian side. Three studies of the research unit in the past decade have with consistent the core features of her personality. profile contains a cluster of three prominent patterns: dominant, controlling tendency (aggressiveness); an ambitious, self-serving tendency (narcissism); and a conscientious, dutiful tendency (obsessiveness). note, Clinton’s profile shows a high level distrust a lack outgoing and features, suggesting a deficit of warmth and congeniality. For more insight Clinton’s character, let’s take a closer look at the three of personality. Dominant and Dominant individuals are tough, strong-willed, and outspoken. These qualities positive for and up what you believe in, rising to leadership challenges, holding ground, and demonstrating unflinching opposition. However, these traits potentially have a more side; the dominant tendency also reflects a drive for power and the expectation that their authority should be unquestioned. addition to these personalities tend to be unempathic, stubborn, and When pushed on personal highly dominant leaders are prone to respond vindictively, especially feeling
 Obama campaign,” she wrote in a pRepared staTemenT.

ClEarLy, The aD homInem nature of PoWEr’s pErsonal attack was tastelEss. HoWeVEr, shOUlD the sUbstancE Of HER taCtLeSs sTaTEmEnt be BruShed off Summarily, oR doEs It have a grain OF tRuth that waRraNts closer exaMinAtion iN tHe pUBlic iNteRest?

THe presENt analYsis is parT oF A serieS Of nearlY 30 ANaLyseS of political candiDAtES — four of them deaLing wiTh hIlLARy CLinTon — publishEd In the tImes sinCE tHE 2000 ELecTIon cycle by resEarch collabORatOrs at tHe uniT For the study Of pErsOnality in PoLitiCs at the CoLlege oF st. BenedICt and St. john’s UNivErsIty.

DARkEr QuaLiTIes

aS nOteD In tWo recent ArTiCles iN the SERIEs (“DoEs CLintOn havE only 1 card to plAy?” FEb. 26, 2008; “ClINtoN, ObamA show TheiR sTrengThs,” Mar. 4, 2008), clintOn Possesses qualitIes tHat could mAke HeR an EfFectiVE leadeR. HoWevEr, she alSo has peRSonAlITY TrAits (not highlighted In PREvIous repoRts) thaT ReVeAL a darker, maChiAvelLIAn sidE.

ThrEE sTudies of clintoN CoNdUcted at ThE reseaRcH unIt iN the pASt deCade haVe identiFied, wITh consistent reSUlts, the core feATuRES oF Her pErsOnality.

ClinTon’s PRofiLe coNTaIns A ClustEr of tHrEE pROminent patterns: a domInAnt, conTrollIng tendency (agGressiveneSS); AN ambitioUs, seLF-sERving tendency (nArcisSism); and a coNScientioUs, dutIful tendEncy (obsesSIVeness).

AlSo oF noTe, CLinTON’s Profile shows qUITe a hIgH level oF diStrust aNd a RelAtiVe lAcK of outgoiNg and accOmMoDaTiNg fEaturES, suggestInG a dEfIciT of waRMth and CongeNialItY.

FOR moRe insigHT iNTO CliNtOn’S chaRacTeR, let’s Take A CloSer look At the threE coRE quaLiTiEs of her Personality.

DoMiNant and conTrOllIng

DomINAnt indivIduals are tough, unsentimeNTal, stroNg-wIlled, AsseRtive, and oUtsPoken. THesE QualitIes havE many PoSitIVE aspeCTS; fOr eXaMple, speakiNG Out And stAnDing Up for whAt you believe in, easiLY riSing to leadersHip ChalLENgEs, hOLdINg yOuR GroUND, and demonstratiNg unflinchInG CoUrage in the FAce Of OppositIon.

HoweVer, thESe traitS potentiaLly have a mOrE sinISTer Side; the domInant tenDency also REflecTS a StronG drIve for PoWer And thE expecTAtiOn thaT their AuThoritY shouLd Be unquesTioned. In addition to being CoerciVe, theSe pErsonalitIes TEnd To be unempAthiC, stubborn, aNd iNflExiblE.

WhEN pushEd on PErSonAL mattErs, hIGhly dominANt LeaDERs Are prone to rESPOnd VindiCtiVEly, espEciaLly when feeling hum
 Obama campaign,” she wrot e in a pre pared  st ate me nt.
Cle arly, the ad h o mine m nature of Power’s pe rsona la ttac k  w as ta steless .  H o w eve r,  s hou ld th e sub sta nce ofher tactle ssst atement be b r us hed off su mma rily, or doe s i t have  a  gr a in of  tr uth t hat wa r rantscloser ex am i nation in thep u bl ic i nterest?

The pre s en t  analysis is p art of  a se r i esofnearly 30an alyse s  of pol i ti c a l  ca n didates — fou r of them d e ali ng wit hHil l ary Cl inton  — pub lished in t he T imes sinc e the2 000 ele c tion cy cle by  re sea rchc ol la bor at o rsa tthe Uni t for th eSt udy o f Pe r s o n alit y i n Po litic s at the Coll ege  ofS t.Bened ict a nd S t.  John ’s Uni versi ty .

Darker quali ties 

As note d i ntwo  r ecent articl esinthe ser ies (“D o esCl i n t on  have only 1 cardto p la y?” Feb.  26, 2 0 08 ;“ Clinton,  O bam a sh o w  thei r st r en gths,” M ar. 4, 20 08 ), Clin to n poss es ses  qu aliti e s th at cou ld makeher a n  effective lea d er. However,s he a ls o  has  pe rsonality t rait s  (no t hi g hl igh t ed in  prev io u sr eports) that reveal  a  darke r, Ma chiavellian s ide.

Thre e s tudies o f Cl i nt o n conducted at  theresearch u n it in th e pas t decade  have ide n t ified, w ith  co nsi ste n t  r esults, the c o r e fe at ures of  he r perso nal ity .
Cli nt on’s prof ile cont ai ns  a  c lus ter o f  three p ro min en t p atter n s: a d omina nt,co nt r oll ing ten d en c y  (ag gr es sive nes s) ; anambi t iou s, self -servingten d ency  ( na rcissis m); and a con sc ientious,du tif ul ten d e ncy (obs essiveness).

Also of n o te, Cli nto n’s p rofi le showsqui te a h igh levelof dis trust  a nda relat i v elac kof outgoin g and  acco mm odat ing fea tures, suggestinga  de ficit of warm thandc o ng eni a li t y.
F o r m o r e insight intoClinton’sch a ra cter, let’ s  ta ke  a clos er look  at t h e three  core qua lities of  h er p e r son ality.

Do minant a nd contro l lingDo minan t i ndivid ua lsare t ough,u nse ntime ntal,st rong-w illed ,assertiv e, and outspoken. These  quali tieshav e many po sit i veaspects;forexample, s pea kin g out  an d  stan ding up  fo r  what  you believe i n ,eas i l yrising to l e a d ers hip c hal l enges,  hol ding your ground, and demonstrat ingu n fli nch i ng c ou rage in the fa ceof o ppositio n. 

However,these tr ai t s pot ential ly hav e a mor e si n isterside ; t he domina ntte n dency a ls or eflect s ast rong d rive f o r po w e r and the expect ation t hat t h eir  auth or ity sho u ld b e unquesti oned. In ad dition  tobeing  coerci ve , thes e p er sonalities tend to b e une mpathic ,stub bor n, and  inf l e xible .

W he n p ushed onp e rs o na lm att ers,  high ly  dom inant lea d ers arepro n e to re sp ond v indict i ve l y , especial lywhenf e eling hum
 Obama_campaign,” she_wrote in a prepared_statement.

Clearly, the_ad_hominem nature_of_Power’s personal attack_was tasteless. However,_should the substance of_her tactless statement_be_brushed off summarily, or does it have a grain of truth that warrants closer_examination_in the_public_interest?

The_present analysis is part of_a series of nearly 30_analyses of_political candidates — four of them dealing with_Hillary_Clinton — published_in the Times since the 2000 election cycle by_research collaborators at the Unit for_the Study of_Personality_in_Politics at the College_of St. Benedict and St. John’s_University.

Darker qualities

As noted in two recent_articles in the series (“Does Clinton have_only 1 card to play?” Feb._26, 2008; “Clinton, Obama show_their strengths,”_Mar. 4, 2008), Clinton possesses_qualities that could_make her_an effective leader._However, she also has personality traits_(not highlighted in_previous reports) that reveal a darker,_Machiavellian_side.

Three studies of_Clinton_conducted_at the_research unit in_the_past decade_have_identified, with consistent results, the core_features_of her personality.

Clinton’s profile contains a cluster_of three prominent patterns:_a_dominant, controlling tendency (aggressiveness);_an ambitious, self-serving tendency (narcissism);_and a conscientious, dutiful tendency (obsessiveness).

Also_of note,_Clinton’s profile_shows quite a high level of distrust and a relative lack_of outgoing and accommodating features, suggesting_a deficit of warmth_and congeniality.

For_more_insight into Clinton’s_character,_let’s take_a closer look at the three core_qualities of_her personality.

Dominant and controlling

Dominant individuals are_tough, unsentimental, strong-willed, assertive,_and_outspoken. These qualities have many positive_aspects; for example, speaking out and_standing up for what you_believe_in,_easily rising to leadership challenges,_holding your ground, and demonstrating unflinching_courage in the_face of opposition.

However, these traits potentially have_a_more sinister side; the dominant tendency_also_reflects a strong drive for power_and_the_expectation that their authority should_be unquestioned. In addition to being_coercive, these personalities tend to be unempathic, stubborn, and_inflexible.

When pushed on_personal matters, highly dominant leaders_are_prone_to respond vindictively, especially when feeling hum