It is difficult today to recall a time when Americans—or at least the most visible and vocal Americans—did not scorn their leaders in government. When and why this distaste, and occasional cynicism, appeared and spread is a large and complicated subject. Perhaps it has always been this way. Even the most beloved twentieth- century presidents like Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan got their share of abuse, and sometimes hatred, from the public. Enmity goes with the job, and probably always will.

If this is true, then the Eisenhower period appears like a small, peaceful island in the long history of presidential leadership. He had plenty of critics. Many were dismissive of everything from his syntax to his golf game; some were downright mean. But his administration was not known for any major upheavals, and there was not really any big policy disaster, apart from the U- 2 shootdown, which had less to do with policy making or policy implementation than with a momentary bit of risky judgment and combined with sheer bad luck.

Students of Eisenhower and his presidency have offered many more reasons for this success (if they call it a success) than can be mentioned here. But one reason that has received comparably little attention is what might be called Eisenhower's soft power: his capacity for empathy, decency, tolerance and loyalty. The tone and style may have been soft, but the implementation and its effects were arguably as durable as any other aspect of his character—certainly his force of concentration, his temper, his endurance, his mental and physical strength, and even his cunning. Such things are not easily measurable, but that need not stop us from thinking about them, and wondering how much of a role they played in history.

We mentioned in this study the concept of friendship because that is where most of these qualities reside. It is interesting to note that, since Ike, presidents have been described as either almost friendless (Nixon, Reagan, Obama) or beset with cronies (Johnson, Carter, Clinton). Perhaps Eisenhower set too high a standard. Perhaps the times and values have changed too much.