Leadership is the willingness to take an honest position involving important matters. To explain why you think you are right. And then have the courage to see if you're right and have the courage to engage critics and to try and convince the American public of the merits of your position. And ultimately to live with the results.
Before he was even a candidate for President, President Obama, as a State Senator, came out against the Iraq war. At the time, there was no upside. President Bush had approval ratings in the eightieth percentile. Mostly all Congressional Democrats capitulated and passed some sort of legislation delegating their authority to President Bush to declare war. No one thought it would be a losing struggle. The best thing, the best thing, the best thing a politician could have done is keep his mouth relatively shut. After all, Obama wouldn't have to vote on the war. He could be ambiguous and however it turned out, he could claim credit. And if you don't think Obama was advised to do this, then you don't think.
But Obama has consistently made difficult decisions when necessary. And here, he rightly knew that if a person wanted to be President of the United States or in any significant position, there were certain issues where he or she would have to put up or shut up. With great risk, he put up. It is all but forgotten now, but it is one of the more inspiring acts of the last ten years. If he'd been wrong, he'd have been toast. A weak Jimmy Carter, Arab appeasing, black guy with a muslim name. It would have been very bad. But real leadership means having the courage to be willing to stand through those risks. Because on certain things, like war, leadership can't be deferred or reduced to an ambiguous talking point. Candidate Obama had his leadership test, and he could not have passed with higher grades.
Candidate Romney has also had his leadership test. A test over his tax returns. Few people would have thought a candidate for the President of the United States would reduce the question of his leadership ability from issues ranging from war or an unpopular tax position, to one of hiding tax returns, but candidate Romney has done just that. When faced with criticism over his tax returns, he has not stepped up to the plate. He has quivered, squirmed and portrayed himself as petrified as to what people might think of him. He does not have the courage to face this difficult but necessary issue. The issue over whether one is qualified to be President of the United States. Whether the American people have a right to due diligence. The same due diligence every candidate has provided over the last 45 years. The right decision would be to release the returns and then walk through the valley of tough criticism. That's what a good leader does when the issue is important enough.
With all this in mind, would Romney have ordered the mission against Bin Laden? I would unequivocally say no. He views leadership through the prism of strict cost / benefit to himself. If a failed mission resulted in heavy and potentially damaging criticism, it simply would not be worth it. Not in a million years. The upside is great but he would need all the credit and none of the risk. That was not the option presented to President Obama. It was a big risk. Failure would potentially have been devastating, especially if US lives were lost. One man knows he has to step up, the other refuses unless he knows it's a sure thing.
I would argue Romney developed his leadership style at Bain Capital. He can make a hard decision, like laying off a whole town. But the benefit to him must be substantial and risk free. That may be great in private equity. But for a President, we need someone with the courage of his convictions. Not someone obsessed with the pursuit of his ambition and afraid of anything that may interfere with his journey.