Molineaux is the lead catalyst for American Future, a research project that discovers what Americans prefer for their personal future lives. The research informs community planners with grassroots community preferences. Previously, Molineaux was the president/CEO of The Bridge Alliance.
We love heroic leaders. We admire heroes and trust them to tackle our big problems. In a way, we like the heroes to take care of those problems for us, relieving us of our citizen responsibilities. But what happens when our leaders fail us? How do we replace a heroic leader who has become bloated with ego? Or incompetent?
Heroic leaders are good for certain times and specific challenges, like uniting people against a common enemy. We find their charisma and inspiration compelling. They help us find our courage to tackle things together. We become a team, supporting the hero’s vision.
Yet there are several situations where heroic leadership is not helpful or perhaps harmful. I find heroic leadership harmful when the chosen hero causes distrust, encouraging paranoia among their followers. We must choose our heroes carefully, identifying values and virtues our country needs, then measuring our leaders by these values and virtues.
A project launched in 2019 sought to educate college students to “ Vote by Design.” Its workbook helped voters to think about the qualifications needed for the president, with professional and personal qualities. Reading through the workbook felt similar to serving on jury duty. I didn’t want to think this much, but once I was there and reminded of my role as a citizen, I knew I had to do my best.
As citizens, our role is to be job interviewers! The more we identify qualities we want our chosen and elected leaders to have, the easier it is to choose.
Few are happy with the 2024 choices we’ve been offered for president. Our excitement or feelings about the candidates are currently unimportant. It’s what we do with the choices we have that matter. Have you considered the team supporting the two likely candidates? We could extend this exploration of values and virtues to the vice presidential picks and one or more likely Cabinet members. This is prudent in 2024 because both candidates are elders. Death is a possibility. Who are their current and past advisors?
Who is the “hero in waiting?” And what qualifications and skills do they have? They will likely be needed to support or replace the president. Who are the candidates surrounding themselves with? What type of leaders are on the team? This choice to examine the team surrounding each candidate is needed because our definition of a leader has been expanding from “heroic” to “facilitator.” What a welcome change!
A facilitative leader gathers a team of experts and guides them to bring their best to the job. The leader facilitates a solution that was not previously known but is better for all the input received. Facilitative leaders usually share credit for accomplishing the goal with the entire team. It is a longer and messier process to achieve results. Patience is required. Abraham Lincoln was this type of leader. In his time, he held the nation together through a Civil War.
Heroic leaders command action. They tend to make everything black and white, avoiding nuance. Our human brains love this. It is simple and easy to follow. It’s also like having a hammer and thinking every problem is a nail. If instead, the problem is complicated, the hammer approach makes things worse. Teddy Roosevelt was that type of leader, exposing corruption with his Rough Rider persona. He was sometimes effective and often there were unintended consequences for his actions. People were the collateral damage for his heroism.
Our duty calls as we enter the remaining months of an election that no one wants. If we abdicate our role as citizens, power-hungry people will fill the void with whatever benefits them the most. It is up to us to pick the best presidential team to move our nation forward.
Americans across the political spectrum have continued to ask about the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s connections among the political elite. (Angela Weiss/AFP)
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner speaks to voters at a town hall at the Elks Lodge 188 on June 7, 2026, in Portland, Maine.
McConnell and Platner both feel entitled
The two men could not be more different. One, a Republican, octogenarian, seven-term Southern senator, the other a progressive, millennial Maine oysterman who’s never spent a day in elected office.
But Mitch McConnell, the senior senator from Kentucky who’s been MIA for the past few weeks and Graham Platner, the Maine Senate candidate who’s facing calls to drop out of his race against Sen. Susan Collins, apparently do have something in common: an outsized sense of entitlement.
McConnell, who is 84 and not running for reelection, has been hospitalized for three weeks, and yet we still don’t fully know what he was admitted for or what his condition is. Per CNN, “his office has not disclosed a medical reason for the hospitalization or provided specifics on his health status beyond saying last week that he ‘continues to improve’ and ‘is working closely with his staff on Kentucky and Senate matters.’ ”
While several legislators have said they’ve talked to him and insist he sounds strong, others have said they are completely in the dark. One MAGA influencer, Laura Loomer, posted ”High level source close to the White House tells me ‘Mitch McConnell is officially brain dead. He’s not coming back.’ ”
Meanwhile, up in Maine, Platner has been artfully dodging calls from his own party to drop out of his race after several allegations of misconduct from women, including a sexual assault allegation from a former girlfriend, came to light. While Platner, who has managed to survive a Nazi-tattoo scandal, a sexting scandal, and several old tweets scandals, denies the allegations, he has not quit.
High-profile Democrats including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer, the latter of whom had unsuccessfully hand-selected Maine Gov. Janet Mills to face Collins instead of Platner, have urged Platner to drop out, while other Dems have accused him of trying to influence the picking of his replacement.
Maine Democratic Party Executive Director Devon Murphy-Anderson released a statement Tuesday, which said in part:
“Unfortunately, Graham Platner’s team has repeatedly reached out to us in an attempt to put their thumb on the scale of what this process looks like. We have repeatedly reiterated to Graham Platner’s team that they have no role in determining our next Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate nor in determining what this process looks like.”
Both incidents show a deep lack of accountability to voters, who in one case deserve to know whether their senator is capable of performing his duties, and in another deserve a candidate who isn’t being accused of crimes, bigotry and deception.
The offensive and odious entitlement of both McConnell and Platner stands out not because it is particularly unique among today’s political class. Tom Kean, the New Jersey GOP congressman, missed more than 100 votes, only sharing after a three-month mystery absence that he was dealing with depression.
Former President Joe Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin failed to disclose a hospitalization for prostate cancer surgery, flouting the established rules for Cabinet members and senior U.S. officials.
From Biden’s insistence on running for reelection despite his obvious cognitive and political weaknesses to Trump’s brazen flouting of laws and norms, few politicians seem to appreciate that their public service job comes with responsibilities to constituents, including transparency and honesty.
But both parties increasingly justify the chicanery, because the stakes of winning elections and keeping power are simply too high. But that’s no excuse. If we’ve learned anything over the past decade, it’s that character and accountability do, in fact, matter. And when we, the voters, stop caring about it, well, so do they.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.