Arnold Schwarzenegger

[Animal]

He's an interesting character. My current assessment is that he's 136 in some order, but I'd like to pinpoint the core. I used to assume it was 3. And it may be 3! But I just want to take a closer look. Eli Jackson-Bear had typed him as a 6 exemplar in his book. I disagree with many of his typings, but I found this one plausible. Arnie is often held up by writers as a 3 or 6 example. I want to get to the bottom of this. ?

So let me know what you guys think. Thoughts, disagreements with the tritype, offhanded observations -- all welcome.
The second interview is long. No pressure to watch the whole thing. Just figured I'd provide some material to start with.

[SpiritoftheGael]

Animal he reminds me most of Obama or Trudeau like he's playing a part. Very smooth. My vote is on 3. He doesn't seem that tense to me. I mean I'm not seeing much nervousness or defensiveness. I can see his shoulders are a bit stiff but it seems more oneish if anything to me.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Animal]

He is statuesque. Watching a few interviews, I'm actually thinking he may be 1 lead. For years I went back and forth... 3 or 6? 3 or 6? My problem with 3 is he doesn't seem adaptable or opportunistic per se. It's more like he has his eye on the goal and goes after it at any cost. There's conviction and determination in him. Which is not to say that 3s can't also be determined... but Arnold seems like he's going to do it his way no matter what. And while he has a side of him that motivates others, his main points are not focused on others, or on heart-type matters at all. Of course, I could be wrong. I'm still mulling this over, but I'd be curious how anyone reacts to the idea of him being a 1 lead?

[Full_fathom]

I'll posit that he IS adaptable, by vitue of entering politics. Aftet all, it does provide the sort of pay-off that strokes a 3. Notoriety, status, influence. Although he's sorta fallen off the map after enjoying his "picadillos", as James Carville would say.

Ahrnold though, the man, the person has benefited from a great image. Yourself even saying "statuesque". I dont think its an accident. Not you, I mean him, existing as a figure of greatness, buoyed by movie roles and wonderful catch-phrases. A brand. Not every type actively allows this or cojoles, or even enhances it. But that is (or was) his brand imo.

Unfortunately, the brand is worthless now. Its a tough spot for an image type, but you know, thats the very danger they dance with. It almost seems on purpose. You see the image that they project, but there is little idea of the image they keep secret for themselves.

John Edwards is another 3 politico that reminds me of a similar predicament. Currency no more, they don't reconcile.

2 - positive. I am the best version of this image, framed within my desire to be loved, bc its what i need.

3 - active/neutral. I AM the image of my emotional feedback, bc the 'responsibility' of attachment. I do/give whatever matters to others , to be actively engaged with its security, as it relates to my 'pay-off', it justifies my need for existing.

4 - negative. I cannot accept my image willingly, i don't relate, i'll probably create one for myself, to feel good about it. Or to hurt myself. Or both. I need to understand what is occurring.