• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Worst American Presidents

Worst American President

  • Total voters
    83
CaptainCourtesy said:
I didn't even have to research it to know it was an idiotic assessment. I've read scores of IQ tests, and have sat with IQ testers. No way it could be determined in the way the article stated. Stupid anti-Republican hack report is all it amounted to.
Click to expand...

I remember when this crap came out about 9 years ago and I did some research. Most of the serious studies noted that Bush 1, Clinton and Nixon were the smartest men to hold the office in the last 100 years. Bush II was normally rated around 125 and his Military test scores indicated a higher IQ than Kerry or JFK who was supposedly at 119. Bush was estimated at 125. No one puts clinton at anywhere near 182 though he is very bright. Bush I and Nixon (who was at the very top of Duke Law School) were in the 145 range from what I recall.

I knew a guy who was off the charts-he is a grandmaster and won the "Innovation" prize 2-3 years in a row (an incredibly prestigious chess award). He wouldn't make much of a politician-his communication skills were not becoming of a politician.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I didn't even have to research it to know it was an idiotic assessment. I've read scores of IQ tests, and have sat with IQ testers. No way it could be determined in the way the article stated. Stupid anti-Republican hack report is all it amounted to.
Click to expand...

On top of that it makes Eisenhower out to be a dolt in comparison, the man arguably had a more difficult job than being the President before he ever was president. That would be of course his role in WW2 and immediately afterward.
 
TurtleDude said:
CC-you haven't seen that hoax nonsense before. "The Lovenstein Institute" was the supposed source of that. Snopes and other sites have destroyed that garbage. posting it as a credible link should permanently brand Mertex as someone who is either gullible or doesn't think anyone else here has a brain
Click to expand...

Hadn't seen the hoax before. Just on the surface, anyone who knows anything about IQ's and IQ testing would know that the report was idiotic. When I start seeing numbers like "174", "175", and "182", I know that the report is complete bunk.
 
Mertex didn't even read his own link which clearly debunked what he posted as a hoax.

that merits some sort of award:mrgreen::mrgreen:
 
TurtleDude said:
I remember when this crap came out about 9 years ago and I did some research. Most of the serious studies noted that Bush 1, Clinton and Nixon were the smartest men to hold the office in the last 100 years. Bush II was normally rated around 125 and his Military test scores indicated a higher IQ than Kerry or JFK who was supposedly at 119. Bush was estimated at 125. No one puts clinton at anywhere near 182 though he is very bright. Bush I and Nixon (who was at the very top of Duke Law School) were in the 145 range from what I recall.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put too much stock in raw IQ results for political leaders or decision making. After a certain point it becomes relatively moot. There are many more factors that begin to impact successful governance, including external actions.
 
Wiseone said:
On top of that it makes Eisenhower out to be a dolt in comparison, the man arguably had a more difficult job than being the President before he ever was president. That would be of course his role in WW2 and immediately afterward.
Click to expand...

My guess is that most Presidents... not all, but most, fall somewhere in the 120-140 range, which would be "superior" or "very superior". Of course there are some exceptions (Harding comes to mind), but in order to BE President, one has to have some above average intelligence. If not, the mistakes that one would have made would have caught up to them in the past.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Hadn't seen the hoax before. Just on the surface, anyone who knows anything about IQ's and IQ testing would know that the report was idiotic. When I start seeing numbers like "174", "175", and "182", I know that the report is complete bunk.
Click to expand...

GM Mike Rohde apparently was in the 185 range. Fisher as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Rohde_(chess_player)

The guy who graduated first in the class of 1980 at yale was a suitemate. he had more A grades than anyone up to that point and 800 scores on the SATs the LSATs and the highest score i heard of that year on the GMAT ( 775 which is a real feat given Harvard B school's average was about a 650 then). I once asked him what he tested at and he said in the mid 170 level. He also earned a marshall and rhodes scholarship majoring in a special interdivisional major (History Arts and Letters) as well as math theory (he was awarded a BA/BS/MS in four years of work)
 
Fiddytree said:
Though the poster took the comment out of context, she was using it to make her point...which I disagree with, but nevertheless, she was just using it to further simple-minded distaste of a leader.
Click to expand...

Out of context? Do you really believe Bush cared for other than ultra wealthy? The reason why he wanted to make their tax cuts permanent?:lol:
 
TurtleDude said:
strong the BDS is with this one Master Yoda

Seduced by the silly side of the force he has been Obi Wan
Click to expand...

Is that the "Tea Leaves" reveal?;)
 
TurtleDude said:
Mertex didn't even read his own link which clearly debunked what he posted as a hoax.

that merits some sort of award:mrgreen::mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I think not knowing somebody's gender when that information is clearly available merits some sort of award as well. :mrgreen::mrgreen:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
IQ testing is FAR more complicated than how those in the article described each President's IQ was assessed. I see zero validity in what they are stating.
Click to expand...

Oh, why am I not surprised. Using your own method of testing, Bush would come out a genius, right?;)
 
mertex said:
Out of context? Do you really believe Bush cared for other than ultra wealthy? The reason why he wanted to make their tax cuts permanent?:lol:
Click to expand...

Yes. Otherwise his base would have been incredibly small, don't you think? At the very least, you cater towards their message and get them hooked, or else you lose. The ultra wealthy cannot win you elections.
 
mertex said:
Out of context? Do you really believe Bush cared for other than ultra wealthy? The reason why he wanted to make their tax cuts permanent?:lol:
Click to expand...

he cut taxes for everyone who paid income taxes and many were dropped from the tax rolls. Its actually the dems who help the ultra wealthy. Estate and income taxes kill off those who would reach their level. If you think rich dems care for the poor you are sorely mistaken. Rich liberals need lots of poor to vote for them and to justify the socialist nonsense that actually helps the uber wealthy

Have you figured out that your post on presidential IQs was really really stupid?
 
mertex said:
Oh, why am I not surprised. Using your own method of testing, Bush would come out a genius, right?;)
Click to expand...

why don't you just admit you got pwned on this IQ bs. you didn't even read your own link that debunked the crap you posted
 
Fiddytree said:
His base of donators, yes. His base politically, absolutely not. It would take extreme filters to forget the power of his "every day man" image, regardless of the fact that he was a member of a prestigious family. His social conservatism and religious values struck a chord with the voting public.
Click to expand...


What religious values? The fact that he said what he thought the religious right wanted to hear?

Bush didn't attend church while in DC - 8 years, and that are his religious values?
And please, don't give me the conservative spin that his not going to church actually proves he is a better Christian.

Many people see George W. Bush's religion as one of his most important and defining factors. He certainly doesn't do anything to disabuse people of this. He speaks often of the role of religion in his life, his desire to have religion play a greater role in American politics, and so forth. It's curious, then, that he doesn't attend any churches in Washington D.C.
Amy Sullivan writes for The New Republic:
Bush Doesn't Attend Church?
 
pbrauer said:
I think not knowing somebody's gender when that information is clearly available merits some sort of award as well. :mrgreen::mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I was reading the post not the avatar. I guess that is the best you can do
 
amazing he got almost all the votes.
 
mertex said:
What religious values? The fact that he said what he thought the religious right wanted to hear?

Bush didn't attend church while in DC - 8 years, and that are his religious values?
And please, don't give me the conservative spin that his not going to church actually proves he is a better Christian.

Many people see George W. Bush's religion as one of his most important and defining factors. He certainly doesn't do anything to disabuse people of this. He speaks often of the role of religion in his life, his desire to have religion play a greater role in American politics, and so forth. It's curious, then, that he doesn't attend any churches in Washington D.C.
Amy Sullivan writes for The New Republic:
Bush Doesn't Attend Church?
Click to expand...

He did a combination of listening to that constituency and maintaining his distance from the movement. He did indeed do some lip service to the movement while not throwing much backbone to the statements. However, in other areas, it was in a full motion. There was also some private worship. To me, how he chose to personally worship is of little consequence to me...I mostly pay attention to how he crafted the message and implemented it. He used a few bills to get them hooked, while knowing they were a futile effort. Nevertheless, his own personal story struck a chord. I would also point to the Bioethics committee.
 
TurtleDude said:
OMG-you didn't research that before posting it

it has widely been debunked as a hoax and only a complete fool would see that as an accurate link

BUsh one was a Phi Beta Kappa at Yale, he had the strongest college academic record of ANY president in the last 100 years

you lose
Click to expand...

Of course it's a joke, the article itself tells you it's a joke - I posted the link, it was supposed to create anger, that Bush was listed with such a low IQ.

But, even though his real IQ was 125, his grades at Yale weren't all that swift. He did not graduate with honors. That George H.W. Bush was a member of Phi Betta Kapa has nothing to do with GW.
 
TurtleDude said:
CC-you haven't seen that hoax nonsense before. "The Lovenstein Institute" was the supposed source of that. Snopes and other sites have destroyed that garbage. posting it as a credible link should permanently brand Mertex as someone who is either gullible or doesn't think anyone else here has a brain
Click to expand...

Don't be inane! The article itself tells you it was intended to be a joke. All you have to do is read all the way to the end. It was suppose to incite some anger, but I guess my attempt at humor is lost on Bush idolizers.
 
mertex said:
Of course it's a joke, the article itself tells you it's a joke - I posted the link, it was supposed to create anger, that Bush was listed with such a low IQ.

But, even though his real IQ was 125, his grades at Yale weren't all that swift. He did not graduate with honors. That George H.W. Bush was a member of Phi Betta Kapa has nothing to do with GW.
Click to expand...

Obama didn't graduate with honors either yet he got into harvard law even though that meant he was below a 3.3 and at that time the 25th percentile at harvard law (meaning 75 percent of the successful applicants were above the 25th percentile GPA) was around a 3.7.

Bush's grades at yale were slightly better than Kerry's and his other opponent. Al Gore-had a bunch of Ds at harvard

If academic prowess was your main criteria Bush was far better than Gore (who failed to complete two graduate programs while Bush got an MBA at the finest B school in the world) or Kerry who not only had slightly lower grades at Yale but went to the third best law school in Boston
 
mertex said:
Don't be inane! The article itself tells you it was intended to be a joke. All you have to do is read all the way to the end. It was suppose to incite some anger, but I guess my attempt at humor is lost on Bush idolizers.
Click to expand...


a decent attempt at a save but the fact remains that BDS victims have been citing that Lovenstein nonsense as authority for years and then when they get pwned on it they start claiming it was a joke etc.

you posted it clearly as something you believed
 
Fiddytree said:
Yes. Otherwise his base would have been incredibly small, don't you think? At the very least, you cater towards their message and get them hooked, or else you lose. The ultra wealthy cannot win you elections.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter that the number of ultra wealthy is small, they are the ones that pay for all the advertisement and propaganda that create the false illusion that the wealth will trickle down.
 
TurtleDude said:
Its actually the dems who help the ultra wealthy. Estate and income taxes kill off those who would reach their level. If you think rich dems care for the poor you are sorely mistaken. Rich liberals need lots of poor to vote for them and to justify the socialist nonsense that actually helps the uber wealthy
Click to expand...
:lamo:lamo
Prove it Turtledove.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom