NationStates Jolt Archive

If there were to be rigorous tests that people had to pass before they were allowed to be Presidential candidates, what if anything do you think they shoul dbe tested on. I think that our standards for presidential candidates lower election after election. Looking back at how well educated our forefathers were, woulndt it be nice to feel like the leader of the most powerful nation in teh world seemd like he was highly educated and wise and not some spoiled rich kid who cant put a sentence togehter without making it sound like he is mentally deficient?

My thoughts:

- Ecology
- Economics
- World History
- US history
- Economic History
- Public Speaking
- Geography
- Psycology
- Philosophy
- Ethics
- Govternmentology (lol, prolly not a real word but what I mean is the study of different forms of government)


what else would you add or what did I list that you don't think is necessary? If you are in another country then think about your own leaders and what you wish they had knowledge about.

Law.

Awareness of foreign cultures/customs.

The last thing we need is a President who makes the kind of cultural blunder that gets someone pissed off at us.

I do not think intelligence should be a factor for political office.

Just because a man doesn't have a high IQ doesn't mean he isn't wise.

Awareness of foreign cultures/customs.

The last thing we need is a President who makes the kind of cultural blunder that gets someone pissed off at us.

We're the USA, the foreign cultures can take a hike and shove it.

They're all mostly savages and barbarians outside of the North America and Europe anyway. Well there is Japan, South Africa (some people there), New Zealand, and then Australia. Also parts of the South Americas are good. But mostly the world is a rotten hellhole and I don't give a darn about the president being sensitive to a bunch of loser cannibals in the congo!

I do not think intelligence should be a factor for political office.

Just because a man doesn't have a high IQ doesn't mean he isn't wise.

Bush supporter eh?

George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, Zachary Taylor, Millard Filmore, and Abe Lincoln all didn't go to college. http://www.languish.org/forums/html/emoticons/puke.gif

I don't think the people running need to be educated or have to pass a test in order to be able to run. If people are stupid enough to elect someone who hasn't finished High School, then thats they're choice, as it is a democracy and not an aristocracy.

I think and wish they have knowledge in a whole bunch of areas, but I don't think that stupid people should be barred from office. Clearly the person who has the most education and best natural abilities,etc. would optimally be President/Leader.

Bush supporter eh?

Perhaps not, Bush is far from wise.

True but he/she probably thinks otherwise.

Those of you who are against the President having a good education, how do you expect him/her to make decisions that would be the best for our environment, our economy, our govt, if they don't know much about them?

Law.

thats a good one but I would only expect the basics on this one.

A lot of the decisions don't only come from the President, obviously - a lot comes from the cabinet. We can't trust someone totally, obviously, as the President still has a lot of power, obviously, but based on what they say during their campaign (as well as their party's platform or whatever party's platform it is that controls Congress), someone should be able to predict reasonably what would happen.

That dosen't mean that it will be the best decision, but finding someone to make all right decisions would be tough as there's no consensus on most issues as to what direction is best.

We can't really expect our president to have a working knowledge of every single issue that might come up during their presidency. ((And I noticed that computer science, biology, and medical technology were left off the list anyways)).

What our president does need is an ability to quickly learn the basics of a field if necessary and good advisors who are very knowledgable and recognized in their fields(which of course means the president needs the ability and unselfishness to choose good advisors) in each area.

I am of the opinion that our current president has neither, especially in fields relating to science. A politician is a politician, but they need to know when to get rid of the yes-men and bring in some actual knowledgable people.

its my constitutional right to vote for a moron thank you very much

but really, just like literacy tests were used to deny black people the vote, intelligence test would end up being used to deny opponents a spot on the ballot

All that really matters is who could lead the stronger war and conquer the most land, thus elevating your country's military and geopolitical dominance in the world.

Perhaps it would be better if, rather than a candidate having to PASS this test, maybe they only have to take it. The results would then be made public. That way the people can use it to decide whether or not this guy is a good choice...

And now we see the foils of democracy opening like a newly blossoming flower.
The people have a right to vote for who they want, there's nothing we can do to stop idiots voting for idiots.

george washington
andrew jackson
abraham lincoln

the following attended limited amounts of higher education:
harry truman
dwight eisenhower
ronald reagan

obviously education is not a factor for leadership or greatness.

Well IQ does have an impact on how intelligent your decision making is, the higher your IQ the easier you are able to learn and the more you know, the more you are experienced the better your decision making is. The president should be forced to take something testing his or her knowledge. But that will never happen because being in a democracy we have the right to elect a retarded vegetable if we want. Besides what president woudlnt veto that bill?? Certainly not Bush.

Perhaps it would be better if, rather than a candidate having to PASS this test, maybe they only have to take it. The results would then be made public. That way the people can use it to decide whether or not this guy is a good choice...

I'd agree to that.

Didnt those presidents have something to do with Harvard?? I believe that people were more intelligent back then. You had to use your brain more and calculate everything. Also those presidents had something to fight for. Just because they did not attend college does not damage there IQ. However blowin coke does. i.e. bush.

you know one thing im annoyed with?? People bush bashing, not saying that he doesnt need to be bashed because well hes a freaking moron. HOWEVER im annoyed because its become the latest trend. People are so adamant about it people that have no idea what they are talking about. Never has the punk scene been so political. Concerts are kind of annoying now. I dont mind bush bashing but read a newspaper and do it intelligently.

Didnt those presidents have something to do with Harvard?? I believe that people were more intelligent back then. You had to use your brain more and calculate everything. Also those presidents had something to fight for. Just because they did not attend college does not damage there IQ. However blowin coke does. i.e. bush. Also it used to be a simpler time, it was easier for presidents to control everything nicely when theres so little people, people are highly religious and therefore dont commit so much crime. A time when you only had to protect and take care of your country not every little country that cant take care of itsself. A time when people had a reason to protect there freedom, also people then had to do everything so they werent lazy. People now adays do nothing they bitch when taxes are raised to help out and protect the country, and they bitch when the government doesnt do anything to help out the country. In this town i used to live in the town next to it couldnt drink their water when it rained because it was unclean they had to get water from faucets in our town, BUT they refused year after yead to raise taxes a little bit so they could have water. This is the american spirit, just bitch and when nothing happens because tou dont let it BLAME THE LEADER.

you know one thing im annoyed with?? People bush bashing, not saying that he doesnt need to be bashed because well hes a freaking moron. HOWEVER im annoyed because its become the latest trend. People are so adamant about it people that have no idea what they are talking about. Never has the punk scene been so political. Concerts are kind of annoying now. I dont mind bush bashing but read a newspaper and do it intelligently.

I do not think intelligence should be a factor for political office.

Just because a man doesn't have a high IQ doesn't mean he isn't wise.
Yeah, there are the "Idiot savant's". Well, the current loony in office at least has half of that down.

Perhaps it would be better if, rather than a candidate having to PASS this test, maybe they only have to take it. The results would then be made public. That way the people can use it to decide whether or not this guy is a good choice...

hmmm, I like this idea and would support that as well.

I do not think intelligence should be a factor for political office.

Just because a man doesn't have a high IQ doesn't mean he isn't wise.


Well IQ does have an impact on how intelligent your decision making is, the higher your IQ the easier you are able to learn and the more you know, the more you are experienced the better your decision making is.

Question: What do IQ tests measure?

Answer: 'Intelligence Quotient' (not intelligence)

iq tests basically rate how well you can learn how fast how easy