Before.
2007-01-14 09:58:00 · 22 answers · asked by William h 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I agree with the thought behind your question. Almost all Americans wish they had a better way of assessing the candidates. Back in the year 2000, it was really just a few states that determined who would be the Republican nominee. Bush had a lot of money behind his campaign, but he was not the certain nominee until he beat McCain in 2 of the earliest primaries: Iowa and then South Carolina. The people in S.C. liked Bush's support for the Confederate flag, and his visit to the Christian conservative Bob Jones University. In effect, voters in just two states chose Bush on the basis of some narrow issues. Once he sewed up S.C., Bush got even more money for his campaign, and the full support of the Republican National Committee, and thus the nomination.
In the general election, the people of the US only had 2 candidates to choose from: the heir apparent Vice President Gore, and the politically connected, well financed Bush. So whether or not intelligence tests work, our system can easily give us rulers who do NOT come up through the ranks by virtue of their intelligence, experience, or good sense.
2007-01-14 19:55:32 · answer #1 · answered by Red Herring 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Intelligence does not get you in the White House. An IQ of 140 a genious, does not make you presidential material. Education, preparation, and decision making create material for a president. Since you are not in the White House, I think President Bush has done more than the media gives him credit for. He is not perfect, but I am sure glad Al Gore or John Kerry did not have a chance. We would be a haven for terrorist in America if they had been elected. And inflation would be out of sight. The Republicans will win again in 2008. The Democrats have already proven they cannot take care of business in Washington. When the Republicans took over in 1992 they fixed 40 years of staggerd growth in America. I just vote for the person. I have proven time and time again that liberal politics = communism = does not work.
2007-01-14 18:13:20 · answer #2 · answered by Mark T 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Won't work. The smartest people in the world can't match their socks. But, good thought. Maybe we should require some battery of tests. Other professions require it, why not Presidents.
2007-01-14 18:04:25 · answer #3 · answered by LINDA G 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That is not a Constitutional stipulation for being President. Should they IQ test people before they are allowed to vote too?
2007-01-14 18:02:07 · answer #4 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I despise Bush as much as the next sane guy, but I heard he has an IQ of 140, which is above average.
He still comes out with some classic lines though.
2007-01-14 18:09:36 · answer #5 · answered by Tom A 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, an I.Q. test isn't a test of knowledge.
2007-01-14 18:06:38 · answer #6 · answered by FurryMink 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
an I.Q. test is poor. It doesn't show all capabilities of a man.
2007-01-14 18:42:56 · answer #7 · answered by wolf 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Same for driving. Same for anything that requires any intelligence. I.Q. doesn't discover how well deal with difficult situations; it's merely how you assess them!
2007-01-14 18:03:23 · answer #8 · answered by loverofmissy 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well that would have eliminated Gore and Kerry from the start now wouldn't it have? Maybe they should have moral standards, that would have saved us from 8 years of Clinton's sexual exploits. An IQ test for congressmen & women would wipe out about half of the dems. I know this isn't the answer you were looking for but this is how assinine your question is.
2007-01-14 18:16:21 · answer #9 · answered by rosi l 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Why would they? You don't get to be President by being stupid. Sorry, but you don't. Even the worse president ever, Jimmy Carter was a smart man.
2007-01-14 18:07:39 · answer #10 · answered by mojojo66 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋