I’m just answering with who has been less educated, which is decidedly different than how much of a dumbass they are. A position Trump holds a massive lead on compared to any other president in history (quite possibly any “leader” in history)
A democratic leader needs to accurately represent their constituents and surround themselves with knowledgeable experts. No matter how well-schooled someone is, no one person can know everything involved in running a country.
A degree doesn’t prove a person actually applied themselves and absorbed the information, and auto-didacts can absolutely study macroecon and diplomacy.
You can absolutely self-teach math and macroecon. I’m not trying to claim that Swift has, or would, or that it is an easy thing to teach, but the idea that it is somehow outside the bounds of the auto-didact is absurd.
She’ll have a full cabinet, policy crafted by an army, and practical experience under her belt. She’s clearly charismatic. AFAIK she’s not anti science or conspiratorial or anything… So what if she’s not a Harvard Graduate? As much as I’d like an STEM PhD in the White House, compared to most alternatives, I almost view that as a plus.
The American voters clearly don’t care about actual qualifications. The presidency is an attention contest, pure and simple. Truth is relative. Even if we get a highly qualified president in (and I don’t believe that’s possible anymore) they’re going to be totally beholden to Facebook and Twitter politics memes.
I’d rather have someone that can dominate the narrative and wield actual political power to do decent things, even if their decisions aren’t always the best. Like… who else could bring millions into civic engagement?
Fuck it, I’d vote for her
At this point, anything is better than orange
I’d vote for anything that doesn’t shit it pants hourly.
I’d vote for any adult without brain damage.
I’d vote for Liz Truss’s cabbage.
“Liz Truss’s cabbage”. Is that a euphemism ? Because I’d happily vote for that also.
It’s the cabbage that was live-streamed for the duration of her holding office.
It survived longer than her tenure.
yes, its how long liz truss survived being the pm in the UK, a whole head of cabbage(from fresh to rotten) which lasted longer than her tenure.
the american one is scarramuci.
Anything? Really? Anything?
There is always worse…
I mean, she’s managed her image and business this long. I think politics is a good fit for her skillset.
As is the power she’d wield over the Democrat Party. They would worship the ground she walks on (in an attempt for some of that celebrity to rub off).
…But the election would be gruesomely dirty. I can only imagine all the shit that would get thrown at her.
deleted by creator
That probably makes her better educated than the current POTUS.
deleted by creator
Who was worse?
Washington, Jackson, Van Buren, Taylor, Fillmore, Lincoln, and Grover Cleveland got a high school (ish) level of education.
Andrew Johnson got tutored while he was an apprentice.
In modern times, I think only republicans have not gone further than undergrad (Reagan, HW Bush, Trump), going back to Roosevelt (FD not Teddy).
deleted by creator
Of all of them, how many have been called “dumbest student ever?” https://studyinternational.com/news/trump-student-wharton/
I’m not the person you’ve been replying to.
I’m just answering with who has been less educated, which is decidedly different than how much of a dumbass they are. A position Trump holds a massive lead on compared to any other president in history (quite possibly any “leader” in history)
deleted by creator
So should I just repeat my question, or what?
deleted by creator
A democratic leader needs to accurately represent their constituents and surround themselves with knowledgeable experts. No matter how well-schooled someone is, no one person can know everything involved in running a country.
As our Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott once said, “No man is a suppository”. Lol.
deleted by creator
A degree doesn’t prove a person actually applied themselves and absorbed the information, and auto-didacts can absolutely study macroecon and diplomacy.
deleted by creator
You can absolutely self-teach math and macroecon. I’m not trying to claim that Swift has, or would, or that it is an easy thing to teach, but the idea that it is somehow outside the bounds of the auto-didact is absurd.
deleted by creator
She’ll have a full cabinet, policy crafted by an army, and practical experience under her belt. She’s clearly charismatic. AFAIK she’s not anti science or conspiratorial or anything… So what if she’s not a Harvard Graduate? As much as I’d like an STEM PhD in the White House, compared to most alternatives, I almost view that as a plus.
And again, she will have so much power. It would be like Trump, where she can swing unpopular stances through sheer force of will (like Trump is doing in the current Middle East visit: https://www.axios.com/2025/05/15/trump-israel-syria-policy-reverse-biden )
deleted by creator
Ehh, I agree in principle but have grown cynical.
The American voters clearly don’t care about actual qualifications. The presidency is an attention contest, pure and simple. Truth is relative. Even if we get a highly qualified president in (and I don’t believe that’s possible anymore) they’re going to be totally beholden to Facebook and Twitter politics memes.
I’d rather have someone that can dominate the narrative and wield actual political power to do decent things, even if their decisions aren’t always the best. Like… who else could bring millions into civic engagement?
deleted by creator