jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (12 posts)

Who has a higher IQ? Clinton or Trump?

  1. ptosis profile image74
    ptosisposted 19 months ago

    Who has a higher IQ? Clinton or Trump?

    IQ Scores of Famous People. ... On a side note, Hillary Clinton tops all of them, with an IQ of 140. However, all of them fall short of Adolf Hitler. Donald Trump is certainly very smart. There was an article estimating his IQ at 156, based entirely on his being a graduate of the Wharton Business School.


  2. Alternative Prime profile image75
    Alternative Primeposted 19 months ago

    Any Expert will tell you it's virtually IMPOSSIBLE to ESTIMATE I.Q. based upon the school you've attended ~ Case in POINT, George W. Bush is a "YALE GRAD" & nobody to my knowledge has ever accused him of being BRIGHTER than a 1/2 WATT Bulb ~ In any event , Regardless of I.Q., Trump has Exhibited and contiinues to DISPLAY signs of Mental Illness ~ Paranoia, Schizophrenia, Inferiority COMPLEX, Senility, Loss of MEMORY, and SEVERE Anger Issues all of which have Disqualified him from the Presidency of the United States ~ Moreover, how did he Graduate from Wharton? Given his Dubious PAST, we'll probably NEVER know the answer to that question unless an IN-Depth Investigation is Conducted ~

    1. ptosis profile image74
      ptosisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      There was this Mexican 'seer' who predicted Trump having a mental break with reality. And I'm thinking - how could we tell?

  3. tamarawilhite profile image92
    tamarawilhiteposted 19 months ago

    IQ doesn't matter. The economic collapse of 2007-2008 was driven by brilliant people from top schools whose real estate models assumed housing prices could never go down, though everyone in the real world knows they can.

    And high intelligence does NOT equate to morality, though many liberals like to brand liberalism as the brand for smart, good, reasonable people. It lets them smear conservatives as stupid, bad, irrational. But it isn't true. Look at eugenics of the 1920s, where many top scientists said yes, sterilize the darker peoples, everyone knows and science says they are (insert any bad adjective here). Look at Lysenkoism of the Soviet Union and climate catastrophism today, where brilliant people go into contortions to support a theory based more on politics than science, down to "thou shall not question" religious devotion, because it gives them higher status in the political system and justification for social control. For example, every solution to climate change is socialism or social control (rationing, population control). Yeah, more power for the elites!

    Dennis Prager's list of things you need at least a master's degree to believe is another, where years of higher education equals more political indoctrination regardless of reality. But of course those with masters and doctoral degrees will agree it proves they are better than everyone else and should be in charge.

    Then you have the technocracy, rule by our supposedly brilliant betters. Shut up and listen to the smart people, you serfs, you're too stupid to know how to live your lives. It is back to feudalism, slavery even, the Greco-Roman model that the smart elite 10% should rule the stupid 90% that should be cared for slaves. Cass Sustein's book "Nudge" of designing the world so you have an illusion of choice, because the majority can't be trusted to make decisions on their own ... and the big government should design the world so you're happily allowed to pick from the 3 proper choices on the menu.

    Saying that the smartest should rule denies the average person their agency, while incorrectly assuming intelligence equals morality.

    1. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 19 months agoin reply to this

      I.Q.  has nothing to do with common sense.  Neither does categorizing people.  There are many levels of intellect in both parties, from the stupid to the highly intellectual, but common sense should prevail.

    2. ptosis profile image74
      ptosisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      AWESOME answer! Thank you very much!

  4. Johnny James A profile image76
    Johnny James Aposted 19 months ago

    Not sure who has the higher capacity to learn, however, at this stage in the game their IQs may not matter.  Having the capability to learn and willingness are two different things.  At this stage of the ball game the two individuals may be set in their ways on how they approach learning anyway, and will stick with their desired methodologies.  Additionally, a President will never be a master of all issues facing America as there are too many to face.  Their job is to manage the situation and put in the right people in the right places so that they can rely on their judgments and advice to make decisions. Ironically, people refer to the President as the most powerful person in the world, however, the power brokers behind the curtains really hold the power. There are men and women who are smart enough to get into positions which do not constantly change with the administration, but who are high enough to influence policy.  The most important quality I want from a President is the ability to be flexible in decision making; be willing to make the hard decisions even if the majority of Americans do not like it; understand you cannot fix all issues, so focus to the few you can fix and patch the other issues until the next president can fix it.  Too many politicians get too ambitious and try to focus on too many tasks and then get nothing accomplished.

    1. tamarawilhite profile image92
      tamarawilhiteposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      A woman whose default reaction to criticism is to scream sexist is not suitable for high office.

    2. ptosis profile image74
      ptosisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      WTF Tam - are you even responding to the answer given or just randomly spouting nonsensical sh&T?

  5. wingedcentaur profile image83
    wingedcentaurposted 19 months ago

    Intelligence itself is not very well understood---much less its supposed "quotient." What in the world is a "quotient" of intelligence, as in "intelligence quotient"?

    If I become Jeopardy grand champion, does that mean I'm "smart"? Or does it simply mean that I have trained myself to absorb vast quantities of "information,"---along the lines of the kinds of questions typically asked on the game show---and retrieve it quickly under stress of the bright lights, millions of viewers at home and hundreds in-studio, and so forth?

    We would be talking about a mental athletic skill.

    Remember the movie, "The Usual Suspects"? Remember that Kevin Spacey's character, the twisted cripple turned out to be Kaizer Sozhay. Remember what we learned about the yarn he told the detective? Remember where the information came from? The very office they were in. Remember?

    Does that mean Kaizer Sozhay was "smart" (though he was smart) or a fantastic impromptu story-teller who can use absolutely anything to craft a narrative?---a handy skill to have if you are, say, a Hollywood screenwriter.

    Surely this does not mean that people who cannot do that are necessarily "dumber" than him in any way. Some people are better at mental gymnastics than others---are more cognitively "athletic."

    Look, Peyton Manning was not very athletic, yet he was one of the best ever quarterbacks and football players. Tim Tebow was a great athlete but not a very good quarterback/football player.

    What I'm saying then, is let's be open to the possibility that "cognitive athleticism," if you will, is not synonymous with intelligence. That is to say, a good mental puzzle athlete may or may not also be a good thinker.

    What I am saying is that, in my humble opinion, an IQ test is, at best, a level above "game show" recall, a test of "cognitive athleticism," which may or may not be related to your ability to "THINK."

    Finally, if it is true that Mr. Trump has an IQ of 156 and Mrs. Clinton "only" has an IQ of 140, then all this means, in my view, is that Donald Trump is a better "cognitive athlete" than the Secretary of State; however, I suspect that like Peyton Manning, in corresponding terms, Mrs. Clinton is the better, shall we shay, "contemplative player," if that makes sense.

    Thanks for the question.

    1. ptosis profile image74
      ptosisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      Great answer! Thank You! BTW, The usual suspects is one of my favorite movies. When certain people owe my money they disappear like Kaizer Sozhay -whoosh  like the wind

  6. Ashish Dadgaa profile image57
    Ashish Dadgaaposted 19 months ago

    Obviously, Clinton has high IQ compare to Trump.