An IQ test, Bush is a pretty smart dude despite his portrayal in modern media, he would probably win.
Dubya was definitely way smarter than the media portrayed him at the time. He did very well in the debate against Gore.
I read that the whole "fool me once" gaffe was down to him not wanting to be have a sound bite of him saying "shame on me", copped it mid sentence then tried to cobble his way out of it. Not sure how true or accurate that is but it is at least plausible.
I believe it. I also love that phrase and now consider it the official Texas version.
This.
Bush is extremely intelligent, and thrives on (loves that) people think he's a dummy.
The "God told me" shit was horribly dumb, though.
He ran on the whole "I'm the guy you meet up with at the local bar after a long day of hard work" campaign. He was electable because he seemed relatable (I know he went to Yale and had a childhood we could only dream of, but to the average American at the time he was your neighbor, that was his campaign and it was genius).
I think this is going extreme the other way. He is not as stupid as he seemed but I would not say he is extremely intelligent. That being said there is a big difference between harvard and University of Pennsylvania and there is a big difference between stem majors and business majors. Being a pilot is no easy task either. It is way easier to accomplish these things of course with money and connections. So while he is not as stupid as he is caricatured as (much like ford is not as clumsy as he is made out to be) I would be surprised if he is much above average in intelligence. Im not sure what you even call things like decorm or whatnot. I mean the guy gave the german prime minister a shoulder message out of the blue.
He'd lose even if he was up against a rock.
With people in power it's always hard to say whether a bad thing they do is due to stupidity or ill-intent, tho I tend to favor the second hypothesis.
All of their actions did benefit a group. For Trump, most obviously, himself; but he also advanced the power of the American far-right and probably some companies thanks to lose regulations. For Bush, he clearly aimed to give more power to companies over things formerly done by the state, like hurricane relief or even the military. His vice president Dick Cheney famously profited from the Iraq war through the company Halliburton.
Many of Bush's policies had a disastrous human cost, but they were very efficient at filling the pockets of a few shareholders. So was he an incompetent buffoon playing into the hands of the capitalists, or was he himself an evil schemer who willingly enriched those he deemed worthy allies at the expense of the rest of the world?
Same question applies to Trump. A narrative people like is that of the out of control puppet. An idiot that the Republican Party tried to use because he was attractive to their target demographic, but who ended up turning against his puppeteers and giving full reign to his folly.
But it's also possible that he is a smart and evil man who's particularly talented at playing the role of a madman and who saw it was working.
So basically, I have no definite knowledge of the intelligence of either man.
I tend to favour Hanlon's Razor. It makes much more sense that this dumbass old rich guy stumbled his way into the whitehouse by saying just the right combination of old rich guy nonsense that got American conservatives excited. Tons of powerful people took advantage of him for tons of different reasons. It's why he was never consistent on anything. He'd be pro- something and then meet with someone in a backroom and suddenly be anti- that thing. His cabinet was full of Dick Cheneys.
If you look at Trump through the lens of "dumb spoiled rich guy who didn't really want the job anymore as soon as he realized how much work it actually was", everything he does makes perfect sense. He was a useful idiot for the wealthy elites to do their regulatory capture. Basically Reagan all over again. They even used the same campaign slogan.
I don't find that this adage applies that well in politics. Yeah, I'll assume whoever almost hit me with his car the other day was stupid/irresponsible/distracted rather than that they were attempting to murder me. Or that someone who gave me wrong directions to somewhere was mistaken rather than deceitful. That is because stupidity can explain these things, but stupidity on its own doesn't explain becoming president.
Beside, if you assume he was being used by dickcheneys, you're still assuming malice, just not from the same person.
As for which case his behavior would make most sense in, I won't try to contradict you since I'm not good at analysing people and don't enjoy trying.
I just tend to think of Trump+close collaborators as a system and assume the purpose of a system is what it does, and I don't make too many assumptions of Trump's exact place in this.
I had to google Hanlon's razor. For Trump I'll go with a combo of malice (revenge) and stupidity. For the rest it's greed and narcissism. From wiki- Douglas W. Hubbard quoted Hanlon's razor and added "a clumsier but more accurate corollary ...: 'Never attribute to malice or stupidity that which can be explained by moderately rational individuals following incentives in a complex system.'"
Well... Are you going to do the work of digging through whatever those two speak to determine if their answers are right, if they are answers, or if they mean anything at all?
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!