crashbry13

I'm not 100% sure that intelligence plays a big role in electing a president. Lets not forget George W. Bush... or even worse... when he was re-elected. Palin could probably run a campaign solely against gay marriage and get close to half the votes.

Suffy

GWB isn't a dumb man by any means, people think just because of his accent and his sub-par public speaking skills he's dumb.

He graduated from Yale and received an MBA from Harvard, he was only in Congress when W. entered Yale (yes H.W was an alum) and Harvard isn't going to accept someone into their business school just because their Daddy is an ambassador to the UN, you need good marks to get into that.

As far as campainging goes W knows how to win an election (fuck the voter fraud bs) I've read a few articles on it and they look at the extreme micro level and that's how they won the elections.

__________________

Assassin™

...we also shouldn't forget what happened a week ago...

Plenty of people thought Palin's clear lack of curiosity on foreign policy, among other issues, was a turn off. Obama was propped up as the intellectual. And, (again among other factors), I believe it contributed positively to his public image. I've been saying this for a while: the average 2008 American is/was paying much more attention to the rationale of the candidates on the economy (or at least their financial crisis management and problem-solving strategies) and other domestic policies. I think this has only sparked a trend (assuming we see some good things coming out of an Obama presidency), and that this close-reading and critical analysis of the candidates will continue in the future. The one thing the Bush presidency has taught Americans is how to pay closer attention to who they're voting for and to not get hypnotized by propaganda.

How would that be any different than the campaign we just saw her run? I'd say 46% is close to half of the votes, but in the end, that amounts to shit when your opponent gets 52%. Simply zeroing in on some tenant of conservatism (be it low taxes, being pro-life, or anti-gay marriage) isn't going to win anyone a presidential election anymore, particularly in a post-Bush America.

This is a defense I used when I got tired of all the the people jumping on the "Bush is dumb" bandwagon, until I realize that it's completely irrelevant.

Getting good grades, particularly in college, doesn't disqualify a claim that someone is dumb. Believe me when I say that some of the dumbest fucking people I know had 4.0's or have multiple degrees from prestigious colleges, while some of the most intelligent people I know dropped out of high school and work at Blockbuster. Doing well in college, particularly if your concentration is somewhere in the realm of business or politics, is in no way an indication of how smart you are. It means you worked hard and were ambitious, and that you probably have good interpersonal communication skills with which you acquired the right connections to get you to where you want to go in life.

Not that any of that should be frowned upon, nor am I suggesting that Bush is dumb, just that a college degree is in no way an indication of intelligence.

Suffy

I do agree with that, hard work really determines how well you are going to do, there are cases where people are just able to pick up the information with little effort but for the most part it is hard work, but one could argue that for someone to realize they have to work hard is a sign of intelligence but that is not really a debate for this topic.

I know what you are saying from a persona level, my dad dropped out of high school but I guarrantee he'd be a top level engineer had he'd grown up in the city instead of on a farm.

But the argument that Bush is dumb doesn't really hold any ground when you look at it from how society sees a degree from Harvard.If you were to tell soemone you graduated from Harvard they will think you are an intelligent person that is the norm in society.

__________________

Dakstang

The economy had everything to with Obama getting elected.

Don't expect voters to critically analyze candidates in the future.

When things are going good, people don't care.

__________________

There'll be no sorrow there, no more burdens to bear,
No more sickness, no more pain, no more parting over there;
And forever I will be with the One who died for me,
What a day, glorious day that will be.

Erin

Dead on, Dak.

To solidify this, take a look at last month's Canadian Federal election. There was less than 50% voter turnout. Most media sources agree it's because the majority of Canadian's are indifferent or satisfied overall with the current administration and the state of Canadian affairs.

__________________

crashbry13

Assassin, you make some excellent points. I agree, I was surprised by the result of the last election. While I won't discount the current economic situation as a factor, I think Obama is an incredibly inspiring individual and that made the difference. I'll even admit that I'm very hopeful about the future of the US government with him at the helm. I hope your optimism about close reading and critical analysis of candidates isn't misplaced, and that we continue to see this sort of election won.

Erin, good call. I'm a Canadian and barely made it out to the election, probably falling into the 'indifferent' category you mention above. To be honest, I drove in just to strike my ballot, but there ended up being someone I didn't realize was on the ballot when I finally looked at it.

One thing I think is slightly different in Canada, the Prime Minister can call the election when he believes his party is most likely to win. In this case there was forewarning about the economic crisis (Freddy Mac and Fanny May) and I think he tried to call an election before the crunch happened.

Assassin™

mmkay, since posts were deleted, I'll repost my response:It wasn't really optimism though. Sure, I think it'd be nice if the general public makes a habit of valuing facts and rational thought over propaganda, but the conclusion/prediction I came to was based on unbiased observations and neutral analysis. I made the prediction I made because I think it's likely to happen, not simply because I want it to happen.