Sun, Jul 13, 2014, 3:13 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

General Electric Company Message Board

  • badgermma666 badgermma666 Jul 1, 2013 4:35 PM Flag

    US Presidential I.Q.'s


    US Presidential I.Q.'s
    112 Franklin D. Roosevelt (D)
    101 Harry Truman (D)
    122 Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)
    136 Bush 1 (R)
    129 Bush 2 (R)
    120 Clinton (D) Playboys
    98 Obama (D) now we know why you sealed his college records.
    US Presidential I.Q.'s Google and take a look for yourself.

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • who the heck tests for IQ?

    • Must have been researched by an imbecilic Right Wing Nut.

    • "First, Bush is definitely intelligent. The IQ estimates range between 111.1 and 138.5, with an average around 125. That places him in the upper range of college graduates in raw intellect (Cronbach, 1960). Admittedly, this average is influenced by Cox's (1926) corrected scores, which may be overestimates. Yet even if we focus on just the uncorrected IQs, the range is between 111.1 and 128.5, with a mean around 120, which is about the average IQ for a college graduate in the United States. In addition, the figure is more than one standard deviation above the population mean, placing Bush in the upper 10% of the intelligence distribution (Storfer, 1990). These results endorse what has been claimed on the basis of his SAT scores and his Harvard MBA, namely, that his IQ most likely exceeds 115 (Immelman, 2001). He is certainly smart enough to be president of the United States (Simonton, 1985).

      Second, Bush's IQ is below average relative to that subset of the U.S. citizens who also managed to work their way into the White House. In fact, his intellect falls near the bottom of the distribution. When compared with twentieth-century presidents from Theodore Roosevelt through Clinton, only Harding has a lower score (at least on three of the four estimates). A similar conclusion is suggested by the Intellectual Brilliance measure, albeit in this case there are now two twentieth-century presidents with lower scores, namely, Harding and Coolidge. Moreover, Bush's IQ falls about 20 points--more than one standard deviation--below that of his predecessor, Clinton, a disparity that may have created a contrast effect that made any intellectual weaknesses all the more salient. Clinton's intellectual attainments as a Rhodes Scholar and Yale Law School graduate, his demonstrated capacity for mastering impressive amounts of complex and detailed information, his verbal eloquence and fluency, and his logical adroitness and sophistication--at times, as during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, verging on sophistry--places Clinton head and shoulders above his successor in terms of intellectual power.

      Needless to say, it can be argued that the Intellectual Brilliance and IQ estimates are biased downward. George W. Bush may be much smarter than Table 1 implies. The counterargument must aim at the score he received on Openness, a score that provided the only information for the imputation of his IQ and Intellectual Brilliance estimates. This score placed him at the very bottom of the distribution of U.S. presidents. Indeed, the score puts him toward the bottom of the general population as well. One reason to question this placement is that Rubenzer and Faschingbauer obtained Bush's NEO scores in a different manner than they did for the preceding presidents. As they expressed it, "We depart here from our usual method; rather than having biographers rate the president, the authors read biographies and then rated him. This was done for one simple reason: None of the few biographers available returned our questionnaires" (2004, p. 301). Although these assessments were supplemented somewhat by a last-minute questionnaire response received right before the book's publication they warned "Although we did eventually obtain three raters, greater caution is called for here in reading our results" (pp. 301-302). After all, "None of us have a deep knowledge of Mr. Bush comparable to the presidential experts that provided the other ratings" (p. 302). Thus, the authors themselves claim that their scores, including the Openness assessment, can only be considered tentative.

      Even so, there are several reasons for suggesting that the numbers reported in last row of Table 1 are not unreasonable. To begin with, it is likely that his Openness score would not be higher than his father's whose score of 18.0 put his IQ estimates in the low end of the distribution as well. If anything, the son's score should be lower given that his intellectual curiosity appears to be noticeably more restricted than his father's. As one national correspondent for United Press International put it, "despite being the scion of an elite family with worldwide connections, Bush's hobbies appear limited to not much more than running, fishing and baseball" (Sailer, 2004, p. 2)."

    • Interesting, but you numbers are all wrong. For one, Clinton's is 182 and Bush's is below 100. Why am I surprised?

26.55+0.35(+1.34%)Jul 11 4:03 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Potbelly Corporation
NasdaqGSFri, Jul 11, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
Citigroup Inc.
NYSEFri, Jul 11, 2014 4:00 PM EDT