<br>
<br>
<p>He wasn’t president long enough to establish any sort of an anchievement record, but James Garfield certainly was brainy. He graduated from Williams College with top grades and was very fluent in the classical languages. It was said he could translate directly from Greek into Latin and vice versa - something that very few or perhaps no living Classics major or professor can do today with any fluency.</p>
<p>Another for the “academically talented” list:
Rutherford Hayes was valedictorian at Kenyon College, so his transcript would probably look good.
He also went to Harvard Law, but I don’t know how well he ranked there.</p>
<p>Madison - Father of the Constitution</p>
<p>I’m not sure the “brainiest” is a desired trait. I want leaders to have common sense and wisdom.</p>
<p>You win, NYMomof2 (post #19) :D</p>
<p>All very interesting answers. Of course, ‘brainiest’ alone is not sufficient, but it should be a desired trait compared to the alternative. It is interesting that in some countries (such as France), being #1 at the top university gives a strong inside track to being President.</p>
<p>I was impressed, after the suggestion posted, on reading more about Herbert Hoover, he was certainly a guy who could think through engineering problems.</p>
<p>It seems to be a common myth that Jimmy Carter had a degree or graduate degree in nuclear-something. Officially, he “took graduate work at Union College in reactor technology and nuclear physics”. Without specifics, that could be anything from an atoms-for-officers short course, to one credit short of a masters in physics. I would very much like to see a transcript with grades for that!</p>
<p>Yes, Obama must’ve been a great student. He probably has a high IQ. I don’t think he has released his IQ test/SAT scores, etc. Not that I care about that. </p>
<p>Not much connection between raw academic intelligence and leadership/people/communication skills.
Some people have one but not the other. Some people have both.</p>
<p>So much of how we judge a president has to do with the “opportunities” that presented themselves during his administration. Some get better opportunities than others. Few of those are under his control. No matter who the president is, I always pity him. It seems like the most unbearable and demanding job ever.</p>
<p>George Washington ought to be on this list–not for the college transcript, obviously, but he was quite a writer (not to mention his military leadership and intelligence in practical political philosophy).</p>
<p>This list sounds about right to me - </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d add Obama to the brightest list. </p>
<p>I don’t agree that “nu-cu-lar” is the standard southern pronunciation. Anyone who says it that way should stop because it sounds stupid. It’s like saying “ju-ler-y” rather than “ju-el-ry.”</p>
<p>Washington might have been “not so bright” relative to Jefferson, but I think he could take on most of the posters on CC (coureur and a few others excepted). Also, I think Grant is underestimated.</p>
<p>What about Buchanan for the “not so bright” list? Zachary Taylor?<br>
For that matter, should Andrew Johnson get a free pass?</p>
<p>Warter sounds bad too. So do you go to the ju-el-er to buy ju-els?</p>
<p>what good is it to be brainy if you can’t make use of it?</p>
<p>I vote for Truman. He was smart enough to make some of the biggest decisions in American History: dropping two atomic bombs on Japan.</p>
<p>I couldn’t put Truman on the list because of those decisions but that is getting into political issues. </p>
<p>I think most people do a good job with jeweler and jewels, but lots of people mispronounce jewelry and it drives me crazy.</p>
<p>George Washington had an extensive library at Mt. Vernon and was very up to date on agriculture and animal husbandry. He was certainly a better businessman than most of the other Founders, many of whom died broke (Jefferson and Madison). And he was the ONLY founding father to free his slaves on his death. He also had the good sense to say two terms as president was enough, setting the precedent until FDR. I’d say he was smart and even better he was wise.</p>
<p>I don’t think accents, lisps, speech impediments or other markers like that are a good way to tell if someone is intelligent. it’s too subjective, and it changes too much over time to be reliable in judging someone from another part of the country or who lived decades ago.</p>
<p>I agree that how you pronounce a word has no bearing on intelligence. I put Carter in my “brainy” list. I think the way he pronounced nuclear “sounds” stupid though.</p>
<p>Anyone who would put Reagan on a “not so bright” list should do themselves a favor and go back and read his actual writings and actually learn something, rather than repeating conventional nonsense. George H.W. Bush is also a very bright man.</p>
<p>Oops, forgot to add Obama to Madison.</p>
<p>Kennedy didn’t write his own speeches, for the person who mentioned that. </p>
<p>Isn’t it interesting that the true genius Jefferson never would have been elected today because of his messy personal life? </p>
<p>In my lifetime? Clinton seems brightest.</p>
<p>Obama is bright, but I think he would have been a better scotus, personally.</p>
<p>The other interesting thing to look back on is how much of Obama’s agenda has mirrored Nixon’s. Politics used to be much less partisan.</p>