<p>Salve!: That essay explains perfectly what I was talking about</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOLOLOLOL</p>
<p>A more intelligent population would have voted for Barack in landslide. He is simply smarter in every way than John McCain. Don’t act dumb. Barack is one of the more intelligent Presidents in recent history. If you do not like his policies, that is fine, but stop acting like he isn’t smart.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As humans, we clearly went through natural selection in order to reach our current form. I go straight to Darwin here. Assuming the same physical characteristics, intelligence can directly be related to the chances of reproduction.<br>
That is my view of intelligence.</p>
<p>bring back James A. Garfield!</p>
<p>ok i wasnt implying that i think that Obama is dumb because i agree he is one of the more intelligent presidents we have ever had(and i didnt like John McCain either personally)</p>
<p>I dont agree with his policies( I was saying a more intelligent population would have chosen a better president with policies that would heal this country for obviously Bush’s policies didnt work and I dont believe that Obama’s will work any better)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ya, you have to love those presidents that run on baseless platforms. Come on, “Change”, can you be any more vague than that? He was not very intelligent in that he built up such a strong support base with his promises for “change” that when he couldn’t deliver immediate help to everyone he lost many of those supporters. People voted for Barack because “they didn’t want another George Bush”. McCain was clearly more qualified for the position and had much more experience and better policies. This is even coming from someone who lives in Barack’s home state.</p>
<p>But then again our selection of Presidential candidates was one of the worst that we could ask for in this time in history IMO</p>
<p>Well, ya know… if only we could get a solid candidate for once… Although I found McCain a much better candidate I don’t think either one was the best. It was more of a choice for the “lesser of two evils”.</p>
<p>mapleleafs26-like he can do any better than grover cleveland.</p>
<p>I know you are from Texas and therefore a psycho conservative but look at the big picture. In less than a year Barack has already ended the recession and gotten Wall Street back on it’s feet. The stimulus package and buyouts were the right moves. You can’t really deny that. </p>
<p>But you are right on one thing. A supremely intelligent population would not be Democratic. Of course they wouldn’t be Republican either. It would be a nation of Independents which would be awesome.</p>
<p>lol grover cleveland was fail. I have no idea how he defeated Benjamin Harrison, who was a decent president</p>
<p>APUSH passion</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How was McCain more qualified? He is an old and senile man with a militaristic background. That is not the type of person who should be President. As a general rule I always prefer the more intelligent candidate if there is a wide gap in intelligence. In the last election there was a significant difference in intelligence. In addition I would never vote for a candidate with a military background.</p>
<p>A country of independents… hm… I like it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Funny you guys say this. I can’t stand the nonstop hate for politicians. It really is hilarious.</p>
<p>At the beginning of the primaries I outlined the two candidates I wanted to advance to the general election. They were both capable and upstanding candidates that I would be comfortable with becoming the President. They were Barack Obama for the Democratic side and John McCain on the Republican side. I’d like to think who you guys believe would have been better. Hillary? lololooolol Rudy? Who? I think Mitt Romney would have been ok as well but who would you have picked?</p>
<p>^lol I preferred McCain to all the other republicans too, until he went all conservative and stuff.</p>
<p>I would I have been fine with Hillary. I think she would get the job done.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You wouldn’t have voted for Dwight D. Eisenhower?</p>
<p>I wanted Hillary Clinton to win too:/</p>
<p>Hillary would have been terrible. We’d have been the laughingstock of the rest of the world. That was a near disaster. Fortunately I believe she will have no chance in 2016. </p>
<p>How, in any way was she a legitimate candidate?</p>
<p>No as a general rule I would not vote for an individual with a military background. Of course, that could change if the other candidate is stupid, corrupt, or in some other way incapable of leading the country.</p>
<p>experience. … and Bill Clinton ;]</p>
<p>Doesn’t experience prove to be beneficial? After all, her husband was president.</p>