Before you identify IQ as a controlling qualification, perhaps you should review the performance of the last few "smartest men who've ever been President".
For example, the current inhabitant of the White House...Bill Clinton, the most corrupt president ever...Jimmy Carter, the nuclear engineer...Herbert Hoover...Woodrow Wilson...I could go on.
IQ isn't the issue. Character is.
They obviously weren’t smart enough. You can have all the character in the world in the White House and if he’s getting bad advice, surrounding himself with yes men and political hacks, yer gonna be in trouble. Furthermore “character” is too often a mask for stubborn or inflexible or formulaic.
I’d put the qualification level for President at I.Q.=160+. A really smart person will have the requisite character, it comes with the territory. The operant phrase is “really smart”. Problem is, genius avoids politics because it is corrosive to character. Politics is inherently corrupting and no smart person will put their soul at risk of having to dance to stupidity’s tune.
>>Before you identify IQ as a controlling qualification, perhaps you should review the performance of the last few “smartest men who’ve ever been President”.
For example, the current inhabitant of the White House...Bill Clinton, the most corrupt president ever...Jimmy Carter, the nuclear engineer...Herbert Hoover...Woodrow Wilson...I could go on.
IQ isn’t the issue. Character is.