:smack: If I remember correctly, GWB gave a speech at Yale wherein he lauded the fact that an alum who had passed through Yale with Gentlemen’s C’s could, nevertheless, be elected President. (One of his few truthful statements.) To prevent this from happening again, shouldn’t voters demand that educational records, test scores, etc. of candidates for the Presidency be made public records. This horrible experience with George should convince us that these records are far more important than income tax returns.
Eh. Bush isn’t a crappy president because he coasted thru school, he’s a crappy president because he signed onto some horrible policies. Policies, btw, which were generated by people who are acknowledge to be pretty damn smart (in book knowledge if not policy making) like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and Rice.
And Kerry’s record wasn’t all that better, IIRC.
If I recall correctly, most candidates release these things. Bush’s academic records seem to be fairly well known (and, if I recall correctly, compare favorably with both the records of Gore and Kerry).
Regardless, how does success in school necessarily translate into success as a leader? Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer and he was a failure as a President. Ronald Reagan went to mediocre Eureka College and did pretty well.
Academic success or failure may be interesting and may play into success or failure as a leader, but I think most people are more concerned with past public service and political positions than what the person did as a college student thirty or forty years in the past.
Why is it necessary to “prevent” this sort of thing? Heck, Harry Truman was no Joe College and he did okay.
I don’t think it would help. I’ve known some people who did really well in college, but who would have made terrible presidents.
[QUOTE=Renob]
If I recall correctly, most candidates release these things. Bush’s academic records seem to be fairly well known (and, if I recall correctly, compare favorably with both the records of Gore and Kerry).
With respect, always, I disagree. We have not seen GWB’s Yale record. He has joke about it, but it has never been disclosed nor will it be. I am a former University admissions person. I will bet the farm that he was a “special admit”–a candidate who could not compete academically with the “normal” Yale admittee. Daddy, Grandaddy, etc. guaranteed admission.
It is also true that being smart is not the only credential that a person must have. My point is that it is a necessary credential.
Bush graduated from our foremost political engine. How can he not be qualified. If his average was 2.8 would a 3.0 be a better president. If so ,then we should only allow 4.0s to run.
Getting good grades doesn’t automatically equal being smart. I don’t see any reason why these records should be made public. Are you honestly going to select your candidate based on what he made in U.S. History in 1974?
Marc
I’d say that the kind of intelligence needed to run a country is probably not one that will be measured too well by grades in college.
It’s not as if Bush’s ineptitude as a leader wasn’t already publically available before the election.
If Bush’s shitty grades were better known, IMO, he would have gotten even more votes than he did in both 2000 and 2004.