← Back to context

Comment by JumpCrisscross

6 hours ago

> How much do we believe the current administration values "intelligence"?

Broadly? A lot. Donald Trump is wickedly smart. So is Stephen Miller. Susie Wiles. Hegseth is an idiot, but he's Chip 'n' Dale to Marco Rubio. (Our planes aren't falling off our carriers any more. And the raid on Caracas was executed flawlessly. That isn't something numpties can pull off.)

What makes you think h is smart instead of a blubbering idiot that Mr Magoo his way through life? All the reports from people who knew him personally had very low regard for his intellegence, and that is even before taking into account his repeated public blunders.

  • > What makes you think h is smart instead of a blubbering idiot that Mr Magoo his way through life?

    The fact that he's President. Twice. He maneouvred himself into the most powerful seat in the world. Twice. I'm tremendously sceptical that someone stupid can wind up there like that. (Again, not necessarily intelligent. You don't need to be intelligent to clear the Republican field in 2016. You do need to be crafty.)

  • That's certainly closer to my understanding of the guy. He really doesn't feel "smart" in any of the usual sense of the term.

    It's entirely possible that you can be on the stupid side of Chesterton's fence (to abuse the metaphor) and take it down, causing all the expected havok, and then claim you're excelling at your goals because you just have a sociopathic approach to the world.

    Sure, picking up Maduro was well executed... and then he has been replaced with (checks notes... ) "the Maduro Regime".

    Yeah, that -screams- competence.

> Donald Trump is wickedly smart.

I'll grant that he has achieved success via some amount of cunning (often via threats), but "smart" is decidedly not a term I would ever apply to him, and I'm not sure how anyone could reasonably think this given the myriad facts otherwise.

People—especially the squares in this business—tend to mistake his unfamiliar blue-collar New Yorker manner of speech at face value and don't bother to look deeper.

  • Or they look deeper and note that the folksy bragging about pretty basic and irrelevant misunderstandings continues into the minutes of meetings his base that laps that stuff up doesn't bother paying attention to, where there isn't any strategic value to dissembling or being mildly irritating to the apolitical CEOs he's supposed to be giving bland assurances to, and conclude the emperor actually doesn't have any clothes. There are, of course, smart and well connected people that want someone whose extraordinary talent is being the centre of attention occupying the centre of attention.

Donald Trump is cunning, but you wouldn't make a Fox president either, it would just screech and shit all over the oval office too.

> Donald Trump is wickedly smart.

wut. this is a joke, right?

Stephen Miller... maybe. He's mostly evil and shiftless, and willing to utilize any and all tools.

  • > wut. this is a joke, right?

    No, it's not. He's smart. His political instincts are well honed. And he's good at surrounding himself with strategists.

    I'm not sure he's wickedly intelligent. And he's getting old, which cuts into his cleverness and memory. But his wit is quick (recall the Republican debates), retention used to be spectacular and has achieved things which you simply cannot do by being the bumbling dope he's sometimes characterised as.

    • The bumbling dope is the default go-to characterization by the left, they always target intelligence first no matter what.

      Bush 1 was a dope. Dan Quayle was a dope. Bush 2 was a dope (until they decided they liked him). Sarah Palin was a dope. Trump is a dope. Vance is a dope.

      The left views intelligence as a top tier prize, so they start by first trying to dismantle someone's standing on that.

      How likely is it that all of those people are actually stupid compared to the typical voter? Zero chance. They're more likely to be considerably smarter than the typical voter, above average intelligence across the board. Are Bill Clinton and Obama smarter than Trump? Yes imo. But you can't play at nuance in the propaganda game though, so the left always settles on: my opponent is stupid; and they push hard in that direction.

      5 replies →

ah yes, a wickedly smart man who appoints an idiot as secretary of defense. completely consistent analysis here

  • I frequently see people saying that Trump is great, but he's let down by those around him. As if he didn't put them all there.

    In any case, all you have to do is listen to the man talk. If you can hit stop before your brains start leaking onto the floor, the conclusion is inescapable.

    For most of his life he did nothing that would require any sort of smarts. Becoming POTUS was quite an accomplishment, but he lucked into it. He happened to have a style and set of opinions that appealed to a large group of voters. He's charismatic in an empty sort of way that still works on a lot of people. He had a pretty pathetic set of opponents both in the primaries and the general. And he just barely won. Nothing in his campaign was shrewdly designed, he was just doing what he does, and it happened to work.

    Birth him into an ordinary family instead of a rich one and he's going to be a used car salesman griping about getting bumped into the next tax bracket when he makes too many sales.

> Donald Trump is wickedly smart

This is the exact opposite of what has been said about Trump by his "friends" in the Epstein files.