this post was submitted on 16 May 2025
602 points (98.4% liked)
Political Memes
8283 readers
2471 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean, she’s managed her image and business this long. I think politics is a good fit for her skillset.
As is the power she’d wield over the Democrat Party. They would worship the ground she walks on (in an attempt for some of that celebrity to rub off).
…But the election would be gruesomely dirty. I can only imagine all the shit that would get thrown at her.
That probably makes her better educated than the current POTUS.
Who was worse?
Washington, Jackson, Van Buren, Taylor, Fillmore, Lincoln, and Grover Cleveland got a high school (ish) level of education.
Andrew Johnson got tutored while he was an apprentice.
In modern times, I think only republicans have not gone further than undergrad (Reagan, HW Bush, Trump), going back to Roosevelt (FD not Teddy).
Of all of them, how many have been called "dumbest student ever?" https://studyinternational.com/news/trump-student-wharton/
I'm not the person you've been replying to.
I'm just answering with who has been less educated, which is decidedly different than how much of a dumbass they are. A position Trump holds a massive lead on compared to any other president in history (quite possibly any "leader" in history)
I know how to read usernames, thanks.
I'm asking if paying for a diploma really counts as "education."
OK, so you've just decided to be an ass because I answered a question.
Noted.
Sure, Jan.
So should I just repeat my question, or what?
You sure? Paying for a diploma doesn't necessarily result in education.
https://studyinternational.com/news/trump-student-wharton/
A democratic leader needs to accurately represent their constituents and surround themselves with knowledgeable experts. No matter how well-schooled someone is, no one person can know everything involved in running a country.
As our Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott once said, "No man is a suppository". Lol.
A degree doesn't prove a person actually applied themselves and absorbed the information, and auto-didacts can absolutely study macroecon and diplomacy.
You can absolutely self-teach math and macroecon. I'm not trying to claim that Swift has, or would, or that it is an easy thing to teach, but the idea that it is somehow outside the bounds of the auto-didact is absurd.
Yes, and presumably anyone in the position we're talking about is somebody who would have devoted a decade to their education in the field. Do you think I'm talking about "I do my own research" types? No, I'm talking about real actual auto-didacts.
Definitionally we aren't talking about "your average person who has a GED," Jesus fucking Christ.
you:
me:
The topic started about Swift, but your claim was bigger than her. Thus my response was to your larger claim, not about Swift.
I was not. But counter-point, we have no idea idea what Taylor Swift does with her free time. For all we know she love economics and has spent the last decade devoting all her free time to the deep study thereof. The point is this is hardly outside the realm of feasibility, and there's no reason to over-celebrate degree or downplay the real viability of autodidacticism.
Argue with the substance of my argument, not its author.
She’ll have a full cabinet, policy crafted by an army, and practical experience under her belt. She’s clearly charismatic. AFAIK she’s not anti science or conspiratorial or anything… So what if she’s not a Harvard Graduate? As much as I’d like an STEM PhD in the White House, compared to most alternatives, I almost view that as a plus.
And again, she will have so much power. It would be like Trump, where she can swing unpopular stances through sheer force of will (like Trump is doing in the current Middle East visit: https://www.axios.com/2025/05/15/trump-israel-syria-policy-reverse-biden )
Ehh, I agree in principle but have grown cynical.
The American voters clearly don’t care about actual qualifications. The presidency is an attention contest, pure and simple. Truth is relative. Even if we get a highly qualified president in (and I don’t believe that’s possible anymore) they’re going to be totally beholden to Facebook and Twitter politics memes.
I’d rather have someone that can dominate the narrative and wield actual political power to do decent things, even if their decisions aren’t always the best. Like… who else could bring millions into civic engagement?