May 3, 2019

American history question of the day.

In which American presidential election were the major party candidates the least well-educated?

I have an idea of what the answer might be but don't know for sure. Trump famously said "I love the poorly educated"...



... but what does the label mean and who gets it? For the purposes of my question, I would consider the level of education reached, the quality of the educational institutions, and the difficulty and sophistication of the program pursued.

IN THE COMMENTS: Lloyd W. Robertson said:
I think you have to speak of different eras. Before 1900, it would have seemed ridiculous to expect an Ivy League education or something similar; there were lawyers, but as traditionalguy points out, that didn't necessarily involve what we would call formal education. John Quinicy Adams was almost unbelievably well educated in the "classics," with a lot of help from "amateurs" who were themselves well educated (including in law). Polk graduated with Honors from UNC Chapel Hill. Without more checking, I would just say that was very unusual at the time.

In the 20th century you have more "Ivy League" presidents, often with a gentleman's C average. Hoover was a brilliant engineer, an early Stanford grad, and surely one of the four or five highest IQ presidents (despite being remembered for his failure in the Depression). He made a reputation for finding ore where others had failed, working in many countries, making his way through obscure documents in many languages, hiring and organizing work crews, transportation, food distribution, etc. Johnson vs. Goldwater in 1964 may indeed set the standard for "little higher/formal education" for both major party candidates.
Johnson/Goldwater was indeed the idea I had when I wrote the post.

Anyway, to make the question work, let's begin at 1900. That was William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan. (1896 was also William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan, so we could just as well say let's begin in 1896, but it would make no difference.) WJB graduated from college and law school (Union Law College, known today as Northwestern University School of Law), so 1900 is not the right answer to my question. As for McKinley, he went to Allegheny College for one year and then went back home "after becoming ill and depressed."

I thought of the question this morning because I happened to be reading about Barry Goldwater, and I was surprised to see how little education he had:
After he did poorly as a freshman in high school, Goldwater's parents sent him to Staunton Military Academy in Virginia... He graduated from the academy in 1928 and enrolled the University of Arizona. Goldwater dropped out of college after one year...
As for LBJ, he went to college, but (constrained by poverty) an undistinguished place, Southwest Texas State Teachers College.

95 comments:

Ann Althouse said...

CNN labels its video "Donald Trumpy."

James K said...

Probably 1788. GW did not have much formal education. There's a lesson in that somewhere....

Annie C. said...

If I remember correctly, Andrew Johnson never had any kind of formal schooling.

tim in vermont said...

Abe Lincoln was well educated, perhaps poorly credentialed though.

Lincoln was largely self-educated. His formal schooling (from travelling teachers) was intermittent, totaling less than 12 months; however, he was an avid reader and retained a lifelong interest in learning.[13]:10, 33[16]:110 Family, neighbors, and schoolmates recalled that he read and reread the King James Bible, Aesop's Fables, John Bunyan's The Pilgrim's Progress, Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe, Mason Locke Weems's The Life of Washington, and The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, among others.[7]:29–31, 38–43

Teenaged Lincoln took responsibility for chores. He accepted the customary practice that a son give his father all earnings from work outside the home until age 21.[7]:30–33 Lincoln became adept at using an axe. Tall for his age, Lincoln was strong and athletic.[8]:134–35 He became known for his strength and audacity after winning a wrestling match with the renowned leader of a group of ruffians known as "the Clary's Grove boys"
. - Wikipedia

The Autobiography of Ben Franklin is a great book, a short read, anybody who hasn’t read it should. I should read it again, I guess before recommending it so highly, but it’s one of those books that stuck in my head as a teenage reader.

tim in vermont said...

Lincoln steeped himself in the wisdom of Western Civilization.

Anonymous said...

More recently, Goldwater went to only about a year of college, and LBJ graduated from Southwest Texas State Teachers College, which is no Wharton.

Molly said...

In 1860, neither Lincoln nor Douglas had attended college, or even graduated from high school. But if you count John C. Breckinridge as a major party candidate, he graduated from college, attended graduate school, and got a law degree.

What about 1832: Andrew Jackson v Henry Clay?

David Begley said...

Trump spent one year at Fordham. He wrote in Art of the Deal, “I didn’t have any problem with the Jesuits.”

David Begley said...

Hillary, of course, went to Wesley and Yale where she learned how to lie.

Ann Althouse said...

@Anonymous

That was my guess at the answer. I hadn't realized how little education Goldwater had, and I knew very well (from the Caro books) how deprived LBJ was.

traditionalguy said...

For the first 300 years, all education in this land of free men was Protestant church owned and operated education. They taught moral character development, and also the best science then known, which was close to nothing. After 1776 the history of the eight years of bloody Revolution struggle to defeat the British Monarchy was added and the people tended to name their children with Bible names or George Washington and Thomas Jefferson followed by a last name.

No wonder they were jealous to maintain their freedom from the European Empires method of class rule using ancient feudal traditions and Divine Right BS with a cover story of rigged elections added in a few places. That European system is what Obama and his allies secretly tried to re-impose on North America. And they started by destroying American Education.

Hagar said...

Define "educated."

According to Mark Twain, he and the book printer corrected U.S. Grant's idiosyncratic spelling and made minor corrections in grammar, but otherwise Grant's memoir is entirely Grant's personal work. Now read it and tell me Grant was not "educated."

rhhardin said...

Lincoln was born in a log cabin that he built himself. Trump can't top that.

traditionalguy said...

The Presidents were frequently lawyers.And that was not much formal education until the last 80 years And as Lawyers they quickly became the best educated men in America because they had to win Jury Trials. Losing was not an option. And that meant they were realists first and useless intellectuals second. For example Abraham Lincoln was a seasoned Trial Lawyer who had tried a second brief career in politics, And although he was hated by all, he won.

Tregonsee said...

We have long known that there are people who are prodigies in such areas as the arts and sciences, and that is usually visible at an early age. There are many people, some listed in the above comments, who have unusual leadership/management skills. This is much harder to spot at an early age, as both society and biology limit the range of interactions for the young. However, they usually make themselves known, for good or ill. Churchill, Hitler, Mao, and Stalin come to mind. The level and quality of education may shape the direction of their lives, but not the fundamental nature of their leadership.

tim in vermont said...

I knew you were looking for a post war answer, but I couldn’t resist taking on the use of the term “educated.” What you meant was “credentialed.”

tim in vermont said...

I always think of training a vine to grow exactly where you want it to grow when hear the words “highly trained.” “Educated” means lead along by the nose. OK, not exactly but close enough.

Lloyd W. Robertson said...

I think you have to speak of different eras. Before 1900, it would have seemed ridiculous to expect an Ivy League education or something similar; there were lawyers, but as traditionalguy points out, that didn't necessarily involve what we would call formal education. John Quinicy Adams was almost unbelievably well educated in the "classics," with a lot of help from "amateurs" who were themselves well educated (including in law). Polk graduated with Honors from UNC Chapel Hill. Without more checking, I would just say that was very unusual at the time.
In the 20th century you have more "Ivy League" presidents, often with a gentleman's C average. Hoover was a brilliant engineer, an early Stanford grad, and surely one of the four or five highest IQ presidents (despite being remembered for his failure in the Depression). He made a reputation for finding ore where others had failed, working in many countries, making his way through obscure documents in many languages, hiring and organizing work crews, transportation, food distribution, etc. Johnson vs. Goldwater in 1964 may indeed set the standard for "little higher/formal education" for both major party candidates.

Ann Althouse said...

Don’t detour into sophistry about what is education, really? The post defines my term. I’m talking about formal education, with levels and conventions of prestige.

The detour changes the question and makes it easy to do without researching the facts.

This schoolteacher is onto that tactic and will not give credit for avoiding the question asked.

iowan2 said...

It's an exercise. Like party games, some fun, but of little consequence except for the act of playing. The opposite question, of which President is the smartest? A metric that is hard to define let alone measure.
Electing a President has taken on way to much importance. It's one person, for 4 years. A judiciary, and legislature, with co-equal powers to check a wrong choice, for a few short years. The power of the Presidency has way more perceived power, than actual power.
All the gnashing of teeth is nothing but constant campaigning.

iowan2 said...

Well I see I misread the post. My bad.

MadBohemian said...

rhhardin said...
Lincoln was born in a log cabin that he built himself. Trump can't top that.

Born in the cabin he made??? That fetus was HANDY with tools! And a clump of cells felling trees.
Unimaginable. No one can top that!
If a fetus did that, think of all the talent we kill. A Lincoln type fetus might even turn the tables and hack down an abortionist .

Darrell said...

Who knows what Obama really did?

Unknown said...

It would have to be Washington in 1788, as James K earlier commented, as George did not have any formal schooling and did not have an opponent.

Skeptical Voter said...

As I recall (without checking Google) Truman never went to college--but he faced Dewey in '48 who was a lawyer.

Ralph L said...

Polk graduated with Honors from UNC Chapel Hill. Without more checking, I would just say that was very unusual at the time.

UNC had under 100 per class as late as my grandfather's class of 1912 and no satellite schools besides Women's College.

Somehow, I think the children of 2016 will learn more about Hillary than children of 1964 did about Goldwater.

Hagar said...

"We all know what B.S. stands for. M.S. is "more of the same" and PhD is "Piled heap deep."

Crimso said...

By your criteria I think the 1860 election easily beats 1964. As noted above, Lincoln's education (by your criteria) was scarcely 1 year. For lack of a better way to describe it, call it a 1st grade education for purposes of of quantifying. Even if the others in 1860 were all college graduates, Lincoln severely drags down the average. The other three need a total of 51 years of formal education just to bring the average up to K-12. I know this is applying educational concepts to a time period where they don't strictly apply, but we have to get a handle on this somehow. It's entirely possible that other races had even less-educated candidates, I just focused on 1860 because I knew Lincoln had almost no schooling.

tim in vermont said...

sophistry
NOUN
The use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.


Sigh...

traditionalguy said...

OK. Formal education with levels and conventions of prestige would give you Woodrow Wilson as the most educated and George Washington as the least educated. But those two men make formal education obviously the least worthy criteria for being a Great American President. And that makes Buttigeig the absolute worst candidate in history since Adlai E. Stevenson.

Jeff Brokaw said...

Wilson was a disaster but people still pretend we should think of president as a professorial type and that education is the single most important quality we should look for.

Couldn’t be wronger. The role is an executive role requiring decisiveness and clear vision of where we are going and why. These are CEO traits, not professor traits.

Understanding America’s unique role in world history, and its people, is important too.

Trump has been a revelation, in other words.

Skeptical Voter said...

Ah Google is a wonderful thing. I'll now go (in relatively modern times) with the 1920 election. Warren G. Harding, proud graduate of tiny little (and by then defunct) Ohio Central College faced off with James M. Cox, Governor of Ohio. Cox was educated in a one room school until the age of 16. He then left to be an apprentice in a newspaper shop.

The two candidates--a Senator from Ohio--Harding, and the Governor of Ohio--Cox, both grew u in tiny little burgs in Ohio.

AllenS said...

When Trump said: "I love the poorly educated", he was talking about people like me, who only graduated from high school, and, may I add, people who didn't graduate from high school, but got their diploma through receiving a GED or High School Equivalency Certificate.

These are the people who keep the country running.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I will need to see some grades.

Gahrie said...

I believe Lincoln had no formal education......

Heartless Aztec said...

Per Wikipedia: (Zachary) Taylor's formal education was sporadic because Kentucky's education system was just taking shape during his formative years.[5] His mother taught him to read and write,[6] and he later attended a school operated by Elisha Ayer, a teacher originally from Connecticut.[7] He also attended a Middletown, Kentucky academy run by Kean O'Hara, a classically trained scholar originally from Ireland, and the father of Theodore O'Hara.[8] Ayer recalled Taylor as a patient and quick learner, but his early letters showed a weak grasp of spelling and grammar,[9] as well as poor handwriting. All improved over time, though his handwriting was always difficult to read.

Lyle Smith said...

What does education mean?

Ann Althouse said...

"What does education mean?" Ahem.

Lyle Smith said...

Truman was considered uneducated... I think the winner is LBJ and Goldwater.

narayanan said...

y'rall spelling it wrong - Define "educated."

shudennit be edumacated?

Lyle Smith said...

I missed your definition Ann. My sincere apologies. Didn’t read pass the video. That deserves a good swat to the hand, I agree.

Quaestor said...

It looks like 1860 was the nadir of candidate academics. Neither Lincoln nor Douglas had much of it.

Paco Wové said...

"people still pretend we should think of president as a professorial type and that education is the single most important quality we should look for."

Yes. It seems the rise of the Education-Industrial Complex has coincided with – and perhaps been impetus for – the re-envisioning of the role of President as Test-Taker in Chief.

Quaestor said...

John C. Breckinridge, the pro-slavery National Democrat, was the Joe College of 1860. He got enough votes to make Lincoln the winner.

gilbar said...

educated? or credentialed?

If you mean educated, the Obvious answer is THIS ONE RIGHT NOW!

Quaestor said...

...the re-envisioning of the role of President as Test-Taker in Chief.

The presidencies of Wilson and Clinton, two of the most highly schooled and lowest character C-in-Cs, ought to teach us something.

traditionalguy said...

Truman had little education because he was a poor farmer in Missouri. But he outlearned everybody else everywhere he went in life creating social and leadership skills off the chart. People despised him for his formal education level at their own risk. He was a winner and not an ideologue impressed by his regalia and letters after his name.

Caligula said...

educated? or credentialed?

Indeed. In the days when few would even consider college, there were many well-educated adults who had no educational credentials beyond high school (if that). There still are, only now we also have many who have been expensively educated to believe things that just are not so.

See also "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses" by Richard Arum. I'm sure Althouse would appreciate it if you'd buy it through her Amazon portal.

Fernandinande said...

sophistry

Since most education - non STEM, anyway - doesn't take place in formal institutions of learning, the question is only of, um, academic interest. To sophists.

In which American presidential election would the major party candidates do the worstest at Jeopardy!?

Quaestor said...

Truman had little education...

True, but he was up against Thomas Dewey.

exhelodrvr1 said...

As if level of education has any relationship to intelligence, knowledge, and ability

Laughing Fox said...

George Washington like Lincoln was largely self-educated. No college, nothing like the equivalent of high school. He learned from wilderness surveying, farming, and military responsibility. And, he was elected unanimously.

Laughing Fox said...

Lincoln had some formal education--about 9 months in a very primitive elementary school.
Truman had a high school education. As a result, he could read Latin.
American education has changed so much over time and place that these comparisons make very little sense.

Fernandinande said...

educated? or credentialed?

Let's hear it for Willie Griggs!

tim in vermont said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim in vermont said...

I guess that if we are going to look at the question strictly in a technical sense, it’s kind of an uninteresting question. But since standards of education have changed, it’s more like “who was the world’s tallest little person?” You can’t answer it without getting into definitions.

Skipper said...

Is there any correlation at all between college degrees and education? No.

Big Mike said...

@Hagar, Grant graduated from the US Military Academy at West Point. Then as now it provided a top-notch education, particularly as regards civil engineering.

Ann Althouse said...

"I think you have to speak of different eras. Before 1900, it would have seemed ridiculous to expect an Ivy League education or something similar; there were lawyers, but as traditionalguy points out, that didn't necessarily involve what we would call formal education...."

I agree. Let's just begin at 1900... I'll front-page this.

traditionalguy said...

Truman was up against the little prick Dewey, AND the Socialist Wallace, AND the Segregationist Dixiecrats, AND FDR's family and friends, AND the staff he inherited from FDR. He won it the same way Trump won by truth telling and by fighting.That style drew back in the loyalty of the deplorables that FDR had once cared about when no one else did.

tim in vermont said...

I wonder what the correlation of 'educational achievement' is to any serious metric, like keeping us out of unnecessary wars, or growing the economy, or winning necessary wars?

Big Mike said...

Formal education is clearly overrated, and the proof is that Bernie Sanders, one of the most piss-ignorant people among modern legitimate candidates for President, graduated from the elite University of Chicago.

Rory said...

"What about 1832: Andrew Jackson v Henry Clay?"

This was certainly a strong contender until the blogger pulled the rug out.

Anonymous said...

Don’t detour into sophistry about what is education, really? The post defines my term. I’m talking about formal education, with levels and conventions of prestige.

Yes, your criteria are clear, and I can see the interest of comparing, say, 20th century presidents by them. (E.g., the relation of quality of leadership to a Podunk State U. vs. an Ivy education.) But the credentialism vs education question is hardly "a detour into sophistry" when making broader historical comparisons about even just formal educational levels. To ignore it would be like trying to make historical economic comparisons without taking changes in purchasing power and the value of currency into account - you end up with meaningless comparisons, a parlor game.

Fen said...

I agree. Let's just begin at 1900.

You're still comparing apples to oranges. I think the GI Bill (The Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944) is a better demarcation point.

The post defines my term.

Then you need a different word, because "well-educated" doesn't mean what it once did. You might as well be asking which President was the most feminist - another term that doesn't mean what it once did. It morphed from empowering women to demonizing men, from liberation to enslavement via Victimhood Culture.

I would consider the level of education reached, the quality of the educational institutions, and the difficulty and sophistication of the program pursued.

You are missing a qualifier. One could study Marxism and surpass all those metrics, and still be an idiot that causes the death of millions. What good are those things if the underlying premise is wrong?

I'll front-page this.

Not without my permission.

Anonymous said...

I agree. Let's just begin at 1900... I'll front-page this.

Ha, that's what I get for starting a comment, walking away, and coming back later to finish it without refreshing the page for newer comments.

rcocean said...

Educated meant something different before 1900. In most places, you didn't have to go to college to be a Lawyer. Alexander Hamilton attended "Kings College" for 1 year.

And in the early 1900's "Ivy League" meant TR, William Howard Taft, Wilson, and Charles Evan Hughes. Today it means Obama and George Bush. What a comedown.

BTW, I'm not surprised about Goldwater. The man was an idiot. He may have been right on the issues, but I would've voted for LBJ in '64. I wouldn't have wanted Goldwater's finger on the button.

rcocean said...

Truman is the only 20th Century President who had no college. Ford went to Yale Law School and was our Dumbest President. Coolidge went to Amherst, which surprised me.

rcocean said...

JFK was well educated, but he seems to have spent little time studying. The same is true of FDR. Ford's path to Yale Law is interesting. He was hired by Yale to be a football coach and then pestered the Yale Law Dean to let him take classes there. They eventually did, on the condition he continue to coach. So, he coached and went to Yale Law part-time and eventually graduated in the middle of his class. Later, his supporters claimed in graduated in the top 25%, but that's wrong. His Navy background check shows he graduated 79 out of 150.

mccullough said...

For me, the 2000 and 2004 elections are a toss up for the least educated candidates.

W and Kerry went to Yale and Gore went to Harvard in the 60s when those schools were all boys and not even feigning meritocratic admissions.

The three of them are dolts.

Kevin said...

Lincoln was born in a log cabin that he built himself. Trump can't top that.

Thread winner, even if off topic.

Fen said...

"Goldwater. The man was an idiot."

Why? The man wrote Conscience of a Conservative. Hardly an idiot.

Skeptical Voter said...

C'mon Mc Cullough--"educated dolts"? You don't have to take a chainsaw to those fellows.

You do have a point though; most of us who are "highly credentialed"in one way or another have experience in working alongside educated fools in our various professions.

Jean Fraud Kerry--what can I say? Gore, a fellow who started, but failed to complete, several different post high school educational tracks. I can't agree that Dubya was a dolt, but your mileage may vary.

Earnest Prole said...

Educational achievement, like personal morality and IQ, has zero correlation with being a great American President.

Martin said...

A decent trivia question but utterly irrelevant to anything else.

Skippy Tisdale said...

iowan2 asked:

The opposite question, of which President is the smartest?

"I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

- John F. Kennedy

gadfly said...

Mafia Don's "love of the poorly educated" is simple to explain. Such stupefied talk shows how very poorly educated The Donald really is. But Trump rally means: I live me, Donnie. Me too.

Anonymous said...

In regards to Hoover, did so well in college they had him teach the undergrads geology, did so well in that that his lectures became a standard text book for the early 20th century, used his education in mining in China to make a fortune worth between 50-100 million in todays money while also learning to speak fluent Mandarin Chinese. Now realize that historians don't even consider the guy to be in the top ten smartest guys to be president because he couldn't solve the great depression in 3 years. Oddly enough one of the guys they consider top ten? FDR who also couldn't solve the depression in 3 years.

Bilwick said...

Davy Crockett was poorly educated (though by all reports intelligent, and one biographer states that he even tried to read at least one classic--Ovid's "Metamorphosis"--to further his scanty education); but he seems to have learned at least one important lesson even the Yale-educated Red Diaper Baby President never comprehended. (Google, "'Not Yours to Give,' by David Crockett.*)

*I realize the story it tells may be apocryphal, but the lesson isn't.

rcocean said...

How realize that historians don't even consider the guy to be in the top ten smartest guys to be president because he couldn't solve the great depression in 3 years. Oddly enough one of the guys they consider top ten? FDR who also couldn't solve the depression in 3 years.

Regarding Hoover. Some one said Bill Clinton wasn't our worst POTUS, but he was the worst man to ever be POTUS. I'd say about Hoover, he wasn't our best President - by a long shot - but he was one of best MEN to ever be POTUS.

I'm reading a WW II History, and Hoover was advising Truman after VE to junk the mindless "Unconditional Surrender" and assure the Japanese they could keep the Emperor. Sound advice indeed. Hoover thought it madness for us to kill 30,000 Americans to invade Kyushu - just to because we didn't want the Japs to keep the Emperor.

You know was against that? Cordell Hull. He called it appeasement. FDR's cabinet was full of ignorant Jackasses and Communists. After reading about them, its astounding we won the war.

tim in vermont said...

Hey gadfly, how did selling all of those etfs work out for you at the end of the year? You know, it was all downhill from there, right? Or were you BSing. and never sold them?

McCackie said...

Frankly "modern" edumukation should be a disability for elected office.

McCackie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael K said...

Coolidge did not attend Law School and his close friend, Dwight Morrow, did going to Columbia Law.

Morrow ended up richer but Coolidge was a great president.

Michael K said...

FDR's cabinet was full of ignorant Jackasses and Communists.

Morganthau wanted to raze every factory in Germany that survived and "Pastoralize" the country. He would have stopped the Gehlen organization (the basis of our intelligence on USSR)if Truman hadn't stopped him.

Nichevo said...

Before answering the question: who cares?
After: so what?

Would there be a point? Are you laboring towards some cogent correlation? Or is your curiosity merely idle?

Nichevo said...

gadfly said...
Mafia Don's "love of the poorly educated" is simple to explain. Such stupefied talk shows how very poorly educated The Donald really is.

As usual...Not even wrong!

Nichevo said...

Michael K said...
FDR's cabinet was full of ignorant Jackasses and Communists.

Morganthau wanted to raze every factory in Germany that survived and "Pastoralize" the country.


Looks smarter every day.


wildswan said...

Hillary and Bill were the most credentialed: Wellesley, Yale Law, Rhodes scholar. And Hillary was the most credentialed candidate for President ever - close associate of a Governor and of a President, Senator, Secretary of State. But still she did not see the problem caused by exporting all jobs to the Third World, raising energy prices, overregulating, overtaxing and in general ruining the American economy. Nor does she seem to know yet that every country with a half way decent hacker in its spy agency had access to the server where she kept secret documents. Nor did she have any achievements as Secretary of State (which is not surprising when you know that everyone knew the US negotiating positions.) But credentialled Hillary doesn't seem to realize the connection between exposing negotiating positions and being unsuccessful as Secretary of State either.

Trump has credentials since he went to a respected business school and then ran a big business. But his real "credential" is that he can get things done - build buildings, run a successful TV show, win election as President, expose the coup instead of being destroyed by it. And that isn't what we mean by "credentialled." I think he's perhaps "incredible" rather than "credible."

TJM said...

2008 when the evil media manipulated the gullible to vote for an unaccomplished, left-wing loon moron, who still won't disclose his academic record.

rcocean said...

"He would have stopped the Gehlen organization (the basis of our intelligence on USSR)if Truman hadn't stopped him."

Truman called Morgenthau a "Nut" and was happy to get his resignation letter. Either in a private letter or his diary, Truman is scathing about the FDR cabinet he inherited, calling them a bunch of selfish Grand-standers (Ickes), Nuts (Wallace, Forestall, Morgenthau) and mediocrities (everyone else). Its hard to disagree.

Probably the only main with brains and character was Stimson, the former Sec of state and Sec of war, who fought single handily against the criminal/insane "Morgenthau Plan".

TJM said...

COCEAN,

You are actually the dumbest poster of the day. Ford, raised by a single parent, was a Yale Law Grad and highly intelligent. If he had been a Dem, the press would have drooled over him. The press tried that crap with Bush and Kerry and were horrified when the truth came out that Bush had higher grades in college than "Monsieur" Kerry, whose grades were sub par and he spoke broken, barely articulate, French. Bush spoke Spanish far better than Kerry spoke French. Obama is another example. That moron said that Austrians spoke "Austrian." Get a grip on reality and stop believing the bilge the New York Slimes puts out. After all, Paulie Krugman said the stock market would "never" recover after Trump was elected. You know, the guy that Obozo said would have to have a magic wand to create manufacturing jobs, because Obozo lost 219,000 of them. Abracadabra baby, Trump created over 400,000 of them!

The Godfather said...

In 1964 they told me if I voted for Goldwater, in 12 months we'd be in a ground war in Asia.

I did, and we were.

William said...

Lincoln was home schooled by Shakespeare and the King James Bible.

readering said...

Trump was definitely not schooled by Shakespeare and KJB.