Front Office Football Central - Presidential Jeopardy!

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)

- FOFC Archive (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=27)

- - Presidential Jeopardy! (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=9666)

Presidential Jeopardy!

Okay, here is the scenario. You need $15,000 to pay for a major surgery. If you do not get the surgery, you will die. Two Presidents have offered to go on Jeopardy and donate their winnings to your cause. Without the $15,000, you will die. Which President would you choose to be your guy?

P.S. - The third option is Forrest Gump. :)

This defines asinine poll.

dola.

C'mon, why don't you just post a poll: Who do you like better?

You would get the same results.

Re: Presidential Jeopardy!

Not sure about the point, but I chose Clinton by process of elimination.

W., no matter your politics, does not seem very bright or well-versed in topics that would allow him to win at Jeopardy.

Forest is brighter than Bill, but I'm afraid he'll be slow hitting the buzzer.

So I'll cross my fingers and hope Clinton can win, but I'm not hopeful. Time to make out the will.

I don't really think so. I think it gets at who people believe is the more intelligent person.

But thanks for the asinine compliment. :)

Come on, Kodos. By that logic, this guy should be president:

(BTW, Brad Rutter attended but apparently didn't graduate from Johns Hopkins)

Poor Kodos, all he knows about measuring intelligence is being able to answer trivia questions and perhaps doing well on a IQ test. That's not very smart.

Your question might ask that, but for the most part, when it comes to political questions, people are going to answer with the candidate they like and support.

Just put up a poll that says: Democrat or Republican

Of course a few people will actually answer without a bias, but in the overall scheme of things, I think you poll results will have zero accuracy. :) Much like your Syracuse poll of late February. :D

I much prefer W to Clinton, but I'd probably pick Slick Willy to go on Jeopardy.

I prefer forrest gump to them both, but i'd pick clinton to go on jeopardy.

I'd prefer to combine the first two names:

GIVE ME GEORGE CLINTON AND THE P-FUNK ALL-STARS ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!!!

I'd take Bush I over Clinton though :p.

I gotta go with Gump. Every time he tries something he somehow comes out ahead. Here's betting he gets questions about shrimp, Lts. named Dan and losing your virginity to chicks with AIDS.

Quote:

Originally posted by SkyDog
I'd prefer to combine the first two names:

GIVE ME GEORGE CLINTON AND THE P-FUNK ALL-STARS ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!!!

were you one of those kids that had P-FUNK written all over his notebook?

I'd represent myself if those were the only choices...and I'm not that smart.

Quote:

Originally posted by Bee
I'd represent myself if those were the only choices...and I'm not that smart.

Well, that one goes without saying for me. The only company I ever worked for beside's Young Life was Patrick's Press, a company that publishes questions for Quiz Bowl contestants to practice. I worked 40 hours a week for them during summers in high school and college, and over Christmas Break as well. My sole responsibility was checking the accuracy of questions and answers before they were published. I know wayyyyyyyy too much useless information as a result.

Quote:

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Poor Kodos, all he knows about measuring intelligence is being able to answer trivia questions and perhaps doing well on a IQ test. That's not very smart.

Good grief. I used Jeopardy because it made the poll more fun than just asking who you think has a higher general intelligence. And out of the possible game shows out there, Jeopardy is probably the one that is won by the most intelligent contestant the most often out of any of the various game shows. In which case, I'm dumbfounded that ANYBODY would choose Bush. Let's face it - the guy doesn't exactly radiate an aura of intelligence. He may or may not be a nice guy, may or may not have good morals, may even be fun to hang out with - heck, maybe his delegating style is even a good quality for a President - but he is by no means one of the more intelligent Presidents in our history.

You think this poll is fun?

Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, I think I'll take my chances with him.

Some interesting info...

Quote:

(1) Is George W. Bush stupid? We have pretty good data here. In 1999 the NewYorker obtained a copy of the future president's Yale transcript and revealed that he'd had a C average in college and, more interestingly, scored 1206 on his Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)--566 on the verbal and 640 on the math.

To find out how this score stacked up, I called Educational Testing Service, publisher of the SAT, and learned that in 1994, SAT scores had been "re-centered." To offset the steady downward drift of test scores over the years, the scoring scale was adjusted upward so that the mean score for both math and verbal was again 500 (the midpoint on a scale of 200 to 800). Those who took the test before 1994 are now entitled to add a prescribed amount to their scores to see how they compare to students today. Having made the necessary adjustment, Little Ed announced, "I got 800 on my verbal! I'm a direct beneficiary of the stupidity of the American public!" Doing the same for Bush gives him 640 on both verbal and math, good enough for 88th percentile on the verbal and 86th in math were he entering college now. Those scores may not be as high as mine, of course, or even Al Gore's (625 verbal, 730 math unadjusted), but they ain't bad.

Then again, I recall having seen a college guide circa 1970 that listed the average SAT for Yale freshmen as about 670 in verbal, 705 in math. So Bush was well below average for his class. He must have written a great essay.

(2) Is Bush the stupidest president? Doubtful, but here the data is lacking. You can get a book called The Intelligence of Dogs but not The Intelligence of Presidents. I refrain from the obvious jokes. The best I could come up with was a 1926 list in which intelligence researcher Catharine M. Cox estimated the IQs of 300 famous people based on their achievements in childhood and early adulthood. Presidents ran the gamut from John Quincy Adams (165) to Thomas Jefferson (150) to Ulysses Grant (125). She didn't single out stupid presidents, but near the top of everyone's list you're sure to find Warren G. Harding, probably the nation's least competent chief executive, who described himself as "a man of limited talents from a small town. . . . I don't seem to grasp that I am president." Among presidents since FDR, political scientist Fred I. Greenstein (Presidential Difference: Leadership Style From FDR to Clinton) cites Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan as being "marked by cognitive limitations," although even detractors would concede they had their gifts.

Smarts aren't easy to judge. Greenstein gives John F. Kennedy high marks for brains, but according to biographer Thomas C. Reeves (author of the infamous A Question of Character), Kennedy as a kid scored a less-than-brilliant 119 on the Otis Intelligence Test and graduated 65th out of 110 at Choate. And remember Bill Bradley, who everybody considered brainy but boring? His verbal SAT score, according to Slate: just 485.

Good SAT scores do not necessarily translate into intelligent individuals. Thank you and good night.

There really is no way to quantify a person's intelligence (I never bought into IQ tests). It is all relative. Bee might find Kodos to be intelligent, and I might see Kodos as a complete fool. ;)

dola....

Nice to see another Kodos Poll (tm) prove itself to be a disaster. :)

Hey Marmel: Just curious. How is it a disaster? It's spawned some discussion, and has also gone in the direction of my point, which is that most people believe that Bill Clinton is more intelligent than George W. Bush, whether they happen to like Clinton or not.

As for folks who don't put much stock in various methods of measuring intelligence, that is fine. It seems that most people agree that Clinton is more intelligent by whatever measure you prefer, whether it is IQ, SAT score, or just the general impression that a person gives you when they speak. Or in your case, when they type. ;)

When you have to defend your poll it is a failure. :)

Or when I call it a disaster, it is a disater. :)

Or when you start one, it is a disaster. :)

Please post more often my furry alien friend. *insert kissing smiley*

A poll with 160 views and only 22 votes might be considered a failure. Looks like a good number of folks looked at, said to themselves "this poll is asinine," and didn't even bother to vote.

Maybe you should make it a sticky until it gets more votes.

Quote:

Originally posted by SkyDog
A poll with 160 views and only 22 votes might be considered a failure. Looks like a good number of folks looked at, said to themselves "this poll is asinine," and didn't even bother to vote.

Those aren't "smart views" correct? Ie, everytime I click refresh it counts as one more view? It could mean that those 22 people who voted keep coming back to follow along. :) (or that Kodos himself keeps refreshing).

I tend to get that "not-so-refreshed" feeling frequently. :)

There is no way I would let Bush go on a game show for me. So ya, I would have to say Clinton.

Clinton and Bush went separate directions with "Southern Heritage." GWB cultivated the man of the people good ole boy persona while WJC went more for a man above the people (not exactly the right phrase, but it will do).

I think Clinton worked hard to portray himself as more of an intellectual. I am sure that had nothing to do with overcoming the stigma of being a hick from Arkansas....

It always burned me that they readjusted the SAT scale.....a pretty lame way of raising scores, if you ask me.

And I haven't participated in the poll because....well, I just can't bring myself to vote for Clinton.