Vice President Kamala Harris, responding to former President Donald Trump's claims about her IQ, said she would take a cognitive test — and "would challenge him to take the same one."
the same one she takes? so not the one that asked him to name a handful of things that conveniently happened to be around him when he talked about it to the press?
He's just going to say "I'm the smartest person ever to be president, the doctor I paid said so. I took the test already: person, woman, man, camera, TV!"
And he keeps talking about the tests if he just took it. Which either means he can't really process the fact that it happened in the past anymore, or they really do have to test him often. Neither is a good look for anyone's grandpa, much less a grandpa who wants to run the free world.
It must be wild being in her position, being so overwhelmingly more capable than her opponent, and having to find out how to get stubborn people to acknowledge that and care about it.
Definitely! I honestly had never thought of that because I didn't take Donald Trump seriously until he was projected to win on voting day. I was dumbfounded and blown away. It was a big wake up call for me about how I was out of touch with a large part of America.
It's wild that such intense questions like "Can you identify a giraffe?", "Can you draw a clock?", "Can you count backwards by 7s?", and "Who is the current president?" was apparently such a grueling ordeal for Donald that he's still bragging about it years later.
It’s probably like field sobriety tests, where how you struggle is relevant. If you miss one in a sequence, that says something different from repeatedly going up instead of down or counting backwards on your hands first.
If this were the entire question, I'd be confused. Another comment suggested starting from 0 and going into negatives, but my initial response would be "starting from what?" expecting to start at 100 or 77 or something.
However, an elementary school teacher told me that negative numbers don't exist, so that might be related ...
Doing arithmetics quickly is a skill that is slowly dying out of the general population. When we all used cache we had this with us all the time, but now we just don't use it that often, generally, on average
New debate idea: instead of political questions, have the whole thing hosted by a panel of psychologists who give a thorough assessment to both candidates live on stage.
At the end, they collectively review all findings and conclude the event by making any diagnosis the data merits.
I've been dreaming of a Trump IQ test forever. I'm almost certain he would be below average. Someone should trick him to do one by saying it's the crypto bro club test that Harris failed or something.
But you throw in questions about dictators and he'll know the answers better than he knows what state he's living in. It's possible the only book he's ever read is Mein kempf
I've been wondering why she doesn't invite both of them to take one.
These fucks blurt out all their motivations and weaknesses, you only need to aggressivey seize on them and hold their feet to the fire till they cry uncle
People do "cognitive tests" for all kinds of reasons. The kind for dementia is only one of a large variety of tests that fit in this very broad category.
We're not unlucky because trump is running necessarily. We're unlucky because half the fucking country doesn't see what an insane and horrific choice he is.
The alternative, if the republicans had a candidate that wasn't a weird 80 year old billionaire, the democrats wouldn't have a shot in hell, facilitating a genocide while endorsing 90% of republican policies from 2016 and promising what amounts to fuckall help to most people.
Are downvoters disagreeing even though the biggest slogan to come out of the DNC was "we are not going back" (plus the point of the stunt this article is about)? Or do they think any criticism whatsoever of democrats is bad? This shouldn't be a controversial take.
Because 1) it's the usual "I'm totally a leftist that hates Trump yet will always blame the Dems for everything for some completely mysterious and unknown reason" bullshit, and 2) it's a goddamn stupid take. Of course running an anti-Trump campaign wouldn't work against anyone but Trump. Harris' campaign strategy (which is a continuation of Biden's) is to singularly point out the threat Trump represents, not to paint the entire GOP as a threat. And as much as it might piss off actual progressives (people who are going to vote Dem anyway because they understand what's at stake, unlike, you know, the poster you replied to) they're trying to reach Republican voters who don't want Trump but need to be reminded it's okay to vote for the other party if they have better candidates.