I just read a piece on the Daily Caller titled “Does academic achievement bring Oval Office success?”
In this piece, the author states the following:
American University historian Allan Lichtman told The Daily Caller that he believes so [regarding the title].
“If you look at some of the least successful presidents,” he said, “they’re not exactly known for their [intellectual] prowess … Whereas the most brilliant of the presidents are all either very successful or at least reasonably successful.”
How, then, does one explain Jimmy Carter, thought to be smart but generally considered a not-so-great president? What of Ronald Reagan, media-cast as an “amiable dunce” but considered by many to be a historically great chief executive?
“Reagan was smarter than people give him credit for,” Licthman said. “It is a very rough correlation, and there will be exceptions, but overall it is a reasonable correlation.”
So, Reagan was basically an aberration. The author goes on to say: