Scott Walker doesn't have a college degree.

[Cobbler]

Lol at people saying this makes him "less qualified". I guess Romney should have been President instead of Obama, because Romney had three degrees and Obama only had two?

The idea isn't that the more degrees you have, the more qualified you are. It is about setting a minimum standard that qualifies you to run for president. Some believe that in most cases, they should at least have a college degree (like many private sector jobs do).

Obviously it shouldn't be the only thing to look at, as their career experiences should weigh more heavily, but honestly, the GOP is already considered the anti-intellectual party, and it doesn't help that image to have someone as your candidate that didn't finish college. The reasons for dropping out seem decent in this situation, but it still won't look good.

IMO, unless they have shown in their career to be an exceptionally bright person (whether through the private sector or a long/effective career in government), then I'd have a hard time voting for a candidate without a degree. I don't want "Average Joe" running the most powerful country in the entire world, I want them to be intelligent and capable and at least on paper, a college degree is one way that indicates that more than a lack of one.

[Cobbler]

Yeah but the logical extension of that idea is more degrees = more qualified. If, as some people in this thread have posited, the bachelor's degree is the baseline, wouldn't you then want to be looking for people with postgraduate education (above the baseline) as opposed to just a bachelor's?

No, because that would be moving the baseline up. Post graduate education is definitely a plus in my opinion, because it solidifies the academic credentials they have. But that would be part of a larger resume that would include experience as well (which, for a lot of people, will in a way be dependent on their college degree, since many professional jobs require one) Education is just a part of the resume, but it is still an important part regardless and shouldn't be dismissed just because some people dislike "elitism."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it wouldn't. Campaigning/getting votes does not reflect your ability to be a good President, and it certainly doesn't indicate that you are an exceptionally intelligent or capable individual. A lot of elections have personal charisma/likability and style playing a huge role in the success of the candidate, not necessarily substance.

[Cobbler]

Not really, no. The bachelor's degree is the baseline for consideration and then when you look at the two candidates, you look above the baseline.

No, because as I have said (but you didn't acknowledge clearly), there are other things to look at other than education, like experiences in their career.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I explicitly said in a previous post that a career in the private sector or government can counter having not gone to college. I'm not sure if you ignored that or just simply didn't read it, but I said it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll ignore the condescending "lol". Having an exceptional campaign staff doesn't make you an exceptionally bright person. Like I said, charisma and likability play a much larger role in campaigns. Ever heard the saying that people like to "vote for the guy they would want to have a beer with"?