Who is the stupidest leader in world history?

>Fuck off /pol/, she has a PhD in chemistry.
>hurrrr if they have PhD in natural sciences that means they will make sound political decisions all our leaders should just be physics PhDs xD
fuck off you reddit simpleton

We're talking people who struggle to read you cunt

Unironically Trump

Mao was brilliant up until the mid 50s. If he had died after the Korean War he is legacy would look far, far superior. Too bad he lived too long and royally fucked China for decades.

>Trump
>>>/reddit/

Isn't Dubya just constantly drunk/coked-up, I read somewhere he has like IQ 130

I must've missed where OP was asking which leader was the poorest reader

Jacob Zuma probably. I don't think he finished Primary Schooling.

Hello Charlie, wanna play with the blocks today?

Nah he stopped drinking back in like the late 70s entirely, coke too. He just was smart in things that didn't have to do with politics. The man could really talk some baseball...but then he did think trading away Sammy Sosa was a good idea.

Well, a stupid leader is not necessarily a bad leader. Especially in the middle ages being educated and intelligent wasn't as important as being a good general. And for a general you don't need to be smart, as you don't need to be smart to be a good quarterback.

When we are talking broad competence, then Donald Trump might unironically take the spot as the least competent leader, at leat when it comes to post-WW2-history.

Pick any of the post-colonial African leaders

So you then?

>When we are talking broad competence, then Donald Trump might unironically take the spot as the least competent leader, at leat when it comes to post-WW2-history.

Why? The stock market is *literally* at an all time high because of Trump's economic outlook you retard

maybe try switching off MSNBC and /r/politics for a while lol

Leave Charlie out of this.
He's not stupid, he's special.

He asked who the stupidest leader was in the whole of world history.

Given the actual retards who have become leaders through hereditary means it clearly isn't going to be the leader of a modern democratic nation who has a PhD and has successfully run multiple election campaigns. And no that's not an endorsement of Merkel and everything she has ever done or every decision she has ever made.

Not him but the stock market literally just means the people who are invested in the stock market are doing well. And if you aren't that, that don't mean much to you.

Mugabe is a lot of things. Corrupt, ruthless, indifferent to human suffering, potentially even evil. But stupid he is not.

Yeah, you tell em! Let no one insult based god emperor Trump. Praise Kek!

there are a number of positive externalities associated with high stock prices - greater investment, leading to more and better-paying jobs, drops in consumer prices, and more availability of a larger assortment of goods. Just because you don't benefit directly doesn't mean it's useless as an indicator.

he drove out all the white farmers and brought on a famine.

Yeah, because Republicans stand for deregulation and tax cuts, which the stock markets like. But that doesn't mean anything for leadership quality. The stock market did even better under Obama, and he was a terrible leader. Also, unless you are invested in the stock market, it means nothing for you.

Trump doesn't know anything about how governance actually works. He literally doesn't. He probably didn't know that the President doesn't actually hold that much power. He probably thought being President of a country is like being CEO of a company. His first year is literally the worst handled presidency ever. How many people did he already fire, and how many positions are still not filled? It's hilarious how bad he is at the actual job.

He also basically ruined americas reputation more than Bush did, although he didn't even start a war yet.

Also, he is horrible at communicating with the public. Most of his ideas -like improving border security- are not so extreme. But he presents them in such hateful and ineloquent ways, that the majority of americans despise him.

What if i told you he did that on purpose to further villify the whites by saying they sabotaged everything in reponse to losing power, thus solidifying his own position as "you need me"

>He probably didn't know that the President doesn't actually hold that much power. He probably thought being President of a country is like being CEO of a company.

In fairness Obama also thought the presidency held more power than it did when he ran for office. He thought he was going to get more programs pushed through and there would be far less deadlock.

>In fairness Obama also thought the presidency held more power than it did when he ran for office. He thought he was going to get more programs pushed through and there would be far less deadlock.

Obama taught constitutional law at the harvard university. He probably knew quite well what the role of the president is.

Also, unlike Obama, Trump is not facing an obstructive congress, his party controlls all branches of the government.

Heck yeah, shadilay brother

Conrad Von Hotzendorf
Cadorna
A lot of generals in WW1 were disgracefully inept

HUUURRRRR

1.Trump hasn't done anything. The stock market would be in the same place with anyone else as president.
2. The stock market is a very incomplete measure of the economy's health.

>Angela Merkel

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, she is actually stopping the immigration to Europe now by striking that deal with Turkey that they will keep the Syrians in their country and get cash in return.

Why do you even talk to him? He's the kind of guy that pointed at the stock market when it came to showing how horrible Obama is because only (((them))) are profiting under him.

For me it's a tie between Georges W Bush and the fucktard who decided to solely focus on defending the maginot line during WW2.

>Trump hasn't done anything
he got elected and amde campaign promises. Which caused a rise in spending, growing the economy. You ever see a rise in private spending in socialist countries like Obama was advocating?

All those people are (or were) very intelligent.

>UNLGNLUGNGHUL
>Translated: Yes, I shall play with the blocks today

>He thinks Kim Jong Un has any real power

Markets usually go bananas when thr Republicans win because it usually means a pro-business government, Trump's whole platform was American first, and business responded positively to this. Whether or not he actually follows through with it is another matter entirely.
But Trump, Merkel and Bush II all break the 25 year rule, so this is probably more suited for /pol/.

Who holds the power in the dictatorship, user?

Is it the dictator? Or are you about to mental gymnastics some communist-tier shit about how actually it's the soldiers or the workers?

>a ruler with total power over a country, typically one who has obtained control by force.

>Trump is not facing an obstructive congress

Yes he is. Boatloads of republicans are still butthurt that he won.

I think its stupid to call the man who won the US presidency against all odds, opposed by almost all media outlets and established politicians, an idiot. Not to mention his great success in business.

>Have all of history to pick from
>Pick contemporary politicians
Jesus fucking Christ that's sad.

My vote goes for that arab whose name escapes me who manage to anger the mongols by continuously killing any diplomat they sent.

>
>>Angela Merkel
>Let's not get ahead of ourselves, she is actually stopping the immigration to Europe now by striking that deal with Turkey that they will keep the Syrians in their country and get cash in return.

Yeah I'm German and I haven't heard of this once. Source bitte

Donald Trump
Kaiser Wilhelm II
Muhammad bin Tughluq
Charles II of Spain
Honorius

I support this one, someone please give the name. Didn't he end up locking himself on the top story of some castle throwing bricks at the mongols?

> fighting all world powers at once
> refusing to make compromises with any of them even with all his armies losing the war
> invading Russia while it is proven a failure every time in history
> not listening to his experienced generals and thinking of himself as some infallible god
We have a winner

Russia got conquered multiple times in the past

Napoleon III propably

Mugabe, easily

Robert Mugabe
Idi Amin

Your favorite historical leader.

khwarezmid empire dont know his name

...

...

This guy comes to mind when it's about stupidity.

>Spends a chunk of his country's GDP on his """"coronation"""" day

James II a bit of an idiot all told.

Also don't forget how """"Emperor"""" Bokassa got deposed after he personally bludgeoned schoolchildren to death while they protested having to spend their entire family income on ridiculous expensive LARPy uniforms he mandated

...

My vote goes to Pol Pot

The truly stupid ones don't last very long.

being driven by your instincts doesn't mean you're stupid

if you have a PHD in science you're not stupid

it doesn't make you a good political leader, but you can't get one if you're stupid

>Not to mention his great success in business.
has he even beaten the market? How rich would he be if he had just put all his inheritance in an index fund.