Kamala Harris says she'd take a cognitive test; challenges Trump "to take the same one"

That's pretty smart. You know he would never do it.
- 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!"
  
  Technically 4 words, woman is a derivitive of man in their minds. Well 3 because person is gender neutral and can't have that either.
  
  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'd be smarter if they got him to actually do it, so I don't see your point... The man genuinely has dementia.
- I guess that depends on whether you think he's narcissistic enough to believe his own lies?

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.
- "Who is the current president?"
  Yeah that one might be an issue for him..
- Can you count backwards by 7s
  counting backwards in multiples of 7? i'd struggle with that and i consider myself at least average
  
  0, -7, -14, -22... dangit
  
  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 ...
  
  It's a common test for concussion. Voice of experience.
  
  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.
- And their political affiliations would be somehow above questioning?
  Have you met our Supreme Court?
- Or ask them questions on elementary school level.
  I feel don don will struggle with them.
  
  Are You Smarter Than Fifth Grader: The Presidental Election Edition.
  It has to be hosted by Muppets. Why? The Presidential election is now a game show. Might as well lean into the absurdity of it.
  
  Just have them both take the Smarter Balanced Assessment

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.
- Hillary Clinton had joined the chat
  
  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.

She should disguise this test, and throw in basic questions about US history and politics. Trump will fail so hard it won't even be funny.
This is the guy who talked about the continental army in the 1700's invading airports. He's real fucking stupid.
- No need to do that
  The guy is struggling enough as it is
  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 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.
- What color crayon do you reckon he would use to fill in the form?
- In fairness, "most" people his age would be below "average".
  Edit: oh, apparently it doesn't work like that. 100 is supposed to be average regardless of age?
- I feel like he'd lie and say he did the test already and he passed it

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?

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

Challenge Trump to a foot race for President since his supporters going around burning ballot boxes.

Like with a TV Debate with Harris, he won't agree to this, as he knows that he has no chance to win.

I want to see how they would perform on the SAT
- SAT is too much, most Americans remember that as too hard. I would be impressed if Trump just got a passing score on the Smarter Balanced Assessment
  
  i remember when we elected presidents who had phds in constitutional law
- How about a high school civics test?
  
  no that's not good enough

She shouldn't even say this. Cognitive tests are for those showing signs of dementia. That trump took one at all is all that we need to know.
- 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.
  
  Shit, I've taken cognitive tests after all of my concussions.

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

Unfair. She could sober up before doing that. Which she won't do while in office or on the campaign.
- Trump idiot comment or tankie....

Harris is lucky to have Trump running
without Trump the Democrat's whole campaign platform would crumble
- I mean, with Trump running the race is still basically a dead heat, so I'm not sure how lucky they really are.
  
  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.
  
  She's running against arguably the worst candidate in American history and it's still a dead heat, what does that tell you?
  
  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.
- Kinda like how Trump's whole campaign fell apart when Biden dropped out? Weird.
- And people would vote for Jill Stein instead?
  Pass me those drugs you're doing LMAO
- Oh yea! Because campaign platforms totally aren't built around their opponent and don't ever change and for sure aren't strategic or anything!
  Nothin but a lil troll account.
- Yeah. I mean, after all.. who would want to vote for someone to run a country who has spent their life practicing law /s
  
  people who have been ate up by the justice system might have some hesitations
- 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.
  
  Criticism? Where did you find it? That was just a silly take with no substance whatsoever.