Are Americans Uncomfortable with Intellect?

If the present trends continue, the big political story of the 2008 US Presidential elections will be the rise and fall of Hillary Clinton. Pundits are likely to tie themselves in knots, trying to explain her precipitous decline. I have a slightly different theory; and I am backing it with history. Let me try and explain my convoluted logic.

If one examines all the US Presidents Americans have elected since World War II, the only ones who could be termed as intellectual giants were Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton - and possibly John F. Kennedy. Even before Watergate, Nixon was never a popular president. Average Americans respected him, but few actually liked him. Clinton was liked and respected, but I believe it was partly because he disguised his obvious intellect with human frailties. Clinton's infamous sexual dalliances actually made him more popular. For sure, many Americans - and particularly the Conservative Right - condemned his morals and professed to be shocked at his peccadilloes; but many secretly applauded him for them. It made him appear more human; more like one of them. Kennedy cultivated charm; and an air of royalty (remember Camelot?) to take the sheen off his intellect.

Probably the two most popular Presidents America has had since the Second World War, were Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan. Eisenhower could not lose, of course. The conservatives loved him for upholding all the moral turpitude they hold so dear: and the rest of the country admired him for being the greatest war hero of their generation. And no one would accuse Reagan of being an intellectual giant. So what if he fell asleep during cabinet meetings and summit conferences? He was one of the boys: as wholesomely American as apple pie and the New York Knicks. His public adored him.