The geatest writers of the ages have sayed the wisest men are those who know that they do not know everything. To measure a main by his knowledge is to assume he knows the answer,but is it right and if it is .Is it the one you will accept. 

This has been changed  - see the Candidate Screening Exam.

Bill Lear had a 9th grade education.  I don't think that the "simpletons" would be selected by the local selection process, but to exclude the smartest, if they were truely representing the people, would be stupid!

There is a very, very simple answer to this debate.  Exclude both the top AND the bottom percentages of educated people.  I think we can all agree that a simpleton (how ever well mannered and intended) cannot be expected to handle this type of commitment.  And that the uber-educated can become intoxicated with the possibility of becoming the "smartest person in the room".  The answer is simple; our GOOOH reps need to be of the same educational background as the majority of people in this country.  I'm sure there are statistics (both reliable and skewed, we will need to search for the truth) showing the median level of scholastic achievement and I.Q. score in our country.  If a person is either below or above, they are not allowed to run. 

We must not limit individuals by their formal education, for if we do the probability is that we will end up with the same type of representatives we have now.

Note that the Screening Exam was changed some time ago; our members were loud and clear on this one. Those with a GED are welcome to participate.

While I believe some evidence of education should be required, excluding those who hold a GED and not the traditional high school diploma would be a mistake. I dropped out of high school and got my GED as a result of the whacked education system we so often demand improvements of. I taught myself computer programming, and have a successful 15 year career in that field. I will receive my undergraduate degree in accounting and business management this year. I know of others with similar “high school education” who have gone on to receive Masters and PhDs. I can stand my ground in constitutional debates against any challenger (I keep a copy with me at all times). Looking what is written and said by current politicians, while these men and women may be well “educated” their knowledge of the constitution is minimal at best. And with regard to formal education, we have plenty in the world that are educated far beyond their intelligence.

I believe we should allow each group of 10 to determine who to eliminate, and why. My gut feel is that the more educated a person is the better he/she is going to do in this process, but let's let everyone have a fair shot.

Do you think lacking a college degree might hinder a candidates chances in the general election?

There should be no "formal" education requirement to run for any office. I did not graduate. I am 49. But I can think, question & educate myself on any topic & have in many, many areas. I have done it for years. Also, I have known quite a few people with high levels of "formal" education that didn't have the common sense of a church mouse. Because the majority of our government reps have college degrees, & we are obviously in a mess as a country, maybe we should EXCLUDE all those with college educations. I am of course, just kidding & wrote that last sentence as an exclamation point to my first sentence. I came to this site just today after hearing Tim on Bud Heddinger's show. A complete "house cleaning" is the only hope of getting this country back on a path that was intended by our founding fathers. This is the best plan I have seen yet. To exclude or include someone as a candidate based on their educational background would do a great disservice the goals of GOOOH.