BKGaming: Maybe... maybe not. I actually think Trump is more intelligent than people like to believe or say. He knew exactly what he had to do to get elected and played to his base perfectly. As others have said, people like to take Trump literally... this is a mistake. This in large part why the Democrats lost. They underestimated him at their own peril.
I don't think the issue is lack of intelligence as much as lack of intellectual curiosity. Someone can be very intelligent yet when faced with new information that contradicts their preconceived notions, completely dismiss the new evidence because it'd involve acknowledging you were wrong about something. Likewise, "knowing what you don't know" has nothing to do with intelligence either. Trump's the first president who has dismissed the daily presidential intelligence briefings because he considers himself to be too smart for it.
Also, I'm probably giving him less credit than you do, but I don't see Trump's election as some carefully crafted master plan where he was playing 4-dimensional chess. According to his campaign staff, even he was surprised he won. Before Comey dragged Weiner's laptop into the spotlight, Trump was spending most of his time telling the rest of the world that the election was being rigged and there were truckloads of illegitimate voters everywhere. That doesn't sound like someone who's confidently following his own carefully-laid-out plan.
My impression is more that Trump ran his campaign on id and gut and things ended up working out in his favor, but several factors (like Comey's stunt, Scalia's death and the Russian hacking shenanigans) ended up breaking in his favor he had no control over.
I suppose where we disagree here is that your impression is that Trump's merely acting like a narcissist and he's playing a role to keep people off guard while my impression is that he is a narcissist and what we see is what he's been like for the last 5 decades and he's not likely to change this late in his life.
Proof? Like a video? A lot was said during the campaign/debates.
Here's a sample.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6sgHzjLQzs Even if true... again we come back to Presidents learn on the job. Furthermore, this is why they have advisors... I willing to bet most Presidents don't have a broad knowledge on most issues. Advisors give them the relevant info and from that they make a decision. This is the real job of Presidents. Make choices based on provided information.
Clinton did. Whatever her faults, her broad range of knowledge and eagerness to expand it were things even her republican colleagues in the senate grudgingly admired about her. This argument does kinda comes back to my argument that this part of the job involves knowing what you don't know and one of Trump's worrying traits when faced with inconvenient information is denying it and pretending he never heard it.
There is no way to know until we live through it... we will never know if Clinton would have been better or not. Even if Trump is really bad, there is always the possibility Clinton would have been even worse.
Obviously we can never be sure, but it's fairly safe to assume that if Gore had been in the White House after the 2000 election, he wouldn't have invaded Iraq. (Bush's foreign team showed eagerness to invade there even before the election was decided, Gore never showed interest in putting Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz in charge of national defense)
Likewise, if a crisis occurs and Trump reacts impulsively or in a disorganized way and bungles it as a result, it'll probably be safe to say Clinton would probably have handled it better, simply because impulsiveness and disorganisation simply aren't part of her character.
