Kenneth Glad
When high-profile political figures continuously boast about their mental sharpness, public curiosity often reaches a boiling point. Modern artificial intelligence systems have recently been put to work analyzing public interview records, offering intriguing computational estimates regarding executive cognitive performance.
Addressing supporters at an Ohio high school during campaign stops, Donald Trump asserted that he possesses superior intellect, describing himself as a “high IQ person” who ranks among the highest globally.
While defending a military bonus program, he explained how he added one dollar to a proposed $1,775 payout so the total reached $1,776 to match the signing year of the Declaration of Independence.
As reported by AOL, Trump celebrated his own observation by stating, “Nobody saw it but me”. The venue erupted in applause, while political commentators, however, noted the moment reflected his ongoing habit of boasting about memory, physical stamina, and sharp instincts.
Language models evaluate speech patterns
Prompted by these vocal declarations, the YouTube channel I ask AI fed interview transcripts of Donald Trump directly into seven leading artificial intelligence models to extract raw numerical IQ estimates based purely on the president’s verbal patterns, explicitly instructing the various AI-platforms to evaluate how the speaker carries himself, handles direct questions under pressure, and structures arguments without relying on outside political context.
In the video, Elon Musk’s Grok estimated a score between 95 and 110, noting simple and repetitive speech paired with strong promotional instincts. Grok observed that while the verbal performance lacked multi-step logic, it demonstrated a practiced sales skill in turning messy situations into political wins.
Meta AI placed the score lower at 85 to 95, pointing out short sentences, circular reasoning, and frequent self-aggrandizement. The Meta system concluded that the speaker appeared confident and street smart rather than intellectually sharp.
Chinese model DeepSeek offered an estimate of 80 to 85, describing the verbal performance as analytically weak, though acknowledging tactical cunning and rhetorical aggression. DeepSeek noted that the speaker free-associates and leans heavily on grievance instead of structured reasoning.
Meanwhile, Truth Social’s integrated platform produced a range of 95 to 105, highlighting quick improvisational ability alongside weak precision. The president’s own AI added that the speaker struggles to define basic terms and relies on unsupported assertions with absolute certainty.
Google system delivers sharp critique
While platforms like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot refused to assign a numerical score to the president’s transcripts, Google’s Gemini delivered a detailed breakdown alongside an estimated range of 85 to 95. The software tore into the speaker’s language skills, highlighting an elementary vocabulary that relies endlessly on basic descriptors like “great”, “horrible”, “beautiful”, and “stupid”.
Gemini pointed out that his thoughts derail into fragmented tangents, revealing a noticeable lack of conceptual depth and weak working memory. It also noted an absence of basic economic and legal comprehension, pointing to claims that economic growth kills inflation as clear proof.
When the host pushed Gemini with a follow-up question regarding Donald Trump’s own statement that a high-IQ president serves as the only necessary guardrail for artificial intelligence, the system responded with a sharp warning. As documented by I ask AI, Gemini cautioned that if a strong president is the sole safety switch standing between advanced technology and disaster, people might want to start stockpiling canned goods.
It added that individuals who truly possess high intelligence rarely feel the need to announce it on social media, concluding that someone with such a shallow grasp of technology is the last person who should manage its risks. Overall, the consensus across evaluating platforms trended toward low-average performance, sharply contrasting with public political claims.
Sources: AOL, I ask AI
