No, she wasn't right then and the millions who voted for Trump this time round are not right either.
IQ has little to do with it beyond the fact that those who have real cognitive issues are more likely to be gullible and manipulable than most - but that's not saying much.
On a basis of collective IQ the US is around 27th of the nations in the World at around 97. Average IQ is not 100 as many think it is but actually considered a range from 85 to 115, i.e 30 points. So most people operate fairly similarly when it comes to 'intelligence', if indeed that is really what IQ measures. However that discussion is for another time and place.
My point is that intelligence or rather the ability to use it well, i.e. intellect, insight, ability to analyse and synthesise, as well as ability to use language well and understand nuance and recognise mis and dis information from that which is accurate, is not so common.
There are also major flaws with the electoral system in the US, (and just about all other nations) and, in reality, no electoral systems is truly fair, i.e. able to ensure that all candidates have an equal chance of being elected and that the ballots of all voters carry the same weight.
Partisanship, conditioning, gullibility, personal pain, trauma, disadvantage or the like, peer group pressure, previous or current interactions with government, apathy or its opposite, susceptibility to advertising, hype, promises and charisma all play a part in the choices made by voters. Sources of information can be and usually are very influential and it is far less likely that the average person will seek out independent, objective and authoritative sources than will an those who are politically aware or activist.
Selfishness, which in my mind appears to be an innate human trait, perhaps because of the instinct for survival, is I think one of the most dominant factors. When I listen to or read interviews with the 'man or woman in the street' or see their views reported, almost inevitably it seems that their views are self focused. Very rarely do I see collective issues highlighted and when I do it is usually in a populist way that shows little understanding of the complexities of interacting causal relationships and wider context than it does of relatively direct impact on themselves, ascribed most often simplistically and with blame of a particular person or political party being the focus.
The USA is also a nation still predominantly of whites conditioned to a particularly uninformed and misleading notion of the superiority of Christian tenets and monopoly over morality, even extending to influence on the judicial system and how other ethnic groups and religions believe, think and act.
The hypocrisy of most self-claimed religious believers is common and particularly so in Christian dominated societies where adherence to the 'faith' is mostly cursory yet its doctrines and tenets used as argument when it suits, despite most of them probably having read little, if anything of the Bible beyond the carefully selected extracts used in religious instruction and 'bible study'.
I could but won't go on. Those who are reading this who are foolishly misled and deluded sufficiently to have supported and even voted for the apology of a 'man' that is Trump - someone completely unfit for any public office, let alone that of the highest office in the land, have already written off my words or begun preparing their abuse and claim that I just don't understand anything, 'need a brain' or some such.
Those who have read this far with some clarity of thought and both willingness and capacity to consider the reasons for the election outcome, will recognise the factors I've mentioned and more - not least that the 'mass' is rarely motivated by any real thought, search for information, validity of what they hear or regard for others. Indeed, the larger the mass grows, the less likely it is that any of these factors count and one will start to find those who have little or no knowledge of what "all the fuss is about", they simply can't resist being a part of it.
There is so much more because causes are rarely 'simple', except perhaps in isolation but that is certainly not the case here, they relate to and impact on one another and so need substantial examination to discover major or substantial determinants.
Joyce may well be or have been an intelligent woman, however even the limited detail of your own account shows how little regard she had for you and how certain she was of her own 'rightness'. That is not the work of intelligence but of narcissism, self delusion, arrogance, conditioning, a personal defence mechanism or some such.
She could even have been playing 'Devil's Advocate', to discover your own views, though I very much doubt it.
An interesting article that raises much that it would be good for our recent electors to consider in depth and learn about - unfortunately, they are most probably too busy gloating over what they see as success and 'being proved right', which is simply yet another thing about which they are deluded and which may prove to be their very last words.
