Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, has a doctorate in molecular quantum mechanics. That makes her quite unusual among political leaders. But being a qualified quantum mechanic
per se doesn't make her especially qualified to lead the German government, since molecular quantum mechanics rarely has much role informing policy.
It does mean, however, that she is what I will call scientifically literate. Very few scientists in fact know anything to speak of about molecular quantum mechanics. I understand vaguely that it's about the physics underlying chemical reactions, and that's probably as much as most physicists know, actually. I'm guessing that chemists tends to know more, but the point is that as our understanding of the world has deepened, science has become highly specialized. Being an expert in one scientific field doesn't mean you necessarily know bupkis about most others.
However, what you do know is how scientific claims are evaluated, and you likely at least have a broad grasp of how various fields of science fit together and build up a coherent picture of the world. You understand how chemistry rests on physics, how biology rests on chemistry, how psychology and society emerge from biology. You understand how physics and chemistry are essential to astronomy and cosmology, and how geology emerges from cosmic history, shaped by physics, chemistry and biology. And anyone who understands high school physics can understand how increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes the lower atmosphere and the oceans to warm.
You also understand the processes by which scientific theories are developed, tested, and come to be accepted. You understand the institutions that guard the integrity of science. They don't always do so successfully, but in the long run fraud and error gets corrected.
You don't have to be a scientist too be scientifically literate in the ways I have just described. But to be a policy maker or political leader who I can respect, you do need to be scientifically literate and you need to respect the expertise of people who have earned it. That is why I cannot respect a political party that denies the reality of anthropogenic climate change, wants to teach creationism to school children, denies that particulate pollution kills people, and continues to claim that cutting taxes on wealthy people benefits working people, among other manifest falsehoods.
I'll say it again. Reality has a well-known liberal bias. The reason is that nowadays, what distinguishes liberalism from conservatism is truth.