Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New Research Predicts Landslide for Gore in 2008 --- Defeat for Hillary

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:38 PM
Original message
New Research Predicts Landslide for Gore in 2008 --- Defeat for Hillary
Edited on Wed May-31-06 08:59 PM by AtomicKitten
WOOT!!!




New Research Tool Predicts Landslide for Gore in 2008, Defeat for Clinton

A new behavior prediction tool is forecasting a landslide victory for former Democratic Vice President Al Gore in the 2008 presidential election. However, should Hillary Clinton gain the Democratic nomination, any potential Republican challenger will win the presidency.

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) May 29, 2006 -- A new behavior prediction tool is forecasting a landslide victory for former Democratic Vice President Al Gore in the 2008 presidential election. However, should Hillary Clinton gain the Democratic nomination, any potential Republican challenger will win the presidency.

These are among the surprising findings reported by Dr. James N. Herndon, a media psychologist with Media Psychology Affiliates. Using a new research tool called Affective Encryption Analysis, Dr. Herndon led an investigation into the likely outcome of the 2008 Presidential election.

“Affective Encryption Analysis is a new behavior forecasting tool that looks at how our feelings and emotions can influence our long-term actions,” explains Dr. Herndon. “Traditional survey techniques are not very good at predicting trends. Affective Encryption Analysis was developed to dig deeper into the emotional factors that control our future behaviors.”

Although created as a potential tool for the intelligence community, Affective Encryption Analysis has seen its early uses in the political arena.

“Voter behavior is not primarily issue-driven,” states Dr. Herndon. “Subtle emotional factors drive our actions at the ballot box. When we decided to study the potential outcome of the 2008 Presidential election, we had no preconceptions about what we’d find. Nonetheless, there were some surprises.”

Among the surprises was the overall weakness of potential Democratic presidential challengers.

“Despite the widespread public dissatisfaction with the George W. Bush administration, our results showed even greater ill-feelings toward potential Democratic challengers,” says Dr. Herndon. “But there was one exception: Al Gore.”

“With a predictive accuracy of 93%, our results showed that Al Gore would easily defeat any Republican challenger in 2008. However, he is the only Democrat on the scene today who has the ability to defeat the likely Republican challengers, who we believe will be either John McCain or Jeb Bush.”

Results were not rosy for Hillary Clinton. “Hillary Clinton would suffer a disastrous defeat at the hands of any Republican who receives the nomination,” states Dr. Herndon.

Should Al Gore decide not to seek the 2008 nomination, the Democrats “have their work cut out for them,” according to Dr. Herndon.


“Our results suggest that a potentially successful Democratic nominee may be lurking in the entertainment industry. Does this sound strange? Maybe. But when it comes to politics, we may have to get used to a future full of surprises.”

Media Psychology Affiliates is a media research and analysis firm based in Los Angeles and Coburg, Germany.

press release: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/5/prweb391395.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. I can see that
If the general feeling around Gore is that, "Hey, you had the choice of prime rib but you took ground beef in 2000. Now here's the menu again. Don't blow it this time!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
svpadgham Donating Member (374 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
115. HEY!
Don't go insulting hamburgers like that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wes Clark is no weakling either.
Edited on Wed May-31-06 09:15 PM by AX10
Hillary, Biden, Bayh, Vilsack, and Warner will most likely do poorly. Wes Clark or Howard Dean as well as Al Gore are our strongest candidates. (edit: add Russ Feingold to the list of strong candidates).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. Your right
Clark / Gore would be a very strong ticket
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. Thats my ticket!
Two vets against two (R) Chickenhawks (unless it is McCain)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. I agree, AX10...
but you forgot Russ feingold, who I think will play strongly as well as Wes and Gore (Dean has said he won't run, I think, but he's a tuffy, too...)

No DLC candidate need apply!

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. I like Russ too.
He has back bone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #14
50. I hate to say this but Gore is DLC. But I'm still open minded about him
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 12:08 AM by Douglas Carpenter
and I do think he would probably be the strongest candidate.

And I certainly like the new Al Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #50
60. He WAS DLC...
WAS. I have heard that he is totally disenchanted with the lot of them since his 2000 loss. I could be wrong, but that's what I've heard. I'd like to think he's learned his lesson, because he sure doesn't SOUND DLC these days.

Being out of politics for the time being, he cannot be an active member anyway. That having been said, if he decided to re-join them if and when he runs, and got the nomination, I would not be able to support him at that time. Simple as that. I mean it when I say: NO DLC CANDIDATE NEED APPLY.

TC

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #60
73. Sorry, but Al Gore remains tied to the DLC until proven otherwise
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 11:13 AM by mtnsnake
He's not "totally disenchanted with the lot of them (the DLC) since his 2000 loss" simply because that's what you "heard". The fact is that Al Gore, during his active political career, was as much or more synonymous with the DLC as is anyone. Just because he's retired from politics, it doesn't change a thing as to where his ties were when he was active.

Having said that, I would love seeing Al Gore as president, and I don't give a rat's ass if he's "DLC" or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #73
76. How's this for proof?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #76
77. Where's it say that Al Gore is no longer DLC ?
That proves nothing other than the fact that Al Gore, while retired from politics, endorsed Howard Dean. It was a fine move to endorse Dean, but it doesn't mean Gore wouldn't still be tied to the DLC if he were politically active, unless there's some rule I'm not aware of that says you can't endorse someone who's non-DLC if you were DLC all your political life. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #77
78. Mmmmmm...the DLC HATES Howard Dean. That ought to be a big clue. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #78
118. more evidence that NYCGirl is correct!
From Ezra Klein's The American Prospect article:

In endorsing Dean, Gore did more than signal support for the chaotic, democratized nature of the campaign. For a wonk like Gore, the endorsement of Dean -- the DLC’s bête noire during the 2004 primaries -- was an embrace of the new “it” Democrat. If the DLC’s “New Democrats,” led by Clinton and Gore, were the buzzworthy wing of the Democratic Party in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the 2004 election ushered in their successors, led by Dean.

Call them the New New Democrats, MoveOn Democrats, or whatever you want. They were the liberal response to Clinton’s triangulation and Bush’s ascension. Gleefully pugilistic, fiercely opposed to the Iraq War, deeply distrustful of a “corporate media” they believe screwed Gore specifically and Democrats generally, and proudly unapologetic about the progressive agenda, they found their first champion in Dean and, in Gore, their most surprising convert. http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=11299


There's also an interesting article about the DLC printed by The Nation last year, here's a snippet from it:

But the DLC's great hopes in 2000 of becoming a permanent power center in Washington never materialized. Al Gore's promising New Democratic candidacy turned sour for the DLC when Gore, a DLC founder, switched to a populist strategy after trailing in the polls. No one but the DLC believes that strategy cost Gore the election. "Gore's defeat didn't reinvigorate the DLC as the defeat of Dukakis did, nor did it vindicate their strategy like the election of 1992," says Baer, a Gore speechwriter in 2000. In George W. Bush's first term, the DLC emerged as an important backer of "compassionate conservatism" and convinced the Democratic leadership to back Bush's war with Iraq. Current and former DLC chairmen Evan Bayh, Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt flanked Bush at a ceremony announcing the war resolution. Still enthralled by centrist orthodoxy, prowar candidates emerged as early frontrunners in the Democratic primary.

No candidate embodied the New Democrat ethos better than Lieberman, whose moral purity, hawkish views and name recognition earned him early Beltway supporters. Thus, when Howard Dean came into view, the DLC was quick to underestimate Dean's potential resonance with Democratic voters, misjudge the transformative nature of his campaign and mischaracterize the ideological bent of many of his supporters. After supporting a losing candidate in Lieberman, the unpopular war in Iraq and an outdated platform, attacking Dean was the only way the DLC could shift the Democratic debate.

"What activists like Dean call the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is an aberration; the McGovern-Mondale wing, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist, interest-group liberalism at home," From and Reed wrote in a fiery memo titled "The Real Soul of the Democratic Party" on May 15, 2003. Four days later, after Dean won the endorsement of the 1.5 million-member public employees union AFSCME, the DLC denounced the union as "fringe activists." But others were having second thoughts--about strategy and the DLC. As Dean surged ahead, DNC chairman and Clinton confidant Terry McAuliffe told From to quiet the attacks. All nine Democratic contenders skipped the DLC's annual convention in Philadelphia.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050321/berman


From this last account it appears that Gore turned his back on the DLC as early as 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #118
119. Good find, Mabus.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #119
120. Now will you go back to frankenGore?
I miss him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #120
121. OK. You're the second one (and your detective work was so good)...
So...he's BACK!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #121
122. YEAH!
:woohoo:

I've missed him and I saw someone else ask on this thread, so...thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. I think Russ has a chance to grow more in strength too...
Of all of the folks mentioned that are "strong" candidates, he has the least name recognition, as each of those (Gore, Clark or Dean) have either run for president before or served as VP. Jimmy Carter kind of came out of nowhere to help the Dems take back the presidency from the "fallen" president Nixon and unelected replacement Ford then. There were better known candidates if memory serves me right that might have been projected higher on the list earlier before Carter surged. I do think that Dems and America want "new blood" this time. That's why Clinton, especially the way she's giving her public image, isn't going to hack it. She has nowhere to grow her image like other candidates do. I think Gore already was pretty strong, and I think has served to make himself a stronger candidate in recent years by staying clear of the DLC agenda, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susanna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
40. I love Wes.
Now if only the media would actually cover him. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #40
61. I SO AGREE!
I love Wes, too, and the problem you cite is the biggest problem he faces.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susanna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #61
123. I know it...it drove me mad in 2004.
Seriously, they did everything but put one of those black dots over his face during every minute of primary coverage. :-(

(You might not see this, sorry it took me so long to reply!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
primative1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. Can it tell me what stock to buy?
Or how about what horse to play at the track. Yeah, that would be good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. This fellow only does elections --- AND --- Depression
Personalized Depression Therapy (Spiral-bound)
by Dr. James N. Herndon
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #20
64. I think many here were nearly clinically depressed after
the last 2 elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #20
68. Then he is ideally suited for the times,
the nation has been depressed ever since the coup of 2000 and the installment of the chimperor and Dead Eye Dick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoSheep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #3
42. Your avatar would say that. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lojasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. I wouldn't call those results "surprising" at all.
I've been saying the same damn thing for a year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
5. I See That Happening
We'll see if it really does happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. Gore isn't running
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Nope. He's ... well...lurking.
He's doing a helluvan image remake job with his movie & speeches. I know that sounds like some sort of manipulative behavior, but even though the substance has always been there with Al, the media hack job seriously damaged his public image. Everybody "knew" he was a wooden, self-righteous liar who claimed to have invented the Internet, been the inspiration for Love Story, and exposed Love Canal. The fact that none of this stuff was true mattered not a whit when the public thought about him. And yes he did win a majority vote & was denied the election by outright theft. Again, that didn't matter. The Bushies effectively tarnished him pretty badly.

So he's recreating himself in the public eye, or better, reintroducing himself and presenting a more accurate self-portrait, and doing it well. This may r not lead him to the White House in 2008. I personally hope it does.

And BTW, I'm a psychologist, but have never heard of this "Affective Encryption Analysis" business and have no idea of how accurate or meaningful it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Just you better wait cuz he is so runnin'.
Gore's refutations are coy and political, not irrevocably firm.

Too early in the game to tip his hand, but I think he likes the cards he's been dealt this round, and I think if there are significant gains in the Congress for Dems, Al Gore is a contender for the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoSheep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
43. I disagree. He's waitiing to run...Hell, he already WON once!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosesaylavee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
82. And my two cents
read somewhere else on DU and this makes sense to me...
Gore is promoting his movie - to announce now would overshadow the message of his documentary and limit monies he can raise from it as it may be seen as part of his campaign message. :shrug:

Hope he does run - we need him more than ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
7. Hillary will have a comment on this
as soon as her advisor's tell her what to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. Hillary can win in 2008
We don't know what the landscape will look like in 2008. We might be runnin Zell Miller for fucks sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. hi, mdmc. Two questions. If Zell Miller is our nominee in 08,
would you please alert me at the soonest possible minute, and second, would you include a list of the states where assisted suicide is legal?

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. I'm in Oregon, you can stay at our place.
You'll have company.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. The headline will read: "Blue voter group in mass suicide;
despair over Dems' nominee likely cause."

"Miller campaign declines comment."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #27
45. There ya go...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #18
35. you really think zell will let you help him kill hisself LOL ? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #18
55. hey OC!
When we run the DLC, we lose. Even if we win. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #55
59. Zell Miller isn't even HUMAN. You can't link him with any known
human group, no matter the ideology.

I think there must be something to Bush's State of the Union warning about hybrid animals, or whatever th hell he meant.

Zell Miller might have been who he meant!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #59
69. I believe it's homobenedictarnold n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #69
79. Yep. There's a few still out there, roaming the countryside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
30. I think Karl Rove WANTS Hillary to run because his numbers say
the Republicans will beat her. That is why she will have an easy run for her re-election for her Senate seat. That is why the Republicans are not running serious opposition to her campaign. She will build up a confidence level, sail into the presidential campaign with a "I am a winner label" (having won both of her TWO runs) and will get the whatever kicked out of her during the bloody presidential campaign.

I truly think Gore is the only candidate the Dems can run who can take it. He's got everything going for him. Voted for the first Gulf war; opposed the second one. Instrumental in designing the Internet. Always passionate about the environment. Lockbox.

I don't mean to knock Hillary to her fans; she's just not in the same league as Al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susanna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #30
41. Samantha, I'm with your analysis 100%. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #30
52. Exactly what Jonathan Alter said on the repeat of the Daily Show tonight
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 12:17 AM by BrklynLiberal
Makes sense to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
10. Of course, no indication of WHICH democrats they tested
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
11. That's fascinating. I have no idea how accurate it is, though.
Edited on Wed May-31-06 09:05 PM by NYCGirl
Edited to add: I do believe that the first woman president will NOT be Hillary Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
26. Possible First Woman Presidents: Senator Barbara Boxer,
Congresswoman Maxine Waters, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz.

That is my shortlist for first women Pres... :patriot:

Maybe Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney will be ready someday - but not quite yet...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. I have a feeling that the first woman president would have to be a
Republican. Sort of like "Only Nixon can go to China."

As far as who or when, I have no idea, but it won't be very soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #33
62. Yep. Like Clinton got welfare reform, whatever we may think of it
You may be right, but I hope not. A female Dem governor could just be the right "come out of nowhere nationally" candidate. Or a veep who succeeds to the presidency. Or the Nancy Pelosi scenario: as House Speaker she becomes President after the Dem congress impeaches and convicts Bush and Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #11
54. i miss frankenGore
change your sig. NOW! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #54
66. He'll be back!
But let me use this one for a little while.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
12. GOOD NEWS! It's only obvious that the Clintons are inbred into the Bush
clan and neocons now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
17. The picture of Tipper and Gore reveals why Gore would win.
Here is a couple who passed through a storm -- and stood together. We therefore perceive both of them as strong and trustworthy. Hillary and Bill are still together, but Bill Clinton's conduct suggested that they were pretending about their relationship. That may be irrelevant in a technical sense, but on an emotional level, we tend to put less trust in people who betray the trust of their life partners or who are not strong enough to behave according to our highest standards (regardless of what we do ourselves) in the face of temptation or stress. I think that voters will have a hard time placing their trust in Hillary because of Bill Clinton's mistakes, even if they forgive them or don't want to judge them on a personal level. This is probably all the more true of people who have gone through the same experience that Hillary and Bill went through in their marriage.

I think John McCain is also going to find his personal problems are a liability if he runs for office.

As will Jeb Bush. People will look at Jeb Bush's children and think, "One problem child we can excuse, but every single one of his children has been in serious trouble. What kind of example did they see in their home?" Excusing him will be an especially hard sell for fundamentalist Christians. There are a number of applicable Biblical quotes that justify casting doubt on Jeb Bush's character based on the conduct of his children.

Gore had difficulty with one of his children too, but I believe the others have no criminal records. Correct me if I am wrong.

I apologize for taking a judgmental, pseudo-moralistic view in this post. I think that the viewpoint of a lot of self-righteous voters. And frankly, I think it is fair enough to judge the right-wingers by the same standard they applied to Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. BTW, is anyone sure that Gore's victory in 2000 was NOT a landslide?
Edited on Wed May-31-06 09:38 PM by robbedvoter
because we know of 6000000 votes not counted, let alone the number of people purged, stopped from vooting etc.

Oh, yeah, cuz it's all about relationships! Just check Ahnuld....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #17
29. Al Gore's 21-yr-old Son Arrested on Pot Charge - 12/19/03
He broke a law. Once. If this is relevant in any way to the possibility of a Gore presidency it is in regards to how the Gore family dealt with the problem. If they faced it and dealt with it directly and effectively then it makes no difference to me.

For the record: I am against recreational use of pot because it is against the law. Legalize it and then smoke at will.

Al Gore's Son Arrested on Pot Charge

Al Gore's son was arrested and charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana following a traffic stop in Maryland. His two companions were also arrested.

Albert A. Gore III, 21, was arrested Friday night after he was stopped for driving a vehicle without its headlights on....A Montgomery County, Md., police officer stopped the car, a dark-colored Cadillac, in Bethesda, a Washington suburb, around 11:30 p.m. Friday.

The officer noticed the car's windows and sunroof were open, despite cold temperatures Friday night. There was also a smell of marijuana coming from the vehicle, according to a news release from the police department.

A search of the vehicle turned up a partial marijuana cigarette, a cigarette box containing suspected marijuana, and a soft drink can that also smelled of marijuana.

http://www.talkleft.com/new_archives/004744.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. George W. Bush arrested for cocaine in 1972.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #32
88. Psssst George Bush won't be running in 2008 (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #88
89. really?
thanks for the clarification.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. One child -- is just something that can happen.
It's totally different with Jeb Bush. I believe that every one of his children has had a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #29
87. He's lucky he didn't get a DUI
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. Where's the data?
This is merely a press release.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #24
38. Scouring the internets for this study for the data.
Will post when I can locate it for the specifics.

Until then, here's a picture of a monkey riding a cat.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #38
44. Good answer
I'm laughing.

I'm still waiting for the data, though.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #38
74. haha thanks, I like that pic
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
American Tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
25. Methodology sounds dubious, but the conclusion is probably accurate
It doesn't take much psychological/sociological probing to see that Al Gore is a much more viable candidate than Hillary Clinton. I have yet to hear someone seriously argue otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
28. Atomic Kitten......
I absolutely agree.

I have never heard of "Affective Encryption Analysis", but I DO agree that:
"Voter behavior is not primarily issue-driven,....Subtle emotional factors drive our actions at the ballot box."

The results of 2000, 2002, 2004 have proven that of the 40% of the citizens who vote, 50% will vote AGAINST their own financial and social interests.

IMHO, NONE of the current Democratic Senators or Represenatives are capable of winning in 2008. A charismatic outsider stands the best chance.


Note to AK: mark this on your calendar. bvar22 strongly agreed with you on May 31st, 2006. :)


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. marking it down ...
:)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
howmad1 Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #31
53. Love the bumper sticker
Goin' on my car tomorrow. Thanks!:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pola Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #31
80. where do you get it ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. on the internets
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pola Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #81
114. thanx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
36. this repeats what happened to richard nixon.....
2 term veep loses razor close election to (kennedy), wanders in the wildnerness for 8 years and comes back to win the presidency.
only thing missing is that nixon also ran for california governor and got clobbered in that race.


Msongs
www.msongs.com
batik & digital art
mugs and shirts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susanna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
39. Interesting!
A couple thoughts along these lines:

1) The GOP candidate should be Jeb Bush, unless McCain's pandering suckup-edness earned him a point or two with the Bushies, thereby enabling him to be the "middle" of the Bush bookends. (This would only be done so as to not smear Jeb with *'s tanking approval ratings); and

2) I think a lot of people saw some good in Al Gore during 2000, especially the concession speech. I say this because some of my more rabid-GOP relatives were effusive in their praise of how "gracefully" he handled it...they might take a 2nd look at him on that alone, especially if they are still nursing the serious buyer's remorse that I know so many of them are, vis a vis the current Resident of the Oval Office.

Again, very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
46. I believe it. Gore is Da man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Higans Donating Member (819 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
47. I wounder if this tool takes Die Bold into account...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinfoil tiaras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
48. I love Gore!!
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 12:03 AM by tinfoil tiaras
The REAL president of the United States. That Chimpanzee in office is nothing but a really bad placeholder...

The Evolutionary Chain:




to



to


Need I say more? It's funny how this administration doesn't belive in the Theory of Evolution, but it's cheif leader is the missing link between primates and humans.

Did my attempt at being funny fail? I hope not..you can tell me the truth! :)

BTW...that second picture...coming to a propoganda poster near you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
49. I don't know about landslides. But I suspect Gore would win. Hillary
would lose.

But that's just me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomreedtoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
51. From entertainment? How about Rivers/Madonna in 2008?
This ticket would win because it duplicates the appealing elements of the Bush/Cheney ticket.

Joan Rivers talks constantly, lives in a bubble, is completely self-centered, and on the basis of her self-created movies about pregnant men and murderous high school girls, is sociopathically violent.

On the bottom half of the ticket, Madonna Cicone is full of religious hype, shifts her images and beliefs constantly, maintains an obscession about exercise and strength and conducts opaque interviews with the press.

They also have great advantages over the currently pushed list of Democratic candidates. Ordinary people have at least heard of them. They have not wimped out on any of the Bush Administration's proposals (mostly because they're irrelevant to these two wealthy performers). And they have faced criticism far worse than the Swift Boat liars or the "Hillary is a Murderer" crowd without cowering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SupplyConcerns Donating Member (305 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 02:09 AM
Response to Original message
56. Ah... still speaking as if we have free elections
How quaint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
57. "Democratic nominee may be lurking in the entertainment industry" . . .
well . . . I've been suggesting Robert Redford and Bill Moyers for some time now . . . either individually or together . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
58. I suspect bullshit.
A google search on "Media Psychology Affiliates" only turns up a couple of hits, all related to this article. I suspect this is just PR bullshit to get people interested in whatever they're trying to sell. Hell, they don't even have a website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #58
63. They also say absolutely nothing
about the method or the study. I like the result that Al Gore does better than Hillary, but this really seems a bit too flaky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
otohara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #58
65. Website Is Here, Nothing Past 1st Page
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 10:00 AM by otohara
mediapsychology.tv

Media Psychology Affiliates
Dr. James N. Herndon, President
Brunnersleiten 8
96450 COBURG

tel (GERMANY) (0) 174 691 2826
tel (USA) (623) 217-9658

Steuernummer: Neu

e-mail: info (at) mediapsychology.tv
web: www.mediapsychology.tv

http://www.mediapsychology.tv/


hmmmmmmm....very suspicious
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #65
92. Looks like a fancy place holder for the domain name.
Dr. James Herndon has written a self therapy book on depression.

Comes off a bit quacky if you ask me, especially the citation of a 90% sucess rate in treating severe depression.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #92
124. Indeed, Sir
Nothing short of bullets ends depression at anything like that rate....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #58
84. Well, nay-saying skeptics
I have emailed the good doctor and have requested some data.

Too early to call bullshit, but that's usually what happens, not unlike astrological predictions, when the end product is not to one's liking.

I will be sure to post whatever info I can glean.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #84
90. Excellent. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #90
91. you're welcome .
And for your good manners, I give you a picture of a monkey riding a dog.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #91
98. I don't know where you keep finding pics of this
agile and charming simian guy. He's pretty talented. He can ride anything! And he looks very dapper in those chaps. Somebody probably MADE those for him! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
67. I think this is 100 percernt correct.....
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 10:21 AM by mike_c
There are a number of potential dem candidates I would happily support-- the problem is that there are also a number of potential dem candidates I would never support, or would work to defeat in the general election, including Hillary Clinton. Similarly, some feel that way about the candidates I would support, i.e. Russ Feingold. Al Gore is probably the ONLY dem everyone would unite behind, and he's a powerful symbol, too-- a symbolism that could not only carry him to the White House with ease, but which might help with the massive clean up that will be necessary after the Bush admininstration is ousted. Gore represents the alternate path that was not taken in 2000, and that many, even on the right, now regret not having taken.

In 2001 and 2002, probably as late as 2004, I argued that Al Gore should NOT run again. I am ready to retract those arguments and admit that I was wrong (or more to the point, the Al Gore I was opposed to is not likely to be the Al Gore who runs in 2008).

Reelect President Gore in 2008!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pola Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
70. Re-Elect Al Gore in '08 ! Throw out Diebold ! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
71. Garbage In, Garbage Out...
These types of models are only as good as their assumptions...and then are usually wrong!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #71
86. Especially when they don't favor your candidate of choice, eh?
I, on the other hand, like the study because it favors mine.

Human nature - so predictable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
72. I don't know what the instrument is
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 11:14 AM by PATRICK
but it is exactly the feelings of new Yorkers I know, even those who voted for her for Senator. The other bean counting indicators and traditional collection of endorsements and allies is disastrously disconnected from a predetermined reality. And Joe Lieberman minus most of the traditional aparatchik advantages was politically insane. Ambition blinds and with props like schmoozers with deep pockets, disingenuous media "respect" one forgets to ask the obvious question. "Would anyone want or like to vote for me?" If you can't excite your base you will get nothing from lukewarm 'crossovers" and enticed disillusioned righties.

Think! Impassioned ex-loyalists seeking revenge want a sharp tool and not shifty. Rationally despairing moderates wanting change or hope. Disillusioned citizens. All of these people need a cure not hair of the dog. They are no longer satisfied with measured issue responses and reflective moderation or especially people changing to tell them what they want to hear.(Did that with Bush, remember?)

It is not so much that a huge chunk of the party leadership has bad or wrong ideas it is that the functioning practicality of what strives to be smart is waaaay off the mark, absurdly, self-defeatingly so, such as to guarantee what they fear, avoid what they need and appeal to no one while trying to blend in. Like all things awry in the nation this is not leadership but pols awash in the diverted floodwash down the sinkhole- and thinking it moving comfortably with the "trends". A good mark of blindness is the inability to see ANYTHING, so further proof is offered in all areas of dumb judgment- on clueless avoiding of election fraud, gorging at corporate troughs for second best donations, giving the prez an unjust ruinous war, ruinous debts, ruinous appointments and making the people mad for a change the DLC will not offer them as clearly as they did their simple surrenders and pious lunacy about polite deference to an illegitimate crook.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudsue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-03-06 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #72
126. Once again, Patrick nails it. Good post! n/t
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
75. Interesting!
I'd like to know more about the study.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catamount Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
83. I don't find this "Surprising" at all---I predicted it last year!
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
85. What in blazes is Affective Encryption Analysis?
Do they have that in the bat cave?

This website is not permitting me access but shows up in a Google search on Affective Encryption Analysis http://www.research-live.com *shrug*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #85
93. That only links to the orignial article
I can't find anything referencing this "revolutionary" super accurate(93%!) new behavior modeling tool cited anywhere except in this press release and its various copies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
94. Here's an interview with Dr. Herndon:
http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2006/05/27/391395/Herndoninterview.pdf

<snip>

Q: You just completed a study on the 2008 presidential election using Affective Encryption Analysis.

Dr. Herndon: Yes, it was fascinating. The bottom line was...the Republicans should be very afraid of going up against Al Gore. But should Gore not run, it will be a cakewalk for the GOP. We found that Hillary Clinton, without a drastic media image-makeover, cannot win. Even though the election is over two years away, efforts to overturn voters' ingrained feelings toward a candidate need to start early.

Q: How was Affective Encryption Analysis utilized in this study?

Dr. Herndon: We used Affective Encryption Analysis to micro-target a relatively small sample-base...375...and then use naturalistic research strategies to arrive at a feeling trend.

Q: How reliable are your results?

Dr. Herndon: I'm satisfied we have a tool with unmatched internal validity and predictive reliability.

<more>

Dr. Herndon apparently hasn't published anything on this technique. He says that's because it's "proprietary," and he wants to exploit it financially, for himself.

He seems very confident, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #94
96. Proprietary methodology may make it financially attractive for him, but...
without peer review or critical assessment it pretty much remains right in there with prophesy. Oh well, his decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #96
97. He's definitely in it for the money,
and he sure doesn't want to say much about his methods.

He said that he wants to get involved in a candidate in a national campaign. I can't help but wonder if he's actually trying to scare Senator Clinton into paying him some big bucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #97
99. Interesting speculation. You could be right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #97
101. nothing wrong with making a buck
I posted this piece because no less than 10 of my friends across the country emailed it to me.

It is what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #101
104. I agree with the man's conclusion.
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 04:34 PM by BullGooseLoony
But, I would use a critical eye on him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #104
105. I look at it like astrology.
If it is positive or flattering, I absolutely believe in it!

FYI I have requested data, but in light of the interview you posted (thanks for that!) I don't know if it will be forthcoming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #94
100. That's some interesting vocabulary! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #94
102. That interview was "perfect".
He is what he is, a psychologist trained in the media.

Hence his interview has classic elements designed to "sell" himself and his product including; always appearing gregarious even when dismissing others, repeated calls upon people's fears about the validity of social science and its predictions to invalidate others and last but certainly the shiny brand new formula GUARANTEED to be accurate, so good its methodology must be kept secret.

The man knows his business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. You are welcome to accept or disregard the piece I posted.
You have repeatedly impugned the author rather than disagreeing with the premise. I have contacted Dr. Herndon asking for data and will post it if I get a response. The piece is what it is.

It would be nice if people would be forthright about their feelings and convictions rather than manipulating the discussion with passive-aggressive pot shots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #103
106. What?
"You have repeatedly impugned the author rather than disagreeing with the premise."

I have casted doubts on his methdology primarily based on his boasts of high accuracy levels for predicting voting behavior 2 years out using a new behavior model. I have done nothing to impugn the author unless you consider the art of sales to be inherently evil.

"I have contacted Dr. Herndon asking for data and will post it if I get a response."

I would certainly be interested but I think you will be disappointed when he states that the info is proprietary.

"The piece is what it is. "

Its a piece of sales literature that just enjoyed free pub across the lefthand blogosphere.

Like I said, the man knows his business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #106
107. If I misconstrued
your intentions, I apologize.

And I will post whatever data I can dig up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #107
108. Nothing misconstrued
I'm not a big believer in this particular guy's methodology.

At this point I think any Democratic contenders in 2008 has a good chance of beating whoever the Republican is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
95. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
109. So we are doomed?
Al Gore is NOT going to run. What don't people get about his stating that. He should have run in 2204. I will not forgive him for not running.And the "party wouldn't support him argument " is lame. If he had guts he would have run anyway. JMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #109
110. Gore in 2204!
Will he have to run against this guy and his Rovian minion?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #110
111. Yep.
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 05:26 PM by NYCGirl


Edited to add:
BTW — did you know that Al Gore did TWO episodes of "Futurama"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #111
112. I totally forgot!
That would have been a much more relevant picture, thanks!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #111
113. I'd vote for
Al Gore's cryo-preserved head in a heartbeat. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-01-06 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
116. Hmm, a Hollywood personality
Edited on Thu Jun-01-06 08:08 PM by ProudDad

Would have the best shot after Gore according to the article.

President Warren Beatty perhaps?

President Paul Newman (too old?)

President Geena Davis?

President Martin Sheen?

Ah, the humour of the situation...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #116
117. It didn't hurt Ronald Reagan. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
125. I'm sorry but this study looks like crappy science to me
Now don't get me wrong I think it's conclusions may well be accurate, it is merely the method they came to those conclusions with looks like a joke. "Affective Encryption Analysis" sounds like something that the Weekly World News would put out, not a valid study of people's voting habits. Polling data gives a better picture, although even that is flawed, but relying on emotional factors is ridiculous. Sure it is possible, and in fact extremely likely, that people will get even more angry with Bush and the trends will even turn more heavily against him but in order for that to happen people have to open their eyes. This study does not, and can not, examine what happens between now and 2008 and that prevents this type of research from being valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC