[typoon]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wi...,6473374.story

By STEPHEN SINGER
Associated Press Writer

October 30, 2004, 4:29 PM EDT

HARTFORD, Conn. -- President Bush is tenacious and efficient, and Sen. John Kerry is cautious and conceited _ at least, that's what an analysis of their handwriting shows.

Sheila Kurtz, who heads the Graphology Consulting Group in New York City, said the candidates' handwriting "crystallizes some of the feelings I had, what their stress level is, what they're thinking, whether they're diplomatic."

Kurtz called the analysis a "very useful tool" that supplements, rather than replaces, voters' views on how candidates stand on particular issues. The analysis was done without bias, she said.

Kurtz and other graphologists do not rely on signatures, but instead use compositions to analyze handwriting. For Bush, Kurtz used a November 1999 letter he wrote while governor of Texas.

Mark Hopper, head of Handwriting Research Corp. in Phoenix, said his analysis of the candidates' handwriting over many years shows Bush is efficient and impatient with tediousness. Kerry is a conceptual thinker, but inflexible and stubborn, a criticism the Democrat has used against Bush.

Kurtz analyzed Kerry's handwriting in a card the Democratic candidate wrote in 2000 to the late Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan of New York.

Bush's small lines on the top of stroke marks and a small hook to the left of a 'T' demonstrate he has a "tenacious single-mindedness," Kurtz said. His use of tightly closed loops in round letters belies a "tendency for narrow vision that might indicate his mind is shuttered almost completely to 'off-the-program' ideas," she said.

At the same time, spaces between letters within a word show that Bush has "considerable intuitive abilities," Kurtz said.

The "relative smallness" of Kerry's writing belies cautiousness and control, Kurtz said. "Straight, firm down strokes of the 'Y's" and "G's" show strong determination and follow-through, she said.

Despite the familiarity most Americans have of the two candidates, Kurtz said her conclusions are based solely on her analysis of his handwriting. She would not say whom she will vote for.

"It doesn't have any bearing with what we know," she said.

Calls were left to the Bush and Kerry campaigns seeking comment.

Hopper said Kerry's tendency to draw the upper portion of an "F," "H" and "L" is typical of someone who is "very strategic, abstract and theoretical."

Spacing between words by Bush demonstrates he is an introvert, despite his chosen profession, Hopper said. "It's an attempt to keep distance between him and others," he said.

He said he will vote for Bush.

The traits Kurtz examined of Bush and Kerry are no different than those she views when working as a consultant to companies seeking executives and managers, she said. The nation's chief executive, like corporate leaders must be a "decision maker, diplomatic, intuitive and open-minded," she said.

Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press


Just something interesting for everyone to read.

[icruise]

What, no palm readings?

[Dakar]

God, you'll post anything.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Dakar:
God, you'll post anything.

God, you'll bitch and grouse about anything.

[icruise]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
God, you'll bitch and grouse about anything.

You're right. This is important news that should factor into everyone's choice of president.

[typoon]

Just trying to post things other than Kerry Good Bush Bad articles. Trying to find things that are a little different and somewhat interesting or entertaining to read.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Icruise:
You're right. This is important news that should factor into everyone's choice of president.

No, it's an interesting personality analysis regarding two people who are campaigning for the most powerful job in the world. It shows the potential negative and positive subconscious behaviors of each person. From my experience, I've seen that it's fairly accurate. I sent my handwriting off for analysis (sent to a 3rd party whom I have never met) and the analyst said that I'm arrogant, driven, and manipulative, yet intelligent, creative, and giving.

It's a good deal more scientific than "OMG!!1! TEH REDSKINZ WON SO KERRY WILL BE PREZIDENT!1!!"

[icruise]

Originally posted by typoon:
Just trying to post things other than Kerry Good Bush Bad articles. Trying to find things that are a little different and somewhat interesting or entertaining to read.

Yes, your Kerry Bad Bush Good articles are a real breath of fresh air.

President Bush is tenacious and efficient, and Sen. John Kerry is cautious and conceited _ at least, that's what an analysis of their handwriting shows.

[Dakar]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
God, you'll bitch and grouse about anything.

You're telling me I don't have a valid point? Is this really that news worthy?

[typoon]

Originally posted by Dakar:
You're telling me I don't have a valid point? Is this really that news worthy?

No, but it is somewhat interesting.

[typoon]

Originally posted by Icruise:
Yes, your Kerry Bad Bush Good articles are a real breath of fresh air.

Thanks.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Dakar:
You're telling me I don't have a valid point? Is this really that news worthy?

and "Kerry will win: The Redskins have foretold it" is?

[tie]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
and "Kerry will win: The Redskins have foretold it" is?

Equally dumb. Go find a make-believe WMD story and post it as EXCLUSIVE. Those are so much more fun. Where's spacefreak when you need him?

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by tie:
Equally dumb. Go find a make-believe WMD story and post it as EXCLUSIVE. Those are so much more fun. Where's spacefreak when you need him?

No, they're not "Equally dumb". One, the Redskins story, is a complete coincidence. The other, the handwriting analysis (aka. graphology), is a personality test based on subconscious mannerisms while writing.

Check out this article on Psychology Today:

http://cms.psychologytoday.com/artic...01-000021.html

It's much more valid than most people realize.

[Rolling Bones]

[Dakar]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
and "Kerry will win: The Redskins have foretold it" is?

No, it's not, but I think its rather obvious that its superstitious drivel. This, however, may be construed as based in 'fact' when all I really see I as being is a feel good thread. 'Pat yourself on the back, your candidate is better than the other because of meaningless reason x.'

Typoon has been posting anything anti-Kerry in a furious fashion of late, and that in itself wouldn't bother me (I won't pretend the left leaners don't post idiotic sh1t), but this definitely clears the Top 5 as far as worthlessness. I just feel his selection of topics has been entirely dominated by one thought (anti-Kerry) when many of them really lacked substance or any real interesting information.

I have to say I also find the grouse comment somewhat unfounded. I browse these forums everyday, have probably made less than 5 posts in the last two weeks, and you acuse me of complaining about anything. I think that's an unfair assessment. There's been loads of dumb threads. I haven't said a word about them.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
No, it's an interesting personality analysis regarding two people who are campaigning for the most powerful job in the world. It shows the potential negative and positive subconscious behaviors of each person. From my experience, I've seen that it's fairly accurate. I sent my handwriting off for analysis (sent to a 3rd party whom I have never met) and the analyst said that I'm arrogant, driven, and manipulative, yet intelligent, creative, and giving.

It's a good deal more scientific than "OMG!!1! TEH REDSKINZ WON SO KERRY WILL BE PREZIDENT!1!!"

I found your last sentence to be very humorous and to the point.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by Dakar:
No, it's not, but I think its rather obvious that its superstitious drivel. This, however, may be construed as based in 'fact' when all I really see I as being is a feel good thread. 'Pat yourself on the back, your candidate is better than the other because of meaningless reason x.'

Typoon has been posting anything anti-Kerry in a furious fashion of late, and that in itself wouldn't bother me (I won't pretend the left leaners don't post idiotic sh1t), but this definitely clears the Top 5 as far as worthlessness. I just feel his selection of topics has been entirely dominated by one thought (anti-Kerry) when many of them really lacked substance or any real interesting information.

I have to say I also find the grouse comment somewhat unfounded. I browse these forums everyday, have probably made less than 5 posts in the last two weeks, and you acuse me of complaining about anything. I think that's an unfair assessment. There's been loads of dumb threads. I haven't said a word about them.

http://www.craftygal.com/archives/201/porch201.htm

CG: Why do you suppose graphology isn't more widely respected and used?

AM: Probably the biggest reason is that there isn't a standardized curriculum or a recognized, accepted body of knowledge. The research that was done by very respectable scientists is getting old and hasn't been replicated. It "works"--people recognize when something is right, but don't know how the result was obtained, so put it down to intuition, occult, etc. Then there are those who read a book and think they can "do it" and create a circus show that discredits those who have studied and try to be professional. Many are reluctant to rely on something that has this tenuous acceptance and therefore its use is reduced. The people I've worked with have told me they found it to be very valuable and would use it again: employers, engaged couples, and individuals.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by Dakar:
No, it's not, but I think its rather obvious that its superstitious drivel. This, however, may be construed as based in 'fact' when all I really see I as being is a feel good thread. 'Pat yourself on the back, your candidate is better than the other because of meaningless reason x.'

Typoon has been posting anything anti-Kerry in a furious fashion of late, and that in itself wouldn't bother me (I won't pretend the left leaners don't post idiotic sh1t), but this definitely clears the Top 5 as far as worthlessness. I just feel his selection of topics has been entirely dominated by one thought (anti-Kerry) when many of them really lacked substance or any real interesting information.

I have to say I also find the grouse comment somewhat unfounded. I browse these forums everyday, have probably made less than 5 posts in the last two weeks, and you acuse me of complaining about anything. I think that's an unfair assessment. There's been loads of dumb threads. I haven't said a word about them.

13 posts since 10-15-04

"There's been loads of dumb threads. I haven't said a word about them. " Verified accurate from 10-15-04.

The dumb, irrelevent, 'worthless,' unpopular, unpopulated threads come and go. It's like okra. If you like it, dig in. If you don't, you just leave it alone and let others enjoy it's slimey 'goodness.'

Although I don't find this topic slimey at all. I think it's interesting.

[MindFad]

Originally posted by tie:
Equally dumb. Go find a make-believe WMD story and post it as EXCLUSIVE. Those are so much more fun. Where's spacefreak when you need him?

Yes, both equally dumb and should be in the lounge.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Dakar:
No, it's not, but I think its rather obvious that its superstitious drivel. This, however, may be construed as based in 'fact' when all I really see I as being is a feel good thread. 'Pat yourself on the back, your candidate is better than the other because of meaningless reason x.'

Typoon has been posting anything anti-Kerry in a furious fashion of late, and that in itself wouldn't bother me (I won't pretend the left leaners don't post idiotic sh1t), but this definitely clears the Top 5 as far as worthlessness. I just feel his selection of topics has been entirely dominated by one thought (anti-Kerry) when many of them really lacked substance or any real interesting information.

I have to say I also find the grouse comment somewhat unfounded. I browse these forums everyday, have probably made less than 5 posts in the last two weeks, and you acuse me of complaining about anything. I think that's an unfair assessment. There's been loads of dumb threads. I haven't said a word about them.

What you're failing to see, is that this topic IS relevant. You may not like it, but it does show that, psychologically speaking, Kerry's got some issues (and yes, the article says Bush does too).

As for Anti-Kerry bias, everyone in the Poli lounge is biased. If you don't care to read typoon's topics, don't. No one is forcing you to.

[Dakar]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
What you're failing to see, is that this topic IS relevant. You may not like it, but it does show that, psychologically speaking, Kerry's got some issues (and yes, the article says Bush does too).

I dunno. It basically comes off as generalizations made of each candidate already only 'based' on a science. I'm not particularly impressed by it.

Originally posted by MacNStein:
As for Anti-Kerry bias, everyone in the Poli lounge is biased.

Right, but there are people here who can show a modicum of objectivity, and there those who flat out refuse to.

Originally posted by MacNStein:
If you don't care to read typoon's topics, don't. No one is forcing you to.

For the most part you're right. However there are times his topics saturate the forum, and if I want to be distracted, I might as well gloss over 'em.

Anyway, I'm sure my 'issues' will be minimized once this election is over and done with. I won't hold my breath, of course.