2008 Presidential Frontrunner?

Added on by PS Cat02.
cat_pinky.jpg

From a press release:

CLEVELAND, OH – In the political equivalent of a "blind taste test" taken by more than 67,000 participants, an independent website surveying public attitudes on various issues is reporting that Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is the first choice of a phenomenal 53% of respondents. No other candidate, Democrat or Republican, even reaches double digits.

The results

The issues

The website (http://www.dehp.net/candidate/) has been asking respondents to express and rank their opinions on 25 different issues – the war in Iraq, health care, the environment, Patriot Act, etc. — that have been raised and debated among the Presidential candidates in both parties. Those taking the survey vote only on the issues, not for or against any individual candidate. The 67,000-plus responses were then correlated with the positions of all of the candidates... As of this morning (the survey is recalculated every five minutes), more than 35,600 respondents were "in sync" with Kucinich on the issues. Democratic front-runner Senator Hillary Clinton was the first-place choice of only about 2,400 respondents (3.6%). Other leading candidates fared even worse: Senator Barack Obama (3%), and former Senator John Edwards (1.3%)

"When people vote exclusively on the issues that are important to them, without being influenced by name recognition, celebrity, or millions of dollars in advertising, Congressman Kucinich wins in a landslide," his campaign said today.

Well that's pretty interesting. I have an idea. Maybe after the election is over, we can compare the data showing Kucinich's pre-election landslide victory to the post-election data showing his landslide defeat. Then we'll have a better idea of exactly how much the American people value perception over reality.

~ pinky

.....comments.....

cat_bunny_mailbag.jpg

[ note from Bunny: That's not a fair statement, I don't think the American people want to value perception over reality. You make it sound like it's a preference, it's actually more like a bad habit. Here's a better idea: Let's take the pre- and post-election numbers for Kucinich and others, and then factor in 1) the amount of dollars spent by each campaign; and 2) the amount of effort/time each candidate is built up/torn down by the media. Do that and you'll have a nice picture of how much money & "reporting" is required to actually reverse public opinion.

cat_kim_mailbag.jpg

[ Kim: Why you guys being so negative? I'd vote for Kucinich. ]

cat_bunny_mailbag.jpg

[ Bunny: If cats could vote then maybe he'd win. CATS NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE. ]

cat_pinky.jpg

[ Pinky: Okay, maybe the tone of my comment at the end did sound negative. But I don't want to underestimate the power of money and media. If we like Mr. Kucinich or someone similar, crossing our fingers (if we had fingers) and voting for him is not going to make any difference in the outcome of the elections. ]

cat_bunny_mailbag.jpg

[ Bunny: CATS CAN'T VOTE. ]

cat_kim_mailbag.jpg

[ Kim: I meant "if I could vote". ]

cat_bunny_mailbag.jpg

[ Bunny: Cats = No Votes ]

cat_kim_mailbag.jpg

[ Kim: Okay already I HEARD YOU THE FIRST TIME!!! ]