Guess who

From the Dallas Morning News. Clinton and Bush word clouds also available.
Original numbers from Quinnipiac survey of 1,500 people. Simplified breakdown on Business Insider.

19 thoughts on “Guess who

  1. another case where the ‘like’ button is not really appropriate. Is it too much to expect more than this from a person who is running to represent the entire country, not only to us citizens more to the world. And not only expect more thoughtfulness, less hate and foolishness.

  2. I loved all of these. What a great use of graphics – really shows what people think and how intensely. (Of course the researcher in me would love to see an even broader cohort and then break it down by age groups, geographical location, rural vs urban centers…playing with all the possibilities would be such fun…and then post all the versions about all the candidates . Marketing/campaign strategists would have a field day.)
    The circus does offer some amusement after all.

    1. Like you I was disappointed they only covered three candidates. Would like to have seen some of the others, but I suppose that would have tested the patience (and cooperation) of the people offering their opinions. I’d love to see the breakdowns you mention, particularly gender, party, and age.

      I’m glad someone else made the word clouds because I thought about doing it myself if I’d had to … and it would have been a lot of work (something I’m really not up for right now).

      For the record, “buffoon” is the one I always opt for.

      1. Ya’ think Perry’s would be a duplicate? If it isn’t, the only reason is because Trump is taking all the attention.
        Would like to see some real debates…there are probably instructions in books if the parties/candidate/hosting stations need to review them. Tired and irritated at those staged performances they are calling debates. People are annoyed at the power brokers/political parties/media selecting the presidents…and suspecting the whole process is a sham in this era.

        1. I can’t remember the last time the “debates” were true debates. Were they ever? At least we didn’t have the media moguls deciding which candidates were worthy of air time and which weren’t. Anything less than all the candidates is grossly unfair to some of the candidates and to the voting public. If there are an unmanageable number of candidates and some don’t get much time, that’s the fault of the candidates and their parties. It’s the networks’ responsibility to give all the candidates equal time. Or used to be. I resent the hell out of the networks deciding which candidates I get to see. And throw in all the other media outlets that seem to think Trump is the only candidate worth covering.

          1. All so true.
            You know how the media is: looking for train wrecks, blood, guts, gore, and controversy. Media has long forgotten it’s function of informing with facts and letting viewers make up their minds themselves.

... and that's my two cents