I say that with snark and exasperation. There is nothing quite so cringe-inducing as a well-respected media outlet reducing the presidential election to a case of high school yearbook superlatives. Gosh, who do you think will win "Most Fun" or "Most Likely To Succeed"?
Forbes: For a decade, one California organization has been quietly matching celebrity endorsers to the products they might be pitching. On the basis of 46 different traits, E-Poll Market Research has developed a profile of [..]everything from intelligence and aggressiveness to beauty or sex appeal, even how "kooky-wacky" they might be.[..]
Now, in a collaboration between Forbes.com and E-Poll, these same traits are being used to assess the Democratic and Republican candidates for president. The Forbes '08 Tracker is the result.
Individually, the results are often surprising, amusing, at times even shocking. But taken together, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that they are astonishingly, even frighteningly, accurate portraits of the men and one woman who would lead the U.S., and indeed the free world, for the four years beginning in January 2009.
Wouldn't it be amazing to have an article talk about "Most Competent" or "Best Grasp of the Facts" or "Most Committed to Peace and Prosperity for All Citizens"? The one thing that does jump out at me is that if Giuliani is still polling as most trustworthy, then we need to do a much better job of reminding everyone of how he was perceived before 9/11.
