Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : John Kerry for President? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (1602)	9/29/2004 3:29:04 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3515

"92-57-90". Inquiring minds want to know.

To: American Spirit who wrote (1602)	9/29/2004 7:10:12 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3515

A longer name wins. Of the 22 elections between 1876 and 1960, the candidate with more letters in his last name won the popular vote 20 times. Work it out: uselectionatlas.org In two cases, Tilden-Hayes in 1876 and Cleveland-Harrison in 1888, the winners of the popular vote lost in the electoral college. In 1916 Wilson and Hughes had the same number of letters in their names, so the voters obviously chose on the basis of the issues. The only time the longer-named candidate lost was in 1908, when Taft whomped Bryan. However, Taft weighed more than 300 pounds, and probably attracted votes by force of gravity alone. The situation has been somewhat muddied in the seven presidential elections since 1960, with only one victory for the long-named candidate, five defeats, and one case in which both candidates had names of equal length. This just shows you the difficulty of doing good science in the face of an uncooperative fact situation. As far as I'm concerned, the Longer Name Hypothesis remains at least as persuasive as the Longer Body Hypothesis.