Haha - Compare BUSH's and KERRY's Signatures - Amusing

[liberalpragmatist]

Bush: Barely legible. An unintelligible scrawl which appears to spell not "GWB" or "GWBush" but "GWBe." I guess he can't spell. This is worse than Quayle; at least Quayle could spell his own name.

> http://www.opm.gov/hrmc/2001/msg-113a.htm (scroll down)



Kerry: Very beautiful. Neat, distinguished, very legible. Quite anachronistic actually, but in a good way. Nicely proportioned loops and even slant throughout. Excellent.

> http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/responsibility.php (scroll down)



NOTE: Yes, this is infantile and something I probably wouldn't point out in real life b/c I want to be taken seriously as a rational, reasonable person. But this is DU - a forum for all progressives united in their hatred of Bush! That's what this is for: infantile, immature spewing!

[scottcsmith]

1. Something missing from the Bush proclamation:

"Oh, and by the way, Federal Employees, kiss your overtime goodbye!"

[El Supremo]

2. Sigs

Yeah, Bush's looks infantile to me, but Kerry's looks real anal.

[Jane Austin]

20. Here's my analysis:

Bush's signature is ugly.

Kerry's is beautiful.

[hippiechick]

21. Exactly.

Kerry's belies an individual who is very set in their ways, inflexible, 'stays the line', and is very closed-off.

Shrub's sig is, well .... a mess.

:hippie:

[LiberalFighter]

33. Do you mean scatter-brain?

[DAGDA56]

3. Maybe it's the similarity of the names...

but Kerry's reminded me of John F. Kennedy's signature...I don't have an example immediately available, but I'm sure someone does. As for GWB...maybe he should try one of those silver liquid-gel pens on black paper...or crayon.

[liberalpragmatist]

5. Here's Kennedy's

Here's the full page: http://www.jfklink.com/speeches/jfk/publicpapers/1962/jfk_foreword_papers1962.html

[mobuto]

6. Bush's seems a lot more like Kennedy's actually

but that means absolutely nothing since graphology makes phrenology and creationism seem like worthwhile scientific pursuits.

[DAGDA56]

7. As long as you believe...

...God created the bumps on your head...

[jobycom]

4. Bush seems to have trouble spelling his middle initial. nt

[DAGDA56]

8. I swear if I didn't know what it was supposed to be...

...at first glance it looks like "Buzzy Bee"to me...

[Crunchy Frog]

9. Bush's looks infantile

and rather disturbed, as well as just plain illegible. Frankly, it's kind of scary looking. Kerry's looks really mature, responsible and presidential.

And no, I don't find doing a signature comparison to be an infantile exercise, although that may simply mean that I'm infantile myself and therefore don't see it.:P

[Tactical Progressive]

10. Oh geez, let's get this over with

Bush's signature looks like it's from someone who would cut Social Security for the elderly, and lie to start a war. It's so nasty, like someone signing away my mortgage in a foreclosure.

Kerry's looks like someone who would reinvigorate the economy with fair and decent progressive tax policy. Just reading the long, elegant first letters makes me feel warm and safe.

[Hav]

11. Who is trjni 3e?

Someone mentioned his middle initial. Where is it?
Anyway..he can't even write his name...seriously, where can you read George or Bush? Or does he not only write from left to right but also from the top to bottom?

[MoonRiver]

12. Anybody out there who can analyze handwriting?

It's a fascinating and very accurate way to understand people.

[Mika]

13. Classic sign of dyslexia..

.. Unintelligible handwriting.

[mobuto]

15. Not fair

I have unintelligble handwriting and I'm not dyslexic.

[citizen snips]

14. It looks like a 3e.

n/t

[roguevalley]

16. Bush has indifferent handwriting, arrogant. He also reflects a total

egocentric view of himself as important without
having to put out effort.

Kerry on the other hand has nice work but its very
small, very tight and very buttoned down. He's sort
of reflecting his uptight (as in reserved personality)
in his writing.

Bush-retard
Kerry-reflective

Bush-arrogant and unconcerned with others
Kerry-measured, cautious and aware of effect on others

[MoonRiver]

17. Welp, that does it,

I'm now firmly in the Kerry camp! No more arrogant, dyslexic, small minded, rightwing dick heads for moi! :D :kick:

[Dr Fate]

24. "Zul 3e" that settles it- Bush really is a Science Fiction Villian!!

!!

[TheDonkey]

18. Anyone here do handwriting analysis?

I know my sister does she can look into this but you can find out a lot from a person by their signature.

Kerry's is good, a bit decorative might mean egotism but I'm not sure, it is legible which means he's "open" which is good for a president ! Not like the other dumbass.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

19. My mother was a professional handwriting analyst

Though first and foremost a registered nurse, she taught handwriting analysis and was secretary of the American Association of Handwriting Analysts for quite a few years, and along the way she taught me a number of things about it.

As a method for gaining insight into personality, handwriting analysis is considered by its practitioners to have more credibility than, say, astrology, because handwriting comes from within the individual and requires a mind-body connection. Handwriting analysis is used by a number of employers as a way of determining whether an individual is suited for positions requiring leadership, attention to detail and other traits. It is more widely accepted in other countries than in the U.S., e.g., German universities offer degrees in graphology.

I don't wish to defend handwriting analysis or debate its credibility here. All I will do is share my limited, non-expert knowledge of it and apply it to the handwriting samples in the OP, and readers are welcome to take it or leave it, makes no difference to me. Any pros are welcome to correct my impressions.

There are several widely-used methods for analyzing handwriting. The best-known is the trait-stroke method, in which specific letter formations are believed to reflect specific traits. Other aspects of a writing sample are analyzed as well: the slant of the writing; its size; the spacing between letters, words and lines; the variations of size between upper zone (ascenders), middle zone and lower zone (descenders); and the amount of pressure used in writing the sample.

Trait-stroke analysis has its flaws and limitations, but it's the easiest to learn and apply, so that's what I'll attempt to use here. BTW. a pro would refuse to analyze such limited samples, especially copied ones like the samples here that offer no clue as to their original size. Signature analysis provides very little insight when it is not measured against a longer written sample because signatures often differ from "regular" writing, and those differences themselves provide a lot of information.

Final disclaimer: I am not a professional, and these are not great samples.

BUSH: A signature's legibility or lack thereof doesn't disclose much about personality, especially when the writer is very well-known. Famous people often develop a fast, stylized signature for ease in giving autographs.

The most striking aspect that I observe in Bush's signature is the size of the "g" descender. Basically, the upper zone of writing expresses intellectual and creative traits; middle zone expresses practicality, realism and a kind of "living in the here and now"; and lower zone expresses physicality, passion, aggression and acquisition. "How much do you want it?" is what the lower zone tells about the writer, and Bush not only wants a great deal but is accomplished in getting it and places nothing in the way of achieving his goals. The size of that loop in comparison with the rest of the sample also speaks to a fair degree of selfishness.

There are no breaks between letters in the words. Breaks are reflective and intuitive, a kind of stopping to think. Bush does not tend towards reflection. He believes, and he acts. He is very dynamic and outgoing - good traits if one is pointed in the right direction.

I find it interesting that "George" is pretty legible but the last name is barely indentifiable as "Bush". But I don't know what that means.

I also wish I knew what is indicated by the capital B which appears to be a 3. It is an unwholesome-looking formation, and it doesn't match the outgoing slant of the rest of the sample. It may very well reflect a health or mental problem but I can't say for sure. Likewise, the upper loop of the H in Bush (which looks like a large lowercase E) is troubling. The upper zone reflects intellectual and creative expression. The H ascender literally looks like he hits his intellectual limit and then retreats into the zone where he's comfortable. But then, intellectualism is not his style. He lives in the acquisition zone.

No surprises so far, eh?

KERRY: The first thing I notice in his signature is the enormous size of the capital letters in relation to the rest of the words. This is an expression of egotism. The big upper loop of the J that is not balanced by a lower loop is also an indication of ego, and pride.

The emphasis in Kerry's signature is upper zone, which speaks to intellect and creativity. He is a very sharp thinker, but may tend towards a certain impracticality. His middle, "active" zone is very small, reserved though sharp and discerning. There are intuitive breaks between almost every letter, a bit too much of a good thing. He thinks, he questions, he reflects. It isn't that he hesitates but that he sees more than one side to any issue. Meanwhile, Bush believes, and charges ahead.

The lower descenders are long lines with no loops, the opposite of selfishness but can also indicate a lack of desire. The slant of the writing indicates he is fairly outgoing.

In general Kerry's sample indicates more intellect than action. How much does he want it? One thing Kerry has is tenacity, expressed in the huge hook on the K in his last name. He will dig in and he will not let go.

On the strength of these samples I would say Bush is driven by greed and Kerry is driven by pride, two very different but equally motivating traits. A professional would never summarize it this way, but then I'm not a pro.

In conclusion: If you think handwriting analysis is on a par with tea leaf reading, I have no argument with you. My only intention was to share as much as I can see in these samples, and I would love to hear what any pros out there think about them.


Edit: typos

[mobuto]

22. I'm really thankful that graphology never caught on in the US

Because if it did, I'd never be eligible for any job, anywhere.

Whether or not that's a good thing, I'll leave up to my present employer.

[Lisa]

28. some Bush handwriting samples

http://www.handwriting.org/main/samples/gwbush.htm
http://www.lewrockwell.com/wallace/wallace123.html
http://baltimorechronicle.com/media_handwriting_sep02.shtml

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

36. That 3rd link is the most interesting

As the reporter points out, the three samples provided vary significantly from one another and there's no way of knowing if any or all of them were generated by Bush. The last sample is so unlike the other two that I believe Bush didn't write it but only signed it.

[Spirochete]

23. Bush could forge prescriptions

for his niece.

[Zynx]

25. With all due respect, this is a BS way of analysis.

The president with the neatest signature by far was James Buchanan. One of the many books I have on US Presidents shows their signatures and James Buchanan had the neatest signature with absolutely flawless penmanship. Bill Clinton had one that was of the same type as Bush's just for reference. If I can get my hands on a scanner, I'll show you.

[jason_au]

26. Here's Bill Clinton's signature

Not sure what to make of that - it seems to be more legible than Bush*'s signature, but then again Clinton was literate.

Though my personal signature is pretty illegible - about 4 recognizable letters from my 10-letter Swiss surname.. so go figure.

Cheers,

Jason

(Edited to fix HTML stuff-up, and a typo)

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

34. Since your link couldn't be loaded, I Googled Bill's writing

and found several professional analyses available online.

The first comes from a company that bills itself as the largest graphological center in the world. Since their goal is providing information for client use, their analysis summarizes rather than dissects the sample.

http://www.annakoren.com/report-new.html

The next link leads to two analyses provided on an .org site that represents a number of graphology-related organizations. These use more analytical lingo to support their premises. They also contain editorializing that reflects the prejudices of the analysts.

http://www.handwriting.org/archives/98sep_01.html

[Gore1FL]

27. Mine is more like shrubbies

I have 19 letters in my name including the middle initial. You can make out the J at the begining if you look carefully... past that is a line, ending in a swoop that presumeably is a p.

My agent told me that was a sign of confidence. I always thought it a sign of poor manual dexterity.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

31. As I understand it, a streamlined signature like you describe

can indicate tact and diplomacy, as well as a certain degree of intellectual sophistication.

When my mother first started studying handwriting, Nixon was in office. I showed her his signature, which threads out into straight lines, and said something like "That must mean he's secretive - he's hiding something, he's dishonest." She said that while Nixon was all those things, they weren't expressed in the threading of his signature. I remember how surprised I was; I didn't want any good traits ascribed to the crude, rude Dickster.

BTW, the more one's writing deviates from the careful Palmer Method taught in school, the more intellectual growth it reflects. People who retain perfect Palmer writing into maturity are much more conventional and less questioning of authority. They believe what they were taught as children, and that's reflected in the lack of development in their writing. (For grins I would send Mom greeting cards signed in exaggerated Palmer style complete with circle dots over the i's - normal in adolescents, scary in adults - just to get under her skin. :D)

[JohnLocke]

29. Here's Nader's.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

38. I would rather someone analyze Ralph

who doesn't feel strong antipathy towards him. I see originality, intellect, tenacity, and a fair amount of altruism, but also egotism, inconsistency, and disconnects in his thought processes. And that is one of the weirdest "p" formations I've ever seen.

No sir, I don't like it.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

30. Kerry's signature is very John Hancock-like.

[bushiehater]

32. How productive is it...

to be comparing signatures? How about comparing stances on important issues like the economy and the war? Next thing I know, we will be comparing their eyebrows and manly areas. Sheesh!

[elperromagico]

35. If you check the majority of this message board,

you will find we compare Bush and Kerry on the issues quite frequently.

Allow us, if you will, this momentary diversion. :)

[elperromagico]

37. Other Presidential Signatures:

Herbert Hoover:


Franklin Roosevelt:


Lyndon Johnson:


Richard Nixon: