Comments

View comments:
1. 1 Marie Nicholas says:
   May 15th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

   I have studied and taught graphology for years (Société Française de Graphologie, Groupement des Graphologues Conseil de France), and used it in career advising as well as in helping with psychopathlogical cases. According to the little bits of handwritings I saw, this is what I would say, though I would need to see the original handwritings, not prints of them :

   True, Obama’s handwriting is fluid, and shows him as essentially adaptable and versatile. He communicates very well, knows how to make others around him feel at ease with themselves and consequently with him, and doesn’t get entangled into difficult situations. He is clever, brilliant sometimes, good at promoting his self-image, good at making contacts, particularly useful ones, good at avoiding difficult questions, and difficult issues. Good also at changing views according to circumstances. A bit shallow, smooth, maybe sleek. … He could be considered manipulative inasmuch as he resorts to charm rather than depth of argumentation to win people, though in the mean time, he will appear, and be, natural if not genuine. He is open to new ideas, he seeks his comfort and pleasure. He enjoys being the center of attention, but in an almost laidback manner rather than in a forceful way. He is sensitive to others, perceptive enough to understand what they secretly feel, but not enough concerned to worry much about it. According to me, the big question is : of whom will surround him and do the hard job, depends the success of his presidency. He’ll be the communicator, maybe the conductor, but the people working for him mustn’t expect him to be a bad weather friend, and he will not involve himself in difficult cmmitments. He is ambitious.

   Hillary Clinton is quite different. A bit stiff, not very open to new ideas, rather tense, and not an excellent communicator, but firm, and in charge, with a good sense of reponsibility. She is autonomous. She is precise and she is thorough. She has a strong will and a strong sense of commitment. She is tough, but self-reliant and reliable. She doesn’t seek her pleasure, she isn’t an easy going person, she has strong attachments and strong resentments. She doesn’t let other people influence her, to the point of being stubborn. She can endure a lot, if necessary. She hates being dependant on others. She doesn’t avoid stress. She is a worrying type anyway, and is used to it. She has depth and character. She tries not to be overwhelmed by her feelings, which are deep and sometimes tdisturbingly so, she wants reason to govern her. She may look cold. She doesn’t want to let things happen randomly : she wants to hold her destiny in hands, and not only hers.

   As to the third one, I have only seen his signature. It left me with a feeling of strength, strong will, decision, self- assertion, discipline, narrowness, and fighting spirit, in a very tense way. Down to earth, but lack of understanding or capacity to anticipate (see ahead) - which I think both other candidates are better at. True to his standards, at the expense of adaptability and capacity to change his views when necessary. Hard. Devoted to his people, with a clannish way of thinking. He would be the controlling type.

   In view of the handwritings only, Hillary Clinton would be my best choice for a good president.

   Those are just a few impressions, based on documents which would have to be compared to others, to make sure they really are significant.

View comments: