Did you hear Crystal Ball's rant on the Cycle asking Hillary not to run?

[JDPriestly]

465. Your graph is the product of the subjective analysis of some academics.

It is worthless.

Have fun with it, but there are several problems with the graph that make it worthless as evidence of anything.

First, the graph is based on the opinions of the people who made it as to what views are liberal, what views are libertarian, conservative, populist, etc. The fact is that the very act of quantifying the range of opinions is subjective, inevitably very subjective. Ask two different people and they will give you two different valuations of specific opinions on issues. And what is more those valuations will change from time to time.

Second, with regard to the grouping, classifying and enumerating or ranking of those views or opinions on issues, public opinion is constantly changing. On issues like abortion are pretty stable, you can rank opinions by party to some extent. But even there, some Republicans are conservative about other things but don't really care about abortion. Right now, the rankings on economic issues, for example, are in flux. During Bill Clinton's presidency we liberals did not really think there was any problem with the fact that our president was in so tight with Greenspan and Robert Rubin. The overreaching and selfishness of Wall Street was not that big an issue. But now, and in part thanks to the consciousness-raising by Occupy Wall Street, the crimes and economic grabbing by the 1% is foremost in many liberals' minds. That chart does not take into account the newer issues that are now developing into election determinants.

Also, the chart is frozen in time. Politics is not. The chart is worthless. If you presented it in a court of law, your opposition would present an equally worthless chart. Each of you would present an expert witness. I doubt that a court would let a jury hear of such worthless "evidence." Sorry, but the chart is not scientific.

In fact, political science is the study of an ever changing reality. It tries to be science, but sorry I think political science is a misnomer. Political analysis would be more appropriate.