Beyond Opinion

Yet another primary day. It is now 2008 February 19 21:08. I did some spreadsheet analysis and found:

Obama 54.9
Clinton 43.0
Uncommitted 1.6

McCain 51.3
Huckabee 35.4
Paul 6.3
Romney 2.3
Uncommitted 2.6

CNN has called this one for McCain, and although they say that Obama is ahead, they will not call it one way or the other. Further, they don't give any poll figures on TV and give a complete set of zeroes on the Web. But my spreadsheet analysis of their exit polls has helped me get the result. The biggest problem is a large number of N/As in their exit polls, in some categories with 9-12% of the vote, everything is N/A. Maybe they don't have the results or maybe they are withholding it to thwart spreadsheet analyzers.

But it's in. Obama has won another one. I think it is going to be hard for Clinton to catch up.

Kidspot has done it again. This time is a puzzle (2008 February 15) with an error and some questionable entries. This is the exercise:

One word in each group of four things doesn't belong. Can you spot the odd one?

1. Carrots, beets, onions, plums.
2. Linx, manx, mink, Siamese.
3. Porpoise, shark, tuna, salmon.
4. Bluebird, cowbird, ladybird, hummingbird

Answer:
1. Plums aren't vegetables,
2. Mink is not a cat,
3. Porpoise is not a fish,
4. Ladybird is a beetle.

The first one is OK. Plums are a fruit. But what about the second one? The answer given is "mink", as it is not a cat. However, the answer could very well be "linx", as that is the only entry that is misspelled because it has a wrong letter in it. It should be "lynx". The answer could very well be "manx" because that one is the only one with a case error. It should be "Manx" with a capital, because it refers to a proper place, namely an island near the British Isles called Man. And the answer could be "Siamese", because that's the only one of the four that does not have something wrong or different about it. Two misspellings have completely ruined this question.

The third one's answer is given to be "porpoise" because that is not a fish; it is a mammal. But the reason could also be that sharks, tuna, and salmon as food are common, but porpoises are much less common as food.

The last one reveals the origin of "Kidspot". It does not originate in the United States or Canada. "Ladybird" is given to be a beetle; however, I have always known this insect to be a "ladybug". A look at Wikipedia reveals that "ladybird" is a British (also South African and Australian) term for the insect, while "ladybug" is the North American term. Kidspot appeared this morning in a Richmond, Virginia newspaper, in the United States, so I am wondering how the British English got into the cartoon. Know your audience.

The most serious problem is with Number 2, however. The creators of Kidspot need to proofread their material before submitting it.

9:45 pm update. Obama and McCain have won Maryland. Votes were delayed because a judge ordered Maryland polls open until 9:30 pm because of the ice storm in Maryland. Here are the vote totals:

Democratic
Obama 60.8%
Clinton 35.0%
Uncommitted 1.9%

Republican
Huckabee 27.7%
McCain 52.8%
Paul 7.4%
Romney 6.6%

Unfortunately, no news organizations took exit polls in the District of Columbia. However, I notice that CNN just now has called DC for Obama and McCain as well. It looks like Obama and McCain. Certainly McCain will make it, and the way he is winning, he will take Lichtman Key 2 as well. Obama has just taken a slender delegate lead over Clinton; he leads by a big margin in pledged or "elected" or "Clark Kent" delegates, but Clinton leads among superdelegates. If Obama keeps winning, he will take the Democratic nomination and probably the White House as well, but if Clinton wins in big states, it still won't be decided until the convention. This will not hurt the Democratic candidate's chances for reelection, however.

The Computer Call game is over. Mike Huckabee's made a harassing barrage yesterday and that was the call game. The Huckabee campaign put a whopping total of 8 computer calls on my phone; I call that computer call harassment. McCain tried to do the same thing but was not quite as successful: 5 computer calls. The last one came at 6:30 tonight just before the polls closed! What was he thinking he was trying to do? In any case, this gives a good reason not to vote Republican in November's election, especially since the total number of times the Democratic candidates Obama and Clinton put computer calls on my phone is zero.

Once again it's primary day, this time in my home state. It is now 7:13 pm. CNN has called Obama the victor in Virginia. He won by a huge margin:

Obama 59.9%
Clinton 37.8%

according to my spreadsheet analysis of exit polls. CNN says it is "competitive" for Republicans between Huckabee and McCain. The figures from my spreadsheet analysis suggest a McCain win:

McCain 44.9%
Huckabee 40.1%
Paul 4.8%
Romney (withdrawn) 4.3%

He does not win by much, but since Virginia is winner-take-all, he picks up 60 delegates.

Update 2008 February 9 2316. I went to a dinner tonight (no, it wasn't the Jefferson Jackson dinner! But I watched it on TV. Great speech, Barack!) and when I got back, I found that the Huckabee camp had put three phone calls on my phone, including a message that was an automated recording. I have never seen so much computer bombing from any one candidate than from Huckabee for the Virginia primary coming up. This Computer Monger must be stopped! I urge you to call the Huckabee camp and tell them what you think of his computer calls. You can call them at 732-460-1435 or 501-324-2008. As far as which candidate I prefer, I still say vote Huckabee if you are going to vote in the Republican primary. It is more important that McCain (or any Republican) be thrown off in the primary than that any single candidate should be stopped from making phone calls. But if this Huckabee bombardment gets too intense, vote for Ron Paul instead. I am not going to do any of these, but will instead vote in the Democratic primary for Obama.

In my last blog I complained about Bomb Bomb McCain throwing computer calls on my phone. He threw two such calls in my face the past two days. My previous blog documents these calls and I recommended at that time that Republicans and perhaps others call that number to complain and to vote for Huckabee in protest.

Well now I may have to retract that. The score is now tied, 2-2. Huckabee threw two calls on my telephone today. One was a survey. I answered the survey, and when asked if I were to vote in the Republican primary, who would I vote for, I told them Huckabee. However, the computer caller, who would like to drill offshore and cause oil spills that would recognize speech (i.e., wreck a nice beach), gave me no chance to say that the reason I would vote for Huckabee was to screw up McCain and the Republicans in general and help Obama get elected President. I then got another call inviting me to a Huckabee event, and I also got a phone number: 501-324-2008. I called that number and complained, and the woman there apologized. I urge you to call that number and likewise complain, and perhaps go to the event with a sign reading "Keep your Computers Off My Phone".

It is interesting that the Republicans are generating all the computer calls. You would think they would be settled with Bomb Bomb having such a lead. So far, neither of the two Democratic frontrunners, Clinton or Obama, has thrown a computer call at me, although I heard that Clinton was making computer calls. That leaves Obama as the only one who hasn't done this. Yet another reason for voting for him.

So vote for Obama, and I hope that McCain and Huckabee leave my phones alone.

By the way, Hillary Clinton has released an ad showing the economy in free fall. But it may be Hillary that is in free fall (or Dubya Bush). Go to this Free Fall Site.

Don't Vote for McCain! There are many reasons for this, such as his stand on Roe vs Wade, his views on religion in public, and especially his foreign policy attitudes, which include Bomb Bomb Iran. But now we have another reason for not voting for Bomb Bomb McCain. He's a computer caller.

Two days ago I got a call from his camp saying to vote for him next Tuesday in the Virginia Primary. He gave a number to call, but the problem is that you can't repeat the message. I remembered pieces of it, and by Google got that it was 703-650-5646. I called that number to complain about the call. I urge you to do the same thing and complain about the McCain camp assaulting our telephones.

Today I got another call. This time it is about a rally for him at 5:30 pm on 2008 February 11 at the Aviation Museum at 5701 Huntsman Road near Richmond's airport. It urged me to go to it, and asked me to press "1" if I wanted to attend. It offered no other responses. I am not going to attend this event, and further, I urge you not to attend it either, other than to walk outside it with placards saying "Don't Bomb Iran", "Get the Troops Out", or especially "Keep Your Computers Off My Phone!".

I am going to vote instead for Obama in the Democratic primary. These calls, however, tempt me to want to vote for Huckabee in the Republican primary; however, Huckabee stands for a lot of nonsense that I don't want to see in a President, such as a non-belief in evolution. A Huckabee surge would be good now, just to mess up the Republican race and force Bomb-Bomb McComputer Call Cain to work for his nomination.

I said yesterday that it is especially important that Romney stay in the race. Now he's done it. He quit. That may cause Lichtman Key 2 to stand. The key reads: "There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination.", and Lichtman defines "serious" as that the nominee gets 2/3 of the delegates at the convention. As of today the delegate count is

McCain 714
Romney 286
Huckabee 181
Paul 16

McCain has more than Romney and Huckabee combined but not more than 2/3 that. He has 60% of the delegates. If things were to continue like this, McCain would win with less than 2/3 of the delegates, and Key 2 would fall. However, with Romney quitting, his delegates will split somehow between the candidates. If they split equally, the result is:

McCain 857
Huckabee 412
Paul 16

Assuming Paul does not get any Romney delegates. This gives McCain 72% of the delegates, more than enough to clinch Key 2. At what percentage of the Romney vote going to Huckabee would be needed to topple the key? Go to Hilbert's Hotel, my mathematical blog, to find out. It's a nice algebra problem, and it shows that algebra can be useful in real life. The result is 72%, or 202 delegates. In other words, 202 of Romney's 286 delegates would have to go to Huckabee to topple Key 2. Any less, and Key 2 is likely to stand.

I am not sure where his support is going to go, and I certainly hope he doesn't support McCain! Support Huckabee, Romney. If 72% of Romney's delegates go to Romney, it would indicate that the UltraConservatives of the Republican Party object so much to McCain that they are willing to make a knockdown dragout ding-dong fight out of it, and that indicates Key 2 falling.

But if any sizable proportion of the Romney vote goes to McCain, Key 2 would stand, vindicating my claim earlier that eventually one candidate would run away with it. Sure enough it seems to have. Now let's hope that the other keys down mean an Obama victory in November.

Super Tuesday is now over. All those 24 or so states that vote in a ballotstorm on this one day in February, which is exactly 1/4 of the way from one Election Day to the Next. So now what's left? John McCain will win the Republican nomination, but it is not clear whether he will do so with a 2/3 mandate that is needed to hold on to Lichtman Key 2. Delegates are a virtual tie between Obama and Clinton, 838-834 in favor of Obama. So now the remaining states decide the nominations.

One of these is Virginia, my home state. That primary is next week, and people will be looking to see what the trends are from Virginia, DC, and Maryland, the primary states of 2008 February 12. So I know what I can expect, now. An assault of calls of all sorts from the political camps. I have complained in the past about computer calling, and if such calling occurs for a candidate, it will indicate insincerity on the part of that candidate. I prefer a person-to-person call, and I prefer calls that call for me to vote for such and such over those that call for money.

So far today, I have received two calls. One was from the Democratic Committee. It wanted me to contribute to a fund to elect Democratic candidates. Well maybe there are Democrats I don't want to see elected, and indeed Hillary Clinton is one of those Democrats. And I don't want to contribute money, since the cases of Romney and Huckabee show that money does not mean that much. But yet this phonehound kept haranging me and asking me to contribute something, and I told him that if he kept doing that, I might vote Republican. Then he hung up.

The second was from the campaign of John McCain. It was a computerized call. If you already had not found that Bomb Bomb McCain is not the best of candidates, this will clinch it. It itemized all the things that McCain would do as President; however, these things want me to vote against him instead. It concluded with a telephone number that went by so quickly that I could not record any ofit. That is one problem with these computer calls. You can't call back or even repeat the message. Fortunately I was able to find the full number on Google and find someone else who had gotten the same call. (Note that I had to get a Google cached copy, since the original site griped about my not having an account.) The number is 703-650-5646. If you get a call like this, call this number and leave a message. Maybe leave two or three messages. These candidates have to learn that this technique is not acceptable.

I wonder how many calls like this I will get between now and February 12.

Lichtman's Keys say that the Democrats will win. But who will be the Democratic candidate? Clinton has a slight lead, but I see problems with her. She is autocratic and ambitious. She supported the war to begin with and then turned against it, whereas Obama opposed it from the beginning. She has flip-flopped on a number of issues. She has been insincere about several things, including where she lives (in New York? That was only to be Senator from that state). And fiannly if she gets nominated, who'd want to be her running mate? Hillary already has her own running mate. Bill Clinton. To me, if Clinton is elected, she could turn into a second Nero President, like Dubya Bush.

Obama has the attributes of a Crisis President. He is calling for change. The only problem, says Jim Kunstler, is that there could be more change than he bargained for. He is also a unifier. He says that race, red or blue, sexual orientation, and so forth don't matter. We are all one people, one nation, or even one world. He reminds me of John Smith when he sings "Don't Put Me in a Box". He has a slogan that is catching on with people, namely "Yes We Can", or "Sí Se Puede" en español. He has good plans for health care, the economy and defense. His main weakness, which all candidates share, is a lack of awareness of Peak Oil. He is charismatic, and he reminds me of several past Presidents, such as Reagan, Kennedy, both Roosevelts, and especially Lincoln.

So what can we do to help elect him? If he gets nominated, he will be elected, because that is what the Keys say. Will contributing money help him get nominated? No. You need some money to make a national presence, but Obama has done that and more. Romney has spent huge amounts of money but he still is far behind, and is thinking of quitting. Huckabee spent hardly anything, but he is challenging McCain and preventing him from wrapping it up. Volunteer and spend some time? Maybe, but I don't want to be, or do I want to be pressured to be, one of these campaign phone people who won't take no for an answer (I got one of these this morning from the Democratic Party).

I think the best way is to tell all of your friends to vote for Obama in the primary coming up. I am doing it here in this blog: Vote for Obama. It is especially important to tell people that there is a primary coming up, so they are aware of this. Then tell them why you feel Obama is the best candidate. And I hope he does catch up and win the nomination, for the nation, and indeed the world, needs someone like him for our Crisis Leader.

And if you are a staunch Republican, or Obama is way ahead or hopelessly behind in your state, and you want to vote in the Republican primary, vote for Huckabee or Romney. That's a good way to screw the Republicans up and deny them Key 2. It is especially important to keep Romney in the race. So if you are with Republican friends, push the case for Romney.

Super Tuesday has come and gone. There were some surprises. Huckabee did unusually well, taking five southeastern states. McCain took New York, New Jersey, and California, and that's a lot of big states. He now has the lead, and I predict that he will win the Republican nomination. The real question is whether he can hold onto Lichtman Key 2. That key states "There is no serious contest for the Republican party nomination." This begs the question: What is a serious contest? The answer is anything that amounts to 1/3 of the vote against the nominee. In other words, the nominee must win on the first ballot, and must take at least 2/3 of the vote to secure Key 2. If all the opposition together adds to more than 1/3, Key 2 falls. Delegate vote totals vary widely, but I am getting something like McCain 559, Romney 265, Huckabee 169, and Paul 16 (CNN). The opposition has 450 delegates, and double that exceeds by a huge margin McCain's 559 delegates. It therefore looks like Key 2 will fall. But that isn't certain. What if Romney drops out? His support will scatter among the other candidates, and that may push McCain's total above 2/3. So this key fall is not certain. I had earlier predicted this key would stand, as I had predicted that a single candidate will run away with it. That looks like McCain. But I would now put Key 2 in jeopardy.

The Democrats did not decide anything, either. Obama's late-night Missouri victory may be an indicator of what's to come. It's the bellwether state. (Talk about bell weather. They had some real ding-dong weather last night in the South, and that may have affected returns in Arkansas and Tennessee.) Obama won more states, but Clinton won the big states. It seems to me that Obama wins the "red" states and Clinton wins the "blue" states, although Obama says there are no such things as these types of states. The exceptions to this are Illinois (Obama is a Senator from this state), Connecticut, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Arizona. Clinton has a slight lead in delegates. This may not seem worrisome, but it is like a chess game in which one side is a pawn ahead. By the end of the game, that player could have two Queens. Obama must win more if he is to catch up with Clinton and win the nomination. Virginia will be an interesting state to watch - and that is my state.

How about my exit-poll prediction system? For the most part, it worked. It correctly predicted Huckabee in Georgia as early as 7:15; the networks did not call it until near midnight. It predicted Obama in Alabama and Georgia, and in most of the rocky mountain and plains states. Where it went wrong was with Massachusetts, where it indicated a close race. Instead, Clinton easily won it. It predicted a close race for the Republicans in California, and instead, McCain won it easily. It predicted Clinton for Missouri by 4 points, and suggested that votes for uncommitted and Edwards took the state from Obama. Not so. Obama just barely won the state early this morning. Why did the exit-poll method fail in these instances? Because it calculates the overall exit-poll vote for the candidates. This compares with exit polls predicting candidates for the November elections, and remember what happened with Florida in 2000. For Gore? Well, no there is a problem. And then for Bush? The method isn't perfect. But it has a better record than polls, certainly.

11 pm update. The Big One, California, has come in. CNN says it is competitive in both parties. However, the exit polls say that Clinton has won California by 50-44, with 4% going to Edwards. The Republican race is not going to be settled until the end of the week, and there may be recounts, especially if it is winner-takes-all. Right now, it is McCain 37.6%, Romney 36.8%, Huckabee 11%, Giuliani 5%, and Paul 6%. I am now hearing that California has a complicated formula and is not winner-take-all. So it might not matter anyhow. California is a tie, and both McCain and Romney will pull about the same number of delegates from it.

That's enough for tonight. Alaska, a small state, comes in during the wee hours of the morning.

Based on what I have seen so far, McCain may pull out ahead. If he clinches the nomination before the sum of all the non-McCain votes (candidates and stuff like uncommitted) exceeds 1/3 of the vote, then Lichtman Key 2 will stand, otherwise it will fall. This is the most important key, so it bears watching in the months ahead.

10 pm update. Not much to report, because the states are small, and because CNN isn't giving exit polls. They are giving the ones for Utah. CNN said Romney won it. Boy did he ever. 90%, to single digits for the other candidates. The interesting thing about Utah is the Democrats. It looks like Obama has this one. Spreadsheet analysis of the exit poll shows Obama with 44% and Clinton with 37%. In general Obama is doing well in western conservative or "red" states and in the South, while Clinton does well in the Northeast, although I think that Connecticut will go to Obama. Also, although I can't get exit polls, the actual results seem to suggest a Romney win in Montana, and a huge Obama win in Idaho.

There are only two states left tonight, but one of them is The Big One, California. Will the late Obama surge carry him to victory there?

9 pm Update. CNN called New York for Clinton, but the election there is closer than one would have imagined, 56-41. They called no Republican races at 9 pm. But from what I see from the exit polls, McCain has taken Arizona with 42%, with 36% for Romney, 8% for Huckabee, 5% for Paul, and 2% for Giuliani. It's home state vs Mormonism there. Obama is ahead in Arizona in a close race, 47-45. Also, McCain took New York with 47%, to 34% for Romney, 11% fopr Huckabee, 6% for Paul, 3% for Giuliani, and 2% uncommitted. New Mexico has only a Democratic caucus, and exit polls there show a cliffhanger, with Clinton leading 40%-39% over Obama with 4% for Richardson, 1% for Edwards, and 1% uncommitted. I saw no exit polls for Colorado, Kansas, or Minnesota.

It looks like a cliffhanger tonight in both parties. There are a lot of close elections. CNN has called Connecticut and New Jersey for McCain, and Romney for Massachusetets. I think that Huckabee will win Alabama and Tennessee and McCain will win Oklahoma. For the Democrats, CNN called for Obama in Illinois and for Clinton in Oklahoma. I think that Clinton will also win Missouri and that Obama will win Alabama and Delaware. Here are the figures I get

Democrats (Clinton, Obama)

Alabama, 42, 53
Connecticut, 45, 49
Delaware, 44, 48
Georgia, 52, 27
Massachusetts, 45, 46
Missouri, 43,39
New Jersey, 49, 48
Tennessee, 52, 40

Republicans (Huckabee, Romney, McCain, Paul)

Alabama, 43, 18, 33, 4,1
Connecticut, 7,31,44,4,1
Missouri, 23,29,28,4,1
Oklahoma, 28,20,32,4
Tennessee, 32, 23, 30, 5,3

I have omitted minor candidates, unpledged, and uncommitted, but I think these are a factor in Clinton's win in Missouri. I have also omitted results in most races that CNN called.

Right away at 7pm tonight (2008 February 5), CNN called Georgia for Obama. By using the spreadsheet technique that I described in a previous blog, I was able to find out what the actual percentages were (at 7:10 pm, after the polls closed). They are Obama 52%, Clinton 27%, Edwards 19%. Obama won BIG! (corrected at 19:32)

The Republicans race is a real donnybrook. I tried the spreadsheet technique on three different topics, including abortion and religion, and got an average of Huckabee 31%, Romney 29%, McCain 29%, Paul 4%, Giuliani 1%. It looks as though Huckabee has won, but I am not completely sure, and we may have to wait a while to see who finished second.

There was a story that when William Henry Harrison and his federal troops defeated Native Americans led by Tecumseh at the Battle of Tippecanoe in 1811, and then when Harrison ran for President in 1840, that Tecumseh threw a curse on him saying that he will die in office and that future Presidents will die in office. Harrison won on a ticket of "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too" in 1840 and took office in 1841 March, and gave his inaugural address on a cold winter day. He caught pneumonia so bad that he died a month later.

Since then Presidents elected in a year ending with 0 have died or been severely injured in office. This includes Abraham Lincoln, assassinated in 1865, James Garfield, assassinated in 1881, William McKinley, assassinated in 1901, Warren Harding, of a mysterious cause in 1923, Franklin D. Roosevelt, of a cerebral hemorrhage in 1945, John F. Kennedy, assassinated in 1963, and Ronald Reagan, seriously injured by an attempted assassin in 1981. So the curse seems to have worked. Our present President, George W. Bush, was elected in 2000, which is not only a year ending with a 0, it was a year that ended with three zeroes. Will he succumb to the curse? Is this all a coincidence?

One can argue that it might be a coincidence. People like to point out that Booth assassinated Lincoln in a theater and ran to a warehouse, while Oswald assassinated Kennedy from a warehouse and ran to a theater. There are numerous other coincidences. Many of these can be explained as simply random occurring events, and maybe Tecumseh's curse can be. However, a reason for this curse can be found in my Periodic Presidents Theory.

This theory is an offshoot of Strauss and Howe's turning theory, which describes American history as a series of "turnings" that repeat in patterns of 4; that is, a First Turning followed by a Second Turning followed by a Third Turning followed by a Fourth Turning, and then followed by another First Turning and the pattern repeats. Right now, we are on the boundary between a Third Turning (unraveling) and a Fourth Turning (Crisis).

The Periodic Presidents theory develops this further by describing 12 types of American Presidents. These are, with their realizations in the current series of turnings (called a saeculum):

0. Crisis (Franklin D. Roosevelt)
1. Outspoken (Harry S. Truman)
2. National Hero (Dwight Eisenhower)
3. Golden Age (John F. Kennedy)
4. Gap (Lyndon Johnson)
5. Expansive (Richard M. Nixon)
6. Regressive (Gerald R. Ford)
7. Supportive (Jimmy Carter)
8. Optimistic (Ronald Reagan)
9. Held Back (George H. W. Bush)
10. Popular (William J. Clinton)
11. Nero/Hamlet (George W. Bush)

I call the ones in blue Dominant Presidents. These Presidents are the characteristic President of their Turnings. The Dominant President of the current Third Turning, for example, was Ronald Reagan.

So how does this explain the curse? These Dominant Presidents preside over a world of change, as one turning turns into another. For example, the crisis-hangover mood of the 1950s gave way to something different under Kennedy's administration. Something was going to be done about racial segregation in the South. Something was going to be done about poverty in the United States. Kennedy presided over change that represented the culmination of the First Turning High. Nixon expanded our country's international reach by opening up China to the rest of the world. Reagan replaced the malaise of the 1970s with the optimistic view of "Morning in America". All of these Presidents called for change. And maybe some people don't want change. That makes these Presidents more subject to attacks and assassinations than other Presidents.

There is exactly one Dominant President sequence (usually just a single President but the Era of Good Feelings lasted through two Presidents) in each turning. So how often do these Presidents come? Since there is one per turning, and since saecula last 80 years, and there are 4 turnings, there are therefore 80/4 or 20 years in a turning. So a Dominant President comes every 20 years. That is just the interval called for by the curse: every 20 years comes a Presidential election year that ends in 0.

And that explains the curse. You can call it a curse by a Native American. You can go astrological and call it the curse of the conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn. But it still occurs every 20 years, and that is the result of the turnings of history. The coincidence is that this 20-year pattern matches the 20-year recurrence of Presidential years ending in 0.

Now this theory would not be believable unless it had some kinks in it. It does. William Henry Harrison was not a Dominant President. He was succeeded by a Regressive President, and then the President of Change came with Polk. Warren Harding died of mysterious causes, but he was a Popular President, and not a dominant Optimistic President, who happened to be Woodrow Wilson. But Wilson died shortly after he left office. Reagan was not killed by John Hinckley, only seriously wounded.

The latest chink may be happening right now. Dubya Bush may very well finish his term peacefully. This is because he is a Nero President, which is not a Dominant type. The 20-year pattern has gone askew. The next President will be a Crisis President (hopefully not another Nero!), the most Dominant of types. He will herald change to our society, as Barack Obama says in his speeches; in fact, according to Jim Kunstler, more change than he bargained for. So therefore it is the next President who will have to beware the curse. Further, if it is Obama, his similarities to Lincoln are so striking that he will be especially susceptible.