Brand President and (Sub-Brand) Vice President

John Kennedy was the first U.S. President to become a brand. Kennedy's team understood the power of the media and approached it with the strategic and tactical gusto of a new product launch. What they did not know then – but happily we know now – is that the behavior of voters could have been accurately predicted – had they possessed the loyalty and engagement-based research techniques.

We conducted this kind of research when Bill Clinton first ran for president and came within three percentage points of predicting the winner in that election. The approach uses a combination of psychological inquiry and higher order statistical analyses to "fuse" emotional and rational elements.

Things like issues, imagery, change, positioning, debates, catastrophic financial meltdowns, change, benefits, the benefits of change, TV commercials, interviews by Katie Couric, imitations by Tina Fey, and a gabillion hits of both on YouTube. It provides us with insights as to how voters view the presidency (or vice presidency), how they will compare candidates, and, ultimately, how they will vote on Election Day.

The technique is more accurate than traditional polling if only for the fact that we include a sample of cell-phone only respondents in the assessments. Beyond that, however, it measures what voters think – as opposed to what they say they think, a more important aspect of this year's election than ever before.

Consider why we vote for a particular candidate. Do we rationally compare his or her position on an issue to our own and then vote for the candidate who comes closest to our own rational views? Is it the state of the economy or the war in Iraq or women's rights? No, it's not just the rational aspects of our life and philosophies and the candidates' stated positions. Just look how the media skirts around issues of race, gender and age. And if you are perfectly honest with yourself, you likely have certain opinions about the presidential and vice presidential candidates you wouldn't articulate to some pollster on the phone or to some focus group moderator.

As with any category, the methodology determines the electorate's concept of the Ideal Presidential and Ideal Vice President and each candidate's perceived qualities are measure against that ideal. Effects of speeches, debates, TV commercials, sound-bites, and smears can be measured, revealing significant changes in the perception of a candidate. At the end of the campaign trail, the candidate that best meets or exceeds the qualities of the ideal always wins. (With the exception of the intervention of the Supreme Court, we've been on the money every election since 1992.)

The four drivers that define the Ideal President and Vice President are (alphabetically):

Action: Does the candidate have a comprehensive, realistic, well-considered plan for solving the problems facing the country?

Compassion: Does the candidate care about all the people?

Perception:Does the candidate have a deep understanding of the problems facing the county?

Resolve: Does the candidate have the strength and leadership to guide the country?

Or, in the vernacular of the consumer, "Job skills," "Love," "Smarts" and "Guts."