posted
This website asks you questions about your stance on various issues and their importance to you, and then matches your stance with the candidates's.
Apparently, I am much more closely aligned with John Edwards than with Fred Thompson. No big shock for me there.
The interesting thing was seeing how closely each candidate in the field matches your views.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Republican that I disagreed with most was Romney, and I didn't agree with any Democrat on more than two issues.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Huh. I may have to stop hanging up on Bill Richardson's recordings. He's not my top match, but he's higher than people I though I agreed with more.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My top 4 were all Republican -- did not see that coming.
Of course, the survey questions were ridiculous. Not a single choice on the immigration one allowed you to want to lessen border control -- all included increasing border security.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pretty sure the survey options were based on the candidate's positions. So if that wasn't an choice, it's because no candidate's plan calls for it.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
JT, I had a similar problem on that question, though I understand they were just doing a matching up to the candidates positions. I'm for no wall, but stricter corporate enforcement. I'm for both a path to citizenship and a work visa/temporary worker program.
posted
Neat website. Tom Tancredo is my top one with a score of 57. Interesting. Though I go back and change some things and nothing seems to change.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Iraq question is misleading. For example, I think Iraq was an enormous, obscene, sinful mistake that should never have happened. I want us to have never been there. But when I answered "timetable for withdrawal" it seems to count me disagreeing with Guilliani (stay in) as much as with Ron Paul (get out now).
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had similar trouble picking answers for the Iraq and some of the others, but I could see why the answers were as they were, so I picked the best I could.
Kucinich and Dodd were my top two. Edwards, Obama, and Clinton were all tied for third (or I guess fifth). And it was clearly divided Democrat on top, Republican on the bottom, except for Giuliani.
I think I'm going to have nightmares tonight of the new polls being structured like that. Misleading and confusing questions, then it pops out who you should vote for... Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
somehow I think I only had one candidate with more in the agree column than in the disagree column... and that was I think 5:4 there's no party for me
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Highest score was a 47, for Duncan Hunter of all people. I didn't know a thing about him. McCain was close behind. I thought Romney would be higher, but he only got a 27.
Lowest score for a Republican was a 22 for Guiliani, and the highest for a Democrat was 18 for Biden. No surprises there.
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clinton, Richardson, Obamba. Just like I told the gal on the telephone last night. They were all 27's. I want to know more about Richardson before any election. It's easer to find information about Clinton. The rest of the field is scary indeed. EDIT. If I have to pick from the "rest of the pack" I will be writing J. Carter in; like I have for the last several elections.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for starting this thread Tante! It was just the kick in the pants I needed to finally register to vote in the primaries.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kucinich, Dodd, then Barack/Clinton/Edwards. No one hit my positions completely, but as has been mentioned some of my positions weren't listed, so.
How do the candidates feel about de-politicizing federal appointments, removing department and cabinet heads that were put in place to destroy or make irrelevant the department in question, peeling back the layers of secrecy over governmental decisions, stripping away the civil rights abuses now encoded in our laws, and restoring the checks and balances the Constitution demands? I haven't heard a lot on that topic from the candidates and I won't be deciding until I do. Which candidate, upon becoming president, will work to make the president less powerful?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did like the phrasing of the questions better. But, the results moved Edwards up on my list. Belay that! The highest match was Clinton for economic policy.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got McCain again, but very different orders on the rest. Clinton and Obama are now near the bottom of my list, and Biden has moved up. I'm pretty sure there's no way I would vote for Biden in the primaries. I would be unlikely to vote for him for president, unless he were running against somebody intimately connected with the clown posse currently running the show.
That's the thing with these quizzes . . . it matches you up with what the candidates say, but what if you don't believe the candidates?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got Edwards on the first quiz, and a Biden/Kucinich/Clinton/Edwards tie on the second.
Tom Tancredo dead last on both quizzes, which I could have told you beforehand. So I guess they aren't all THAT bad at prognosticating.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Not anything I didn't know already, but whether I'd vote for Hillary or not depends greatly on who is running against her. Honestly, though, I'd pick her as the lesser of two evils in most cases (for me).
Yeah, this isn't all that useful, but I needed a refresher on where all these candidates stood on issues.
Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tom Tancredo dead last on both quizzes, which I could have told you beforehand. So I guess they aren't all THAT bad at prognosticating.
Tom Tancredo didn't show up on mine. Thank god -- he's the worst pretend candidate this state has ever produced.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No questions on education or the criminal justice system. It's just another test that tells me how far away I am from setting the national agenda.
Edit: Does anybody really agree with a line item presidential veto?
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
My top choice of candidates was pretty low on both lists. But when I looked through the quotes, I still line up with my candidate. Of course, he is a lower tier candidate so probably not going to make it. Obama is my highest of the top tier. I also confirmed that atleast right now, I am pretty firmly a democrat.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dodd and Kucinich: 60 Edwards: 55 Clinton and Obama: 53 Giuliani: 38 Romney: 19 McCain: 7 Hunter: 5
Very interesting. I'm not incredibly surprised actually, even though my actual vote at this point is for Obama, followed closely by Edwards. I've known for some time how much I agree with Dodd's and Kucinich's views. If Kucinich wasn't totally off his rocker, and if I thought he stood a chance of winning, I'd vote for him. And I just don't like Dodd, to be honest. Not really sure why.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rollainm: ], If Kucinich wasn't totally off his rocker, and if I thought he stood a chance of winning, I'd vote for him.
Kucinich was my number one, as well. My husband looked at it and asked why I never mention Kucinich as a potential candidate. My response was in essence what you said (I used the word wacko).
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got Kucinich again at 73%. Are we sure he's a wacko? Seems like the right guy to have in charge to me.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not always his ends, but often his means, that worry people. He has an unrealistic, and potentially damaging idea of how to go about and achieve his goals. To me, he could do as much damage to the Republic as I feel Bush has, regardless of how much I agree with him on some things.
posted
They matched me up with McCain but I won't vote for him because of McCain-Feingold and his wish to expand it. Free speech wasn't even *mentioned*.
The closest thing we have to a centrist in this campaign is Romney, because he keeps changing his positions on things. At least it takes him months instead of seconds, but anyway, centrist is not always good.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got Rudy (unsurprising), but only with a score of 32. McCain came in at 31. If they'd included questions about Israel, McCain wouldn't even have been on the list, I don't think. Ron Paul was 23, which is a little embarrassing, and Huckabee was way down at 15 (they don't mention the Fair Tax, which would have brought him up a bit).
It's kind of interesting that my highest score for any of them is a 32. Makes me think maybe I should run.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
there's no party for me
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
