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.
Posted by kojabu (Member # 8042) on :
Top of mine were Obama and Clinton.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
The Republican that I disagreed with most was Romney, and I didn't agree with any Democrat on more than two issues.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
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.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
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.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
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.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
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.
Dodd was my #1, followed by Obama and Clinton.
-Bok
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
Giuliani, followed by Edwards and Huckabee.
Pretty much my entire list alternates between Republican and Democrat...
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
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.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
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).
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
Interesting. According to them, I should vote for Dennis Kucinich, Christopher Dodd or Barrack Obama, in that order.
Not bad.
And I'm least like Mike Huckabee. Not surprised.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
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... Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
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
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I'm a big government, semi-social conservative, fiscally responsible, bleeding heart libertarian.
I think.
Posted by Reshpeckobiggle (Member # 8947) on :
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.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Um, my highest score is 23. And I've never heard of the person I apparently agree with most, so I guess he doesn't have much chance of winning.
It looks like I am not really all that represented by any of the candidates.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Duncan Hunter (who I have never heard of)
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
I got Kucinich first at 39 pts. That goes along with what I was already thinking.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
my highest was Kucinich with a score of 40 .
Posted by Nathan2006 (Member # 9387) on :
I got John McCain at 24, and John Edwards and Bill Richardsin at 22, and Kucinich at 21.
Jim Gilbert at 10 was the least compatible with me.
Only three agreed with me more than they disagreed with me, and even that was only by one.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
I had a tie between Kucinich and Guiliani. If anyone can explain how that is possible, they get a cookie.
I guess I hate everyone!
--ApostleRadio
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
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.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Thanks for starting this thread Tante! It was just the kick in the pants I needed to finally register to vote in the primaries.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
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?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
John McCain: 25 Hillary Clinton: 22 Barack Obama: 22 Joe Biden: 21 John Edwards: 18 . . . Rudy Giuliani: 14 . . . Mit Romney: 7
Interesting.
(Not that I think it's an accurate guide for who I want to vote for, but it is interesting.)
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Highest was 40. Chris Dodd.
Next at 37, were Clinton, Obama and Gravel.
At the other end, Romney, Huckabee, Thompson and Hunter were a score of 1.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
Ron Paul.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
I got Biden with Clinton and Obama tied for second.
I'm still hoping for Obama to win the nomination.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
I got Clinton and Obama tied for first with 49 each. I'll vote for Clinton.
Posted by seven (Member # 5367) on :
Interesting! My results were way different than I expected, but I think that is because of the phrasing of some of the questions. I like this quiz better though: http://www.speakout.com/VoteMatch/senate2006.asp?quiz=2008 Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
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.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
I got John McCain for both quizes. Interesting.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
and...Clinton on the second.
Posted by Nathan2006 (Member # 9387) on :
Aparantly I'm centirst.
Tommy Thompson was at 48%.
Mike Huckabee and John McCain were at 40%
At the other end, Ron Paul scored 13%, and Chris Dodd scored 18%.
<sigh> What are the minority parties again?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
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?
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
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.
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
Obama (48), Clinton (48), Dodd (45).
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.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
Dodd: 57 Obama and Clinton: 52
I'm trying to decide between Clinton and Obama.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
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.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
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?
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
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.
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
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.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
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).
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
I had Kucinich at 45, then Edwards, Dodd, and Richardson.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Twinky is apparently my voting buddy. Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nathan2006: Aparantly I'm centirst.
Tommy Thompson was at 48%.
Mike Huckabee and John McCain were at 40%
At the other end, Ron Paul scored 13%, and Chris Dodd scored 18%.
<sigh> What are the minority parties again?
Tommy Thompson and Mike Huckabee aren't centrists.
-Bok
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
I got Kucinich again at 73%. Are we sure he's a wacko? Seems like the right guy to have in charge to me.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
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.
-Bok
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
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.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
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.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
I'm Dodd, then Obama, then Clinton (I guess that shows my leanings. )
The reason for the ranking - the death penalty.
As I went down to Kucinich, Gravel, Edwards, Biden and Richardson before I went Republican - Giuliani at the top. I'm a leftie. Pity I can't vote. *grin*
Posted by Avatar300 (Member # 5108) on :
Ron Paul: 56 John McCain: 50 (Who I will never ever vote for, due to McCain-Feingold and his position on Iraq)
Hillary Obama: 7 (We agreed only on opposing the marriage amendment)
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by vonk: Thanks for starting this thread Tante! It was just the kick in the pants I needed to finally register to vote in the primaries.
Hey, anytime you find yourself desiring a kick in your pants, just let me know, and I'll be glad to oblige. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I agree with Kucinich on most of the issues, but I don't think he would make a good president. I am delighted that he is part of the conversation, though and I think the fact that he is getting his ideas out there and that they are getting some traction is a good thing for the party and for the country. I voted for him in the primary in 2004 as Kerry had it pretty well sewed up by the time Illinois vote to weigh in.
Although Obama and Clinton are pretty well matched on the issues listed in the survey, I think that they are considerably different in how they view politics, government, and power. I think that Obama, without being naive, stands for a more idealistic concept of how government of, for, and by the people should work. I think that is fundamental, so he gets my enthusiastic support.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Twinky is apparently my voting buddy.
If I had to pick one of the candidates at this point, though, I'd take Richardson on the strength of his extensive foreign policy experience and apparent successes in that sphere -- I think you need a diplomat right now, and badly, even if I don't necessarily agree with the most experienced diplomat of the bunch on every issue.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Edwards at 38 is the top for me with Kucinich, Clinton, and Obama all tied for 2nd. I don't even see a Republican (Giuliani) until 8th place, which is moderately surprising.
But I see this more of a result of the Christian right highjacking the Republican party and hence screwing up the platforms they end up taking.
Fred Thompson is in last place with a score of only 8, good I don't like him anyway.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
This Kucinich business is troubling me. I've been in favor of him since I heard about him, but if there's no way he'll make it, I don't want to waste an opportunity to support someone else who should beat Clinton in the primaries. I'm sporatically trying to find evidence of his eccentricity. Googling Kucinich and wacko didn't really help.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
Boy, I don't _feel_ that conservative, but apparently I am (at least on a national scale). My other observation is that the two quizes are more incompatible than I would expect, which means either I'm very bad at answering questions or one or both have bad methodologies.
My first list matches me as follows: John McCain : 30 Mike Huckabee: 27 Duncan Hunter: 27 Tom Tancredo: 27 Sam Brownback: 24 Fred Thompson: 22 Jim Gilmore: 19 Ron Paul: 18 Joe Biden: 17 Mitt Romney: 14 Hillary Clinton: 11 Bill Richardson: 11 Barack Obama: 11 Rudy Giuliani: 9 Mike Gravel: 8 John Edwards: 8 Chris Dodd: 8 Dennis Kucinich: 5
My second list matches like this: 40%: Sam Brownback 38%: Tom Tancredo 35%: Mitt Romney 35%: Duncan Hunter 33%: Jim Gilmore 33%: Ron Paul 30%: Joe Biden 25%: Barack Obama 25%: Rudy Giuliani 25%: Tommy Thompson 18%: Chris Dodd 18%: John McCain 18%: Bill Richardson 15%: Mike Gravel 15%: John Edwards 13%: Dennis Kucinich 13%: Hillary Clinton
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Ha!
Kucinich at 31 followed by Ron Paul at 27 on the first one, and Gravel at 33% followed by Kucinich and Ron Paul both at 30% on the second one (which I thought much more poorly done than the first).
Unsurprisingly, my political opinions are hard to classify .
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: 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.
I just took the other one. Rudy came in second at 45%, and Brownback is first at 53%. I don't even know who Brownback is. McCain is third, again, at 43%. Whatever. I still think I'd vote for me before I'd vote for any of them. Except that I'm Jewish, so I wouldn't vote for me, either.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Hmmm. I just did the other quiz and found myself a lot more closely matched. And on social issues, which I consider very important, it matched me more strongly with Giuliani than anyone else except Clinton, which I found surprising. Kucinich scored highest match on economic issues, followed by Biden and Edwards (ties.)
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
For me it's Dodd, closely followed by Kucinich, closely followed by a tied Obama and Clinton. My polar opposite candidate is Duncan Hunter.
In the primaries I'm leaning toward Obama at this point, although that could change (and I certainly take twinky's point about Richardson). My reason for favoring Obama over Clinton is simply that I think that if Clinton were the Democratic candidate it would galvanize the Right. I'd rather not have that happen.
Posted by guinevererobin (Member # 10753) on :
Apparently I'm a hate-everyone type. My best match was Ron Paul for 48%. McCain, who happens to be my favorite, came in at the same score as Hilary Clinton (35%) - but I think I'm gonna go ahead with my own analysis, rather then accepting the quiz.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
Bill Richardson by far. The first five were all Democrats, but Hilary, Obama, Romney, and McCain were all way, way down the list. Giuliani was second to last. *pout* My candidates never have a chance.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
That's one reason I like the caucus system. I can support my long shot candidate and then when he's declared non-viable I can join the crowd at my "practical" choice candidate's table.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
This is depressing...
38 was the highest score on the first quest and 53% was the highest on the second.
Once again I'm facing an election where I don't have someone to vote for.
At least it's confirmed what I've been thinking.. Rudy is my best bet...
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
quote:Originally posted by Qaz: 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.
My dad said he liked Romney a lot, to which my sister asked, which version? I actually think changing your mind on things is a good thing. I want someone who is capable of reassessing a situation constantly. My problem with Romney is that I don't feel like he looked at the situation and changed his mind. I feel like his beliefs line up with his perception of the polls.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: This is depressing...
38 was the highest score on the first quest and 53% was the highest on the second.
Once again I'm facing an election where I don't have someone to vote for.
At least it's confirmed what I've been thinking.. Rudy is my best bet...
Ditto. Hey, you wanna be my running mate? We could create a candidacy that we'd both score in the high 90s for, no?
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Lisa, dear, we'd get precisely 2 votes.
Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
Hmmmmm...
Clinton & Obama - 36
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
Oh yeah - Richardson was gallops ahead of everyone else, and he only matched 27%.
No wonder I root for whomever will give the best entertainment.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Lisa, dear, we'd get precisely 2 votes.
But they'd be the important ones.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Brownback and Dodd were my top two, practically tied.
Posted by Jhai (Member # 5633) on :
quote:Originally posted by vonk: This Kucinich business is troubling me. I've been in favor of him since I heard about him, but if there's no way he'll make it, I don't want to waste an opportunity to support someone else who should beat Clinton in the primaries. I'm sporatically trying to find evidence of his eccentricity. Googling Kucinich and wacko didn't really help.
Whenever I hear about Kucinich, I can't help but remember a research project I did on municipal fiscal crises.
Kuinich was the mayor of Cleveland in the late 70's when it became the first large city since the Depression to declare bankruptcy. Demographic & economic shifts had a lot to do with the problem (Rust Belt & all), but Kuinich certainly helped it. He was way more socialist at the time, and basically hated most of the businessmen of the city. A crisis occurred revolving around the municipal power company - which he refused to sell to state-wide electric company - and, coupled with the city's debt, pulled the city into the red. The banks and the businessmen turned on him, and refused to rollover the debt. And so the city went bankrupt.
After reading about his antics in Cleveland, I have strong doubts that he would ever be able to be an effective president - just alienates too many people. I do think he adds an interesting side to the debates, though.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Wow, that's no good. I want someone that's gonna stick to their guns (metaphorically) but not someone that's gonna burn down the house before making a compromise. But, y'know, that was thirty years ago. One would hope he'd learn some temperance by now. But this definitely merits further research. Gah! And I was so happy that I'd found my candidate. Now y'all gotta go and make think about things. Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Lisa: Lamentably, our votes aren't worth any more than anyone elses.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
there's no party for me
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)