PDA

View Full Version : A test for your political stance



UncaRastus
11-21-2015, 08:37 PM
https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz

Come right in, take the test, and be proud of what you are!

Why don't we post our findings?

You can find my political leanings in my next answer, to this thread.

:D

And don't cheat! If you come out with not how you thought you should have, maybe ya oughta have some alone time, to reconcile yourself with the facts!

Please record your final finding(s), truthfully typing.

Rainmaker, you might be a bit surprised by finding out how I am.

AA, I am sorry, but I don't think that this test qualifies as a Troll testing medium. While I do enjoy your way of yanking people's chains, you will probably confuse the bejeebers out of everyone in here with your 'supposed' end of test rating.

But by all means, if you want, have at it.

UncaRastus
11-21-2015, 08:40 PM
So far right winged that I couldn't fly a straight line if I wanted to. Yup, my right wing is very muscular!

With a dash of libertarianism tossed in, to add a smoky taste.

MikeKerriii
11-21-2015, 10:39 PM
90% Bernie

garhkal
11-22-2015, 04:33 AM
88% Ben Carson, 87% Trump, 86% Ted Cruz, and 84% Marco Rubio..

With a wapping 11% siding with Bernie Sanders and 24% for Hil-liar-y Clinton.

Rusty Jones
11-22-2015, 02:12 PM
97% Sanders
88% Clinton
77% O'Malley
43% Webb
36% Huckabee
34% Graham
34% Bush
28% Christie
21% Santorum
21% Trump
20% Rand Paul
19% Carson
18% Kasich
16% Fiorina
16% Rubio
15% Cruz

Big schocker to me is that Clinton ranked higher on my list than O'Malley, and that Huckabee was the top Republican. And the fact that Kasich was so low. Other than that, the list is pretty accurate.

sandsjames
11-22-2015, 04:08 PM
83% Cruz
82% Trump
81% Fiorina
80% Rubio/Paul

60% Clinton/Webb
54% Sanders
46% O'Malley

That was a pretty good survey. I think there was only 1 or 2 that didn't have an answer that worked (the "Yes, but..." answers were written very well.

I also wonder how much it would have changed the percentages if I would have changed the "How Important" tabs on the left. What's interesting is that I will not, as of now, vote for either of those top 3. I think the first one on the list that even interests me in Rand Paul, if he'd get rid of the one or two deal breakers he keeps laying out there.

UncaRastus
11-22-2015, 07:32 PM
I listed my political stance, which was far right wing and a bit of libertarianism. Could you guys do the same? If you do not want to share your leanings, no problem.

LogDog
11-22-2015, 07:42 PM
No surprise with me.

Sanders - 93%
Clinton - 91%
O'Malley - 80%

Huckabee - 58%
Trump - 52%
Paul - 43%
Bush - 39%
Cruz - 23%
Carson - 23%

How many people, noticed on most of the categories, there were additional questions as well as on the Other Stances you had more choices plus you could write your own position (which I did on a number of them). I answered all the questions so as to make it more thorough.

garhkal
11-22-2015, 08:53 PM
How many people, noticed on most of the categories, there were additional questions as well as on the Other Stances you had more choices plus you could write your own position (which I did on a number of them). I answered all the questions so as to make it more thorough.

I opened up all those, and for around a good 2/3rds of the questions i did open up the 'yes/no but' with other comment block.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-22-2015, 09:35 PM
Bush 84%
Rubio 83%
Clinton 77%

The rest were in the 60 percent range or lower.

I hit other on a bunch of the questions.

I've never felt well represented by either party.

giggawatt
11-23-2015, 12:44 PM
My ideology: Libertarian

Paul 78%
Cruz 77%
Huckabee 76%
Trump 76%
Fiorina 74%
Carson 73%
Rubio 73%
Santorum 69%
Bush 62%
Clinton 61%
Christie 61%
Sanders 56%


Interesting test and interesting results.

efmbman
11-23-2015, 03:01 PM
Disclosure: I did this survey on 10/10/2015, but I saved the results

Rand Paul 86%
Mike Huckabee 80%
Ted Cruz 78%
Rick Santorum 75%
Bernie Sanders 71%
Donald Trump 69%
Jeb Bush 69%
Ben Carson 69%
Hillary Clinton 65%

Not entirely shocked to be honest. However, I am sure that while our personal preferences may align with a particular candidate I'm am sure we can each also find one or two reasons to exclude a candidate. For example, I would immediately exclude Huckabee for the his theatrics in the Kentucky marriage license fiasco.

garhkal
11-24-2015, 03:33 AM
Strange.. When i did mine, it didn't list my 'ideology'..

giggawatt
11-24-2015, 08:13 AM
Strange.. When i did mine, it didn't list my 'ideology'..

Should be able to expand more fields at the end. It has graphs and other visuals that shows where you stand on the issues with regard to the candidates and other cool graphics.

Rusty Jones
11-24-2015, 01:07 PM
Strange.. When i did mine, it didn't list my 'ideology'..

I didn't see the part where it asked you to select your ideology, either. I'm actually glad I didn't, because the answers to the questions (expanded out, and weighted, of course) should speak for themselves in generating the list.

UncaRastus
11-24-2015, 05:08 PM
When I did the test, it came out with the candidates that were into my choices. Then it also came out with the ideology that was best represented by the testing results..

I was kind of surprised by who supported some of my choices.

Garhkal, sometimes we think that we are __________, but after entering our choices, we are actually ________. Times change, people change, and political parties change, without us noticing the changes.

garhkal
11-25-2015, 04:45 AM
Crud.... Pity i didn't save my test, and i have since done my weekly browser history clean up. Otherwise i would go back and see if i could pull it back up.

Rollyn01
11-25-2015, 07:37 AM
Left wing Authoritarian. How odd, how odd indeed.

UncaRastus
11-25-2015, 03:43 PM
Rollyn, meet Stalin.*

*Don't try to buddy up to his corpse. He will rise from the dead to kill you. Just sayin'.

;)

Rainmaker
11-25-2015, 06:04 PM
Left wing Authoritarian. How odd, how odd indeed.

And this is exactly the reason why you're in charge of the preps at the bunker. You always want an autocrat in charge during times of martial law.

Rainmaker
11-25-2015, 06:30 PM
The Donald 88%.

Can't see it . But, Rubio came in a close 2nd at 87%....Ewww....

Anyhow,we'll be at the Trump Campaign Rally in Sarasota on this Saturday and will provide an After actions report to the Forum.

Happy Thanksgiving All. Rainmaker Out//

UncaRastus
11-25-2015, 10:17 PM
Rainmaker, I do believe that shooting off guns to be celebratory would maybe get you into trouble at the Trumpalooza. I guess that they are just soooo 1890s.

garhkal
11-26-2015, 04:29 AM
One of the gals i work with at the Fabric store, went to Trump's showing in Columbus Monday.. Still have not heard an 'after action' report from her to see how it went down.

Rainmaker
11-30-2015, 03:54 PM
Post Game Wrap:

Rainmaker arrived On site at Robarts arena in Sarasota at 0845L.

Ran into Veterans advocate Kat" Gates-Skipper (1st Woman Marine to stay overnight in the field for combat training). She was there to give an endorsement speech to Trump. We Had a brief chat before i got in line with about 100 people were already there waiting.

bought a couple of Trump Buttons and Red Trucker hat.

The Local Fish wrapper reported that there was a contingent of protestors on Fruitville Rd. However, I saw none of that. It was early though and those people aren't really known for their promptness, so they may have come later.

By the time the gates opened at 0930 the crowd numbered several thousands and there was an elephant in the parking lot and dozens of press corps.

Visible security presence of uniformed USSS, and the professionals of the TSA. Many pros in Civies milling around the crowd as well.

Entertainment was provided by Sarasota Vocal Vixens and a couple of speakers. The Pregame was lacking . Seemed like they only had 2 or 3 CD's on continuous loop. Hearing Elton John's Rocket man for 3 hours was tiresome.

I'd estimate the crowd at 98% white, median age of 45. Vets were asked to self ID. probably about 1/4 of the crowd.

Finally about 1215 The man of the hour arrived. He Stood outside talking to the several thousand procrastinators who didn't make it in. audio was piped in to the arena. He told them to stand by and he'd be back in an hour " to do a double". In the meantime his pilot would give Helo rides to the "beautiful children" whose parents said they could go.

Following the pledge of allegiance and invocation the

Main points were:

Globalization and "Anti-American" Free trade deals are destroying the United States.

Open borders are going to be closed. Illegals will be deported, but legal immigration will be expedited.

A grungy White female looking "BlackLives Matters" Protestor interrupted for about 30 seconds. She was gently escorted out, while the 5000 people sang "Na Na Na Na Hey Hey Hey Goodbye"

.gov is incompetent (they don't get the best people). PACS are a scam and corrupt

He took about 15 minutes to lambast the press in attendance saying that "you know the truth but, refuse to report it".

He's going to "put HR block out of business". If you make under $45k you'll pay no tax.

No matter who wins, Obamacare's going to have to be repealed in 2018, because it's unsustainable.

Veterans care in the US Is a National disgrace and he's going to fix it.

If he wins the presidency "We're going to bomb the Hell out of ISIS, Take back Iraq and Take the Oil"

Conclusion:
Whatever you think of the Trump phenomenon either to be legit, or a comedy or an embarrassment, For 10K people to show up on a Thanksgiving weekend (a year before the election), in a small town like Sarasota, is really quite remarkable. Having attended the Ron Paul rally at the USF Sun dome in 2012 and also attended the one of the DC tea party protests in 2010 . The energy at this thing far surpassed those. My money's on him taking the GOP nomination wire to wire.

Rusty Jones
11-30-2015, 05:02 PM
Couple of things I was giving more thought: a few weeks ago, I said in a conversation with TJ that I thought that Trump would be hard for the Democratic nominee to beat.

After giving it more thought... I can't say that anymore. After Ben Carson's fall, Ted Cruz is now neck and neck with him, and is actually slightly ahead. But they've both only got a roughly a quarter of the conservative vote according to the polls.

What stands out even more is that, among conservatives, you either love Trump or you hate him. I've seen too many conservatives say that they're not voting for Trump if he wins the GOP nomination. It doesn't look like conservative voters are going to unite behind Trump.

Rainmaker
11-30-2015, 08:16 PM
Couple of things I was giving more thought: a few weeks ago, I said in a conversation with TJ that I thought that Trump would be hard for the Democratic nominee to beat.

After giving it more thought... I can't say that anymore. After Ben Carson's fall, Ted Cruz is now neck and neck with him, and is actually slightly ahead. But they've both only got a roughly a quarter of the conservative vote according to the polls.

What stands out even more is that, among conservatives, you either love Trump or you hate him. I've seen too many conservatives say that they're not voting for Trump if he wins the GOP nomination. It doesn't look like conservative voters are going to unite behind Trump.

That's because Trump's not a conservative. He's a Populist/Economic Nationalist

If you believe voting still matters ( I have my doubts), then No matter which side of the political spectrum you fall under, I don't see how you could not be hoping for a Trump vs. Sanders choice for the election.

I think we'll do better with either of these two, than we will with any of the Globalist sellouts currently in charge.

I've watched a parts of a few of His speeches before. But, it's much different when you hear it first hand, in its entirety, instead of just the sound bites (with the media spin). The populist theme was deafening

Rusty Jones
11-30-2015, 08:24 PM
That's because Trump's not a conservative. He's a Populist/Economic Nationalist

If you believe voting still matters ( I have my doubts), then No matter which side of the political spectrum you fall under, I don't see how you could not be hoping for a Trump vs. Sanders choice for the election.

I think we'll do better with either of these two, than we will with any of the Globalist sellouts currently in charge.

I've watched a parts of a few of His speeches before. But, it's much different when you hear it first hand, in its entirety, instead of just the sound bites (with the media spin). The populist theme was deafening

I'm actually hoping for Bernie Sanders vs Rand Paul. If a GOP candidate HAS to take office, I'd rather it be Rand Paul. But we all know that he won't be the nominee.

I'm all for Bernie Sanders myself, and all the polls showing Hillary Clinton ahead don't bother me. I doubt most people who said they'd vote for Hillary Clinton when asked are even going to vote in the primaries in the first place. I think they're all "casual voters."

I'm actually shocked to see you want a Jewish socialist to win the Democratic nomination.

sandsjames
11-30-2015, 08:31 PM
I'm all for Bernie Sanders myself, and all the polls showing Hillary Clinton ahead don't bother me. I doubt most people who said they'd vote for Hillary Clinton when asked are even going to vote in the primaries in the first place. I think they're all "casual voters."

I think that many people will go to the polls, look at the names, and say "Oh, I recognize Hillary Clinton's name" and vote for her. I think that sometimes we overestimate the number of people who actually pay attention at all. Most people don't watch debates, don't read/watch the news, and are highly uneducated about politics of any kind. Name recognition goes along with our reality TV voting society and, unfortunately, that means that when the masses go to the polls, Hillary gets a huge bump. There aren't enough hipster reddit 20 somethings who will vote to actually give Sanders a chance.

Rusty Jones
11-30-2015, 08:58 PM
I think that many people will go to the polls, look at the names, and say "Oh, I recognize Hillary Clinton's name" and vote for her. I think that sometimes we overestimate the number of people who actually pay attention at all. Most people don't watch debates, don't read/watch the news, and are highly uneducated about politics of any kind. Name recognition goes along with our reality TV voting society and, unfortunately, that means that when the masses go to the polls, Hillary gets a huge bump. There aren't enough hipster reddit 20 somethings who will vote to actually give Sanders a chance.

It's the people who actually pay attention that vote in the primaries in the first place. Those dummies you're talking about won't be voting until November.

Rainmaker
12-01-2015, 03:48 AM
I'm actually shocked to see you want a Jewish socialist to win the Democratic nomination.

Don't get me wrong, I still think Sanders is a delusional Bolshevik jerk and could not be more diametrically opposed to Trump.

And Letting the Militant Black activist chicks take over one of his rallies, while he stood there like a spineless moron was especially shameful.

That said, I do think he wants to put America first and at least he calls it like he sees it and not like the other typical bullshit artists running in both political parties.

Plus I really don't feel like seeing any mushroom clouds caused when some post menopausal chick's hormone replacement therapy meds are off. Nomsayin?

Rollyn01
12-02-2015, 02:27 AM
And this is exactly the reason why you're in charge of the preps at the bunker. You always want an autocrat in charge during times of martial law.

I rather be considered a technocrat as I believe that only those with the actual and proper knowledge of the sciences should be in charge. However, as I don't see anything like that happening in the near future due to the many imbecilic leaders that keep get elected, I see that the only way forward is to put an autocrat in charge who's main goal will be to completely remove all federal-level politicians from power and regulate the reelection of their replacement.

Primarily anyone who receive any political funding greater then $500.00 from any entity, regardless of the reason or intended use, would be ban from holding any public office. Each and everyone that passes after that would be screened to the same extend of someone trying to obtaining a top-secret clearance. Once cleared for that, their finances would be monitored for at least a year. If any infraction occurs, they would be charged through the use of the RICO Act. Then, and only then, will they be allowed to be elected for public office.

But that's just me. :D

garhkal
12-02-2015, 04:04 AM
I rather be considered a technocrat as I believe that only those with the actual and proper knowledge of the sciences should be in charge. However, as I don't see anything like that happening in the near future due to the many imbecilic leaders that keep get elected,

And who's fault is it, that those imbecils keep getting re-ellected. US the voters.

Rollyn01
12-02-2015, 05:06 AM
And who's fault is it, that those imbeciles keep getting re-elected. US the voters.

Yes, most of the voting public are very ignorant of what needs to be done due mainly to a lack of an education in civics. Most of them only think of themselves. This isn't that bad until they start making decisions that serves them only. This is the fundamental problem with politics: how can the public be served in a way that allows an individual live a comfortable life without unduly causing harm to another individual trying to do the same? Our definition of harm changes like the wind and our ability to justify any action, good or bad and with disregard of the harm it causes, is a deep-seated problem that needs to be addressed before we could even begin to move on. This is why I would rather have a technocratic system of governance as it would require a well supported education system in order to work.

Imagination, intelligence, integrity are what I believe to be the three main factors of a person's ability to reason. Being limited in any one of those greatly reduces a person's ability to make any reasonable decision. If we don't help people learn to increase these factors, we will continue to have a society that is run by imbeciles.

MikeKerriii
12-02-2015, 05:51 PM
And who's fault is it, that those imbecils keep getting re-ellected. US the voters.

One party is dedicated to anti-science, the Republicans, the Democrats tend to be fairly ignorant of science but not particularly hostile. Stop electing republicans and much of the problem is solved.

sandsjames
12-02-2015, 06:41 PM
One party is dedicated to anti-science, the Republicans, the Democrats tend to be fairly ignorant of science but not particularly hostile. Stop electing republicans and much of the problem is solved.

There ya go. That's a sound plan right there. Cuz' aint none of dem der 'Publicans b'leeves in that voodoo science stuff.

MikeKerriii
12-02-2015, 07:08 PM
There ya go. That's a sound plan right there. Cuz' aint none of dem der 'Publicans b'leeves in that voodoo science stuff.
In 2008 all the Republican candidates indicated they were new-earth creationists and that is about as ignorantly anti-science as you can get. The Current crop is no better.

They put an openly ignorant Luddite, Gohmert, in charge of the Science committee.

All Republicans might not be anti-science but the party itself is anti-science and the clowns running the party are also.

sandsjames
12-02-2015, 10:27 PM
In 2008 all the Republican candidates indicated they were new-earth creationists and that is about as ignorantly anti-science as you can get. The Current crop is no better.

They put an openly ignorant Luddite, Gohmert, in charge of the Science committee.

All Republicans might not be anti-science but the party itself is anti-science and the clowns running the party are also.

Especially Ben Carson, the doctor, who probably doesn't believe anything scientific.

MikeKerriii
12-03-2015, 01:53 AM
Especially Ben Carson, the doctor, who probably doesn't believe anything scientific.

The Good doctor believe that most of biology and all of physics since the start of the 20th Century is a scam. Others wish he could not hold his position on the age of the Universe. He called the big bang theory a fairy tale , and stated that Evolution is the work of Satan Besides being a nutbag, (pyramids are grain storage) he is apparently completely ignorant about science and history outside of his specialty.

Either that or the snake-oil he hypes to suckers has rotted his brain