Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
- kyle
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
- Contact:
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
take the quiz here and see who you really side with.
As of right now a lot of states side with my views better than any of the candinates. Maybe i should run
As of right now a lot of states side with my views better than any of the candinates. Maybe i should run
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
This whole topic is bleh....
Thank Rush for creating crazy conspiratists. Is that guy believes in What he says then he's Ill.
**** politics. It only seems to make good people argue with one another, or cause people to be terminally pissed off at the world. I would rather be ignorant than part of this mess.
Thank Rush for creating crazy conspiratists. Is that guy believes in What he says then he's Ill.
**** politics. It only seems to make good people argue with one another, or cause people to be terminally pissed off at the world. I would rather be ignorant than part of this mess.
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Pretty much accurately put me where I figured I would be. Romney and Obama at 41% and 31% respectively. Ron Paul at 79% and Johnson at 85%. Didn't think I'd be siding with Johnson so much but Paul was the only candidate from the two main parties I actually agreed with for the most part.kyle wrote:take the quiz here and see who you really side with.
As of right now a lot of states side with my views better than any of the candinates. Maybe i should run
I don't know too much on any of the candidates, but Ron Paul was the only person I actually liked from either party when I had to do a class project earlier in the year. Won't look into Johnson until closer to elections but it seems like I'll have to consider him.
Regardless, I still don't believe the President has much true power and the candidate that ends up getting chosen (unless it's a third party candidate I don't know much about) won't really do much to "help" us. I think all the power comes from Congress, but it's bleh to me.
BRAWL dead. RIP.
Fort is like a box of knives, you never know when you're going to be cut.
Fort is like a box of knives, you never know when you're going to be cut.
- Jonathan
- A Brave Victim
- Posts: 3391
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:50 am
- Location: Not really lurking anymore
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Annoyingly, that's exactly why you should get into it. Your own individual input is unlikely to change anything. But if you take all people with similar opinions, and they all stay out of it (they're similar after all), that's a sizable systematic bias against you. It's more about moving entire groups than the occasional individual, but this is what I can do.Mkay1 wrote:**** politics. It only seems to make good people argue with one another, or cause people to be terminally pissed off at the world. I would rather be ignorant than part of this mess.
ˌɑrməˈɡɛˌtrɑn
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Jill Stein is my girl! (I guess?) Also, I never imagined myself a Democrat. Weird. Two years ago I took a similar test and it said I was a Libertarian. I think it's all a bunch of hooey.
- Attachments
-
- isidewith.png (65.01 KiB) Viewed 2674 times
Last edited by sinewav on Thu Aug 23, 2012 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- ElmosWorld
- Match Winner
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Anyone else so even between the candidates?
- Attachments
-
- 57051644.jpg (29.9 KiB) Viewed 2666 times
- Clutch
- Shutout Match Winner
- Posts: 1008
- Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:53 pm
- Location: A frozen wasteland
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Haven't heard of this lady, to google I go
Boxed
- kyle
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
- Contact:
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
I should have said this with the test. it is more acurite if you use the other responces rather than yes or no. if there is one that fits you.
First time I took it with just yes or no I sided with Romney 95%, I selected more specific answers and that dropped him to 51%. Johnson and Paul remained about the same 88% and 87% respectfully.
it also says 53% of america sides with me
First time I took it with just yes or no I sided with Romney 95%, I selected more specific answers and that dropped him to 51%. Johnson and Paul remained about the same 88% and 87% respectfully.
it also says 53% of america sides with me
- Jonathan
- A Brave Victim
- Posts: 3391
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:50 am
- Location: Not really lurking anymore
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
I had quickly clicked through it before I had to leave a few hours ago, although I couldn't answer everything accurately (even if I had taken the time) because I'm ignorant about some American issues. It looked like a slightly more extreme, slightly more green version of sinewav's result. Not surprising, considering how appalled I am by Romney and the Republicans. Would be a nice name for a stage act, but this is one large stage.
ˌɑrməˈɡɛˌtrɑn
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
I'm not american, but my quiz results are these:
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
"Dream as if you'll live forever,
Live as if you'll die today." -James Dean
- Phytotron
- Formerly Oscilloscope
- Posts: 5041
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:06 pm
- Location: A site or situation, especially considered in regard to its surroundings.
- Contact:
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Addendum: Here's the other Daily Show clip about the myth of voter fraud, versus actual election manipulation on the part of the right. And again, for some reason the video on the Comedy Central site won't play for me, but now neither will the HuffPo video. Eh.
But the fact is, the origins of Birtherism are racist.
* SIDEBAR: They certainly need to concoct reasons. Considering that the bulk of Obama's legislative agenda and Presidential policies have been tediously middle-of-the-road, and in some cases even center-right, many even co-opted from Republican proposals, they need something with which to smear him. Hence as well, cries of "OMG CREEPING SOCIALISM" applied to something like so-called "Obamacare," specifically the "individual mandate," which is in reality a fundamentally Conservative/Republican concept and program. Indeed, its origins are with the bona-fide conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation; it's the same legislation. The individual mandate is all about putting the onus on personal responsibility to get private insurance, over social/collective responsibility of the public/government; against people being free riders (or "free-loaders," in the pejorative) on the system. Moreover, the health care industry and insurance remain private; indeed, private insurers will make bank off this. There's nothing socialistic about it. Damn morons.
I also thought this was funny, the phrasing of it:
When did you become a conspiracy theorist? Hilarious. Although, let's be honest, you're full of shit. This is just trolling for the sake of it. BORING. I'm betting if I were to do a search of your many screennames, I would find a past post wherein you bashed someone for believing that nonsense. Typical you. Bug off, you're old and worn out.Kijutsu wrote:I agree with compguygene, you know almost nothing about your president's history
I do want to be clear about this, however. No, I did not. I said the Birther movement is fundamentally rooted in racism. There's no other basis for it in reality. This isn't to say that all Birthers are racists; I didn't call Gene a racist. Many (reactionary) people have, however, jumped on this crap for providing little more than a convenient smear, an attempt to delegitimize Obama.* And of course, people already prone to conspiracy theory are going to believe it, too. It's a truism about conspiracy theorists that if they believe one, they're highly likely to believe most others with which they're presented. So in the case of someone like Gene, it's a one-two punch; he's bound to believe it, even if he didn't have a racist bone in his body.phyto already said something was racist about cpg's post even though it's not.
But the fact is, the origins of Birtherism are racist.
* SIDEBAR: They certainly need to concoct reasons. Considering that the bulk of Obama's legislative agenda and Presidential policies have been tediously middle-of-the-road, and in some cases even center-right, many even co-opted from Republican proposals, they need something with which to smear him. Hence as well, cries of "OMG CREEPING SOCIALISM" applied to something like so-called "Obamacare," specifically the "individual mandate," which is in reality a fundamentally Conservative/Republican concept and program. Indeed, its origins are with the bona-fide conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation; it's the same legislation. The individual mandate is all about putting the onus on personal responsibility to get private insurance, over social/collective responsibility of the public/government; against people being free riders (or "free-loaders," in the pejorative) on the system. Moreover, the health care industry and insurance remain private; indeed, private insurers will make bank off this. There's nothing socialistic about it. Damn morons.
No thanks. The Birther stuff, in particular, is unadulterated garbage. Period. And that includes your sources. And while I wholeheartedly support third parties (and, again, have been active in so doing, which, again, does not entail simply posting stuff on websites), once you bring the "International Bankers" conspiracies and hyperbole about tyranny into it, forget it. It's not an honest debate. A legitimate debate must be preconditioned on an agreed-upon conception of reality and what qualifies as facts. That is not the case here, and therefore doesn't qualify as a debate. Those two threads are incapable of being any more legitimate or productive a "debate" than evolution versus creationism. One is reality, the other fantasy. The end.compguygene wrote:Well, if we are going to actually debate these things, I have created separate, new topics to separate this out into 2 issues.
Did everyone fill out all the "choose more [issue category] questions?" I did. I also ended up choosing "choose another stance" on nearly every question, and even wrote in a few, heh. On a few I wish I could choose more than one. But anyhoo, my results: A bit odd at the top; I'm not quite sure what explains that. I think they possibly give the Democrats, as a whole, far too much Left credit. I also don't know how, or even if, it interpreted the answers where I filled in write-ins. And I don't know how they figure I side with Ron Paul on foreign policy issues, either; I don't think any of my responses were in line with his strict isolationism. Nor do I know where even the mere 3% agreement with Rmoney comes from. So, I question this thing's accuracy a bit. Oh well, whatever. I know where I stand; I don't need some web quiz to tell me.kyle wrote:take the quiz here and see who you really side with.
I also thought this was funny, the phrasing of it:
- FFIIXXIITT
- Match Winner
- Posts: 422
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:20 am
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
Why vote if one must choose between a duche and a turd sandwich?
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
The joke will be on you once your reptillian president will eat you, Phyto. Where's his birth certificate, btw?
Re: Elections 2012 [third-party candidate option added]
I did, but misread one of those essential questions about evolution [evolution is a fact <---> evolution is not a fact] so I ended up with agreeing with Mitt Romney in the Science part (but still got 78% Obama).Phytotron wrote:Did everyone fill out all the "choose more [issue category] questions?
Oh, and: