OT: 2008 Elections

ProvoAnC · Post by **ProvoAnC** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:40 am

pk500 wrote:Second Amendment

come to the dark-side

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:07 am

ProvoAnC wrote:
pk500 wrote:Second Amendment
come to the dark-side

Easy now, Lee Harvey.

Love,
Michael Chiklis

kevinpars · Post by **kevinpars** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:20 am

You know what's funny to me? The Dem's spouting on about the religious right,but yet they seem to find a way into black churches every election. They look uncomfortable as hell trying to clap to the gospel.

Speaking of uncomfortable as hell....

Every campaign manager owes it to themselves and their candidate to display this picture prominently in their campaign headquarters:

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:55 am

I managed to catch pieces of the GOP debate last night. Based on what I saw, Thompson is my guy. Sadly, he probably won't make it much past South Carolina.

Of the rest, Huckabee is not for me (OK, the rhyming was unintentional). It's gotta be Bill Clinton with a mask on. Over the past couple of years I have found myself liking, then hating McCain. I'm just not sure what he'd really do a president. If I had to pick a 2nd choice right now it would be Romney.

Have there ever been such a diverse set of Democratic and Republican candiates? We could have either a black man, a woman, or a Mormon as president. Other than the times Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton ran, I can't recall seeing this much diversity among the candidates.

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:21 am

Here's a fun little app:

http://www.electoralcompass.com/

I'm closest to Obama and furthest from Thompson.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:43 am

matthewk wrote:Have there ever been such a diverse set of Democratic and Republican candiates? We could have either a black man, a woman, or a Mormon as president. Other than the times Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton ran, I can't recall seeing this much diversity among the candidates.

Absolutely. It's the one positive all Americans can take from the general unease and suspicion that I sense most feel about the current pool of candidates from both parties.

Take care,
PK

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:49 am

Slumberland wrote:Here's a fun little app:

http://www.electoralcompass.com/

I'm closest to Obama and furthest from Thompson.

Not a big shock: I'm closest to Ron Paul and furthest from Thompson, although my pinpoint on the compass is pretty far from any candidate. I'm in the upper right quadrant -- the economic right (fairly close to the middle, though) and progressive on social liberalism.

I am very disappointed and somewhat disillusioned about the racist remarks attributed to Paul's newsletter.

Take care,
PK

Naples39 · Post by **Naples39** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:58 am

Slumberland wrote:Here's a fun little app:

http://www.electoralcompass.com/

I'm closest to Obama and furthest from Thompson.

This is the second one of those types of programs I have tried.

I am a social liberal and an economic conservative, so I ended up pretty close to the axis, but noticeably in the upper right quadrant. Ron Paul is the only guy even close to that territory, but after watching last night's debate I don't think I could vote for the guy. Predictably Guiliani was 2nd on my list on this site (he was the only other guy that broke into the my view circle on the graph).

The other site I tried gave me Romney first, and Huckabee second. Given how Huckabee is pretty much completely opposite from my views who knows how reliable these things are. I do like how this site gives a graphical view which can be adjusted issue by issue.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:19 pm

Naples:

Appears that you and I have very similar beliefs: Economic conservative, social liberal.

In other words, we're political misfits. There's really not a candidate who serves both of those distinct masters.

Take care,
PK

webdanzer · Post by **webdanzer** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:38 pm

pk500 wrote:Naples:

Appears that you and I have very similar beliefs: Economic conservative, social liberal.

In other words, we're political misfits. There's really not a candidate who serves both of those distinct masters.

Take care,
PK

I sit in that quadrant as well. Our Two-Party system doesn't work well for folks like us...

And yeah, that Ron Paul stuff greatly disappointed me as well.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:39 pm

Edwards is just piling on the populism and class warfare:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qobwf-QOzJg

I think Lou Dobbs will be his running mate.

Take care,
PK

Naples39 · Post by **Naples39** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:10 pm

At least there are a few of us like-minded types in here. Kinda sucks, but independents decide most elections right?

I used to be a moderate democrat, but my views on government taxing and spending have changed enough that I can't say that anymore.

Guiliani's the only guy that really comes close to my views, but that hardly settles it for me. I'm thinking of voting for the individual rather than his views. I plan to pick someone based on their priorities and the likely effectiveness of the candidate if they were to be put in office.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:19 pm

Romney needs to win in MI.

Going to be tough tho:

http://www.slate.com/id/2181847/

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:29 pm

pk500 wrote:Naples:

Appears that you and I have very similar beliefs: Economic conservative, social liberal.

In other words, we're political misfits. There's really not a candidate who serves both of those distinct masters.

Take care,
PK

I'm in that camp as well.

That program is sweet. That matrix is pretty flawed, however. At least on the Republican side it bunches the candidates far too closely on social issues IMO.

Naples39 · Post by **Naples39** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:43 pm

wco81 wrote:Romney needs to win in MI.

Going to be tough tho:

http://www.slate.com/id/2181847/

I agree. Romney is hemorrhaging momentum, and failing to win MI might be the nail in the coffin for him.

MI's a toss-up at this point though.

jondiehl · Post by **jondiehl** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:12 pm

Slumberland wrote:Here's a fun little app:

http://www.electoralcompass.com/

I'm closest to Obama and furthest from Thompson.

Pretty cool.

I'm squarely in the middle of the lower right quandrant, which I guess makes me a Romney supporter.

Here were my detailed stats vs his:

58% agreement Gun control
67% agreement Environment
75% agreement Iraq
83% agreement Economy
67% agreement Income
67% agreement National security
92% agreement Family
67% agreement Immigration
75% agreement Health care
75% agreement Law and order
42% agreement Education
100% agreement Terrorism

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:50 pm

Who gets Edwards' share if he drops out?

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:57 pm

I'm closet to Richardson and Edwards, furthest from Paul Kelly. Strange.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:24 pm

I ended up right between Paul and Giuliani.

I'm surprised to see Thompson so far in the lower right. He's my favorite (based on gut, not quizes), and I didn't to come out this far away from him. None of the Dems came close to my circle.

I have some doubts to the accuracy of this. I think it will put you in the general area of a few to choose from, but I don't think it's good for nailing down a single choice. Huckabee just doesn't seem like he belongs anywhere near the group of Thompson, Romney, and McCain. From all the accounts I've been hearing of him the past few weeks, he should be up and to the left quite a bit. Guess the evangelical pull is strong with him

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:25 pm

For some reason Richardson reminds me of one of the guys on SNL. Not sure what his name is, but he looks like Richardson

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:36 pm

Horatio Sanz... yeah, it's uncanny. And it might be the subconscious reason that I can't take Richardson seriously.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:56 pm

Slumberland wrote:Horatio Sanz... yeah, it's uncanny. And it might be the subconscious reason that I can't take Richardson seriously.

Because every time he tries to read one of his lines on the teleprompter he starts laughing

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:17 pm

Brando70 wrote:
Slumberland wrote:Horatio Sanz... yeah, it's uncanny. And it might be the subconscious reason that I can't take Richardson seriously.
Because every time he tries to read one of his lines on the teleprompter he starts laughing

Richardson or Sanz?

TheHiddenTrack · Post by **TheHiddenTrack** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:35 pm

That was a good little quiz. It's not designed to be perfect, that would take a million questions.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:41 pm

The obvious problem with the quiz is that it doesn't weight issues the same way a voter does. For example, social security may be my most important issue, while immigration doesn't matter a whole lot to me. The quiz doesn't take that into account; my preference on social security and on immigration are weighted the same.

Edit: there are some other major problems. If you are pro-gun control and pro-war on drugs (both positions that advocate government intervention/regulation), you'll end up in the same place on the social policies axis as someone who is anti-gun control and anti-war on drugs (both positions that advocate civil liberties). That is because Republican positions have been defined by the site as "socially conservative", which is why Ron Paul ends up in the middle on the social policies axis.

A more informative graph would have civil liberty and economic liberty as the two axes.