Comparing Your Opinions to Candidates: Romney vs Johnson

[Whovian]

Jill Stein: 95%
Rocky Anderson: 88%
Barack Obama: 84%
Gary Johnson: 70%
Virgil Goode: 5%
Mitt Romney: 3%

 

[Gokul43201]

Here's a site that compares your opinions to the positions of the candidates.

I side with ...

Gary Johnson 91%
...
Mitt Romney 74%

... I intend to vote for Romney.

This post (before the clipping) reads like a non sequitur. Care to fill in some of the blanks and share your thought process?

 

[Galteeth]

Gary Johnson 99%
Jill Stein 70%
Virgil Goode 63%
Mitt Romney 55%
Barack Obama 41%

Libertarian 75%
Green 69%
Democrat 63%
Republican 58%

 

[BobG]

I predict Jill Stein will win the election with about 50% of the popular vote, followed by Obama, then Johnson, with Romney finishing in single digits.

Who made that survey, anyway?

 

[Czcibor]

If you're European, that's normal. Even though social democrats are considered right-wing here, they'd be considered left wing in US. Obama would probably be considered a social democrat in Europe.

I'd say that's it's only a partial answer. Also keep in mind that Europe (even if narrowed down only to the UE) is still less uniform than the US.

There is one serious source of bias here - I'm asked here about issues that are within US mainstream or fight to become such, like matter of legalisation of marijuana. When such question are answered - then indeed I can end up left from centre. However, there are a few questions that no one would dare to ask in the US.

Example: I'm not convinced that no education but merely 18 years is all that one need to be allowed to affect official policies through voting. (Such idea is clearly outside US politics, thus ignored) According to standards of my country that would place me outside mainstream, but wouldn't be shocking at all. (one candidate in our last presidential election dared to speak such a blasphemy too) Thus, for such idea I'd be moved a bit towards semi democratic systems as right wing. (unless speaking such a heresy in the US places me as proponent of the NWO, and that would move me left wing even further, at least in eyes of your right wing? ;) )

 

[Tosh5457]

Example: I'm not convinced that no education but merely 18 years is all that one need to be allowed to affect official policies through voting. (Such idea is clearly outside US politics, thus ignored) According to standards of my country that would place me outside mainstream, but wouldn't be shocking at all. (one candidate in our last presidential election dared to speak such a blasphemy too) Thus, for such idea I'd be moved a bit towards semi democratic systems as right wing. (unless speaking such a heresy in the US places me as proponent of the NWO, and that would move me left wing even further, at least in eyes of your right wing? ;) )

Why would you be considered right-wing for supporting that, if you support left-wing policies too? There we arrive at the problem of the left-right paradigm: that classification doesn't provide all the information about a person's political positions.

 

[Czcibor]

Why would you be considered right-wing for supporting that, if you support left-wing policies too? There we arrive at the problem of the left-right paradigm: that classification doesn't provide all the information about a person's political positions.

I have mixed stances. (I see very well both market and government failures, with proper rephrasing of seemingly similar questions I can give different answers; example: the abovementioned questions considering ecology)

That approach towards democracy moves me, at least formally, on axis authoritarianism vs. individual freedom towards authoritarianism, right? (any other idea how to interpret it?)

Yes, I see the problem in one dimensional axis, and it still exists in two dimensional distinction. Any idea of reasonable multidimensional political axis'? (Maybe some kind of ranking of conflicting aims?)

 

[Ryan_m_b]

That approach towards democracy moves me, at least formally, on axis authoritarianism vs. individual freedom towards authoritarianism, right? (any other idea how to interpret it?)

Yes, I see the problem in one dimensional axis, and it still exists in two dimensional distinction. Any idea of reasonable multidimensional political axis'? (Maybe some kind of ranking of conflicting aims?)

Have you ever seen a Nolan chart?

 

[Czcibor]

Have you ever seen a Nolan chart?

For sure I've seen its mutations. I already mentioned it as two dimensional model.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

For sure I've seen its mutations. I already mentioned it as two dimensional model.

Ah I see you did. I skim read before and missed it.

 

[Galteeth]

I predict Jill Stein will win the election with about 50% of the popular vote, followed by Obama, then Johnson, with Romney finishing in single digits.

Who made that survey, anyway?

Most people only vote for either democrats or republicans, assuming they are the only viable candidates (or just vote based on ticket, whatever.). Because of this, there is the phenomenon of appeal to the so called middle. A lot of democrats, for example, might actually be closer to the positions of the green party then the democratic candidate, but will still vote for the democrat. I think the "right" is a bit more complex, as you have a hodgepodge of people who might not like each other very much (in fact this is becoming an increasing issue for the GOP.)

EDIT: On the other hand, the paradigm is more complex. My preferences were 1. Libertarian 2. Green, which for me is accurate. I would vote for Libertarians over greens, and greens over republicans or democrats (and in fact constitution party over democrats or repubs, as the survey results indicate.) That might seem an odd thing, but it makes sense to me.

Do you feel your results were inaccurate? If so, why do you think that is?

Did others feel the poll accurately ranked their preferences?

 

[Galteeth]

81% Obama on foreign policy, science, social, economic, and immigration issues
18% Romney no major issues

82% Democratic
17% Republican

I liked this quiz, as I felt like *most* of the questions were fairly straightforward, or whatever. But there were a few where I almost wish I could pick more than one option, or an option only expressed part of my view.

Like, what's the difference between saying "Yes" to Do you believe the theory of Evolution?

and saying Yes, Evolution is a fact (the one I chose)?

anyways, I wasn't surprised by the results

You could. They had a "choose another option" option, and if you didn't like the additional choices, you could create your own.

 

[Galteeth]

I wonder why some got Rocky Anderson as an option and others didn't.

 

[PAllen]

Most people only vote for either democrats or republicans, assuming they are the only viable candidates (or just vote based on ticket, whatever.). Because of this, there is the phenomenon of appeal to the so called middle. A lot of democrats, for example, might actually be closer to the positions of the green party then the democratic candidate, but will still vote for the democrat. I think the "right" is a bit more complex, as you have a hodgepodge of people who might not like each other very much (in fact this is becoming an increasing issue for the GOP.)

EDIT: On the other hand, the paradigm is more complex. My preferences were 1. Libertarian 2. Green, which for me is accurate. I would vote for Libertarians over greens, and greens over republicans or democrats (and in fact constitution party over democrats or repubs, as the survey results indicate.) That might seem an odd thing, but it makes sense to me.

Do you feel your results were inaccurate? If so, why do you think that is?

Did others feel the poll accurately ranked their preferences?

I thought it was accurate for me: green, libertarian, justice, democrat, and way down republican - in that order (by candidates; the way the classified by party seemed less accurate for me).

 

[jbunniii]

Interesting poll. Here were my results:

Gary Johnson - 90%
Virgil Goode - 75%
Mitt Romney - 74%
Barack Obama - 65%
California Voters - 59%
American Voters - 59%

Libertarian - 76%
Democrat - 71%
Republican - 70%
Green - 70%

I guess my views were too eclectic to fit easily into one box.

I thought I would have a higher green showing, but there were only a few environmental questions vs. many on foreign policy and the economy (I expanded all the topics to show all the questions). My green rating took a ding because one of the three questions was about offshore drilling, which I support in a qualified way.

I think government should meddle a lot less than it does, which explains the high libertarian ranking. But I also think we need some kind of social security and health plans, which I guess must have given me points with the "status quo" parties.

I actually hate both the Republican and Democratic parties, so it's funny to see them in second and third place.

 

[BobG]

Do you feel your results were inaccurate? If so, why do you think that is?

Did others feel the poll accurately ranked their preferences?

Obama 89%
Stein 89%
Johnson 68%
Goode 53%
Anderson 53%
Romney 46%
American voters 59%

Democrat 92%
Green 80%
Libertarian 55%
Rebuplican 41%

This is disturbing, since I belong to the Republican Party. But the Republican Party and the Democratic Party definitely have shifted their positions over the past decade and I would have classified myself as a moderate Republican even back then (in fact, I would have been a pretty big fan of Governor Romney, but definitely not a fan of Presidential candidate Romney).

None the less, it wasn't the shocking results that kept me from posting. It was this message:

Because of you, 0 people have taken this quiz.

It made me feel kind of bad.