Who is your presidential candidate?

I side with Ron Paul on most issues in the 2012 Presidential Election.

Candidates you side with...

86%
Ron Paul
on economic, healthcare, domestic policy, immigration, social, and foreign policy issues.

82%
Gary Johnson
on economic, healthcare, immigration, and domestic policy issues.

80%
Mitt Romney
on economic, domestic policy, healthcare, and immigration issues.

46%
Barack Obama
on science and foreign policy issues.

Who you side with by party...
85% Libertarian
80% Republican
54% Green
46% Democratic
 
Eh, what the heck....

88%
Jill Stein
on domestic policy, foreign policy, healthcare, immigration, environmental, and social issues.

81%
Gary Johnson
on domestic policy, immigration, healthcare, foreign policy, and social issues.

70%
Ron Paul
on domestic policy, healthcare, and foreign policy issues.

70%
Barack Obama
on immigration, social, and science issues.


88% Green
76% Libertarian
70% Democratic
23% Republican <--percentages don't make sense.
 
For anyone trying this out, Expand the questions when you can for more accuracy.

And often times "other option" will open up a platoon of extra options.



flawless


Just cuz Ron paula nd gary johnson are republicans. Their mindset and ideas are more libertarian based.
 
Critical-Limit said:
flawless


Just cuz Ron paula nd gary johnson are republicans. Their mindset and ideas are more libertarian based.
Click to expand...

I personally don't favor any party. However, I question what those percentages mean. I thought the numbers compare party/ideal leanings, but if it adds up to over 100%....it doesn't mathematically make sense to me...unless there is something I'm missing.
 
Last edited:
FlawlessVictor said:
I personally don't favor any party. However, I question when what those percentages mean. I thought the numbers compare party/ideal leanings, but if it adds up to over 100%....it doesn't mathematically make sense to me...unless there is something I'm missing.
Click to expand...

oh,

It's saying like for instance

your gary johnson was 81%

Of all of the choices you made. you agree with 81% of what johnson agrees with.


19% of the issues you decided on, Gary does not agree.

you repeat this for each candidate.
 
I side with Jill Stein on most issues in the 2012 Presidential Election.
Candidates you side with...
80%
Jill Stein
on healthcare, immigration, foreign policy, environmental, and social issues.
69%
Barack Obama
on foreign policy, science, immigration, and social issues.
53%
Ron Paul
on healthcare and domestic policy issues.
43%
Mitt Romney
on economic and domestic policy issues.
Show all candidates
Who you side with by party...
80%
Green
69%
Democratic
59%
Libertarian
43%
Republican
 
Critical-Limit said:
oh,

It's saying like for instance

your gary johnson was 81%

Of all of the choices you made. you agree with 81% of what johnson agrees with.


19% of the issues you decided on, Gary does not agree.

you repeat this for each candidate.
Click to expand...

I understand the percentages by candidate.

However, the percentage by party is where I'm confused. I'm not sure how that was calculated.

Edit: Oh I think I get it now. The calculation is based on the percentage of issues I agree with by all candidates of a party. It needs to be taken with a grain of salt, the results are skewed because not all parties have the same number of candidates.
 
Last edited:
FlawlessVictor said:
I understand the percentages by candidate.

However, the percentage by party is where I'm confused. I'm not sure how that was calculated.
Click to expand...

That's in comparison to the party platform


For instance.


Republican party platform: has foreign policy as "Internventionists" basically. They believe in pre-emptive war. Attacking first before getting attacked.


If you agree with the platform. Your % goes up.


So if your republican % is I can't see it so lets pretend 33%

You agree with only 33% of the republican party platform.


The platform is a general guideline for what most of the "party believes in" of course there are members who disagree with some of the platform so not all people in a party 100% agree with the platform.
 
44205885.jpg


I don't know whether to be happy or sad :laugh:

I don't know much about politics.
 
lol, I tried answering it in the most contradicting and hateful way as I could.

okap0m.jpg


But in all seriousness, this is scary as fffffok:

Should the federal government regulate the internet to deter online piracy?

Dear god, I hope it never comes to this. The internet should never be regulated... never.
 
I find it interesting how just about all of us don't have either candidate who actually has a chance of winning as our top choice. Keep the MK kommunity weird, I guess.
 
I did this a few weeks ago. I sided with Obama on 84% of issues. I also got a few other lesser-known candidates as top scorers for 'political compatibility', as one would say, which on the face of it, doesn't surprise me. I also sided with 67% of fellow Connecticut residents on political issues, which again, in a 2/3rds moderately-liberal democrat state, isn't surprising.
 
I do like Gary Johnson's approach to taxes. But you can bet your ass it won't see the light of day, because,

1.) It would eliminate IRS and destroy many tax loop holes (corporations would have less of a reason to buy politicians to achieve tax breaks)

So you can bet your ass they won't like that.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of taxes, I see Romney has decided to go with Paul Ryan as his VP after all. Now, why would a man who's being accused of possibly having paid little or no taxes for decades choose to run with someone who, he admitted in public when debating Gingrich, has a tax plan that would see him paying zero taxes? What a dumb move. Not to mention that Romney's already seen as a self-serving plutocrat who wants breaks for the wealthy...adding Paul Ryan, author of the Ryan Budget of 'slash benefits and cornerstones for the middle and lower class and spend the result on the wealthy with tax cuts' might well be political suicide.
 
Why are people saying Paul Ryan is hot when he is nowhere near it?

Anyway:


[h=5]Jill Stein[/h]on science, foreign policy, healthcare, social, environmental, and domestic policy issues.

82%
962415.png
[h=5]Jimmy McMillan[/h]on immigration, economic, healthcare, foreign policy, and social issues.

72%
962388.png
[h=5]Barack Obama[/h]on social, healthcare, science, and foreign policy issues.

65%
962418.png
[h=5]Ron Paul[/h]on immigration, economic, and foreign policy issues.

56%
962427.png
[h=5]Mitt Romney[/h]on immigration, economic, and domestic policy issues.
 
Freyith said:
Speaking of taxes, I see Romney has decided to go with Paul Ryan as his VP after all. Now, why would a man who's being accused of possibly having paid little or no taxes for decades choose to run with someone who, he admitted in public when debating Gingrich, has a tax plan that would see him paying zero taxes? What a dumb move. Not to mention that Romney's already seen as a self-serving plutocrat who wants breaks for the wealthy...adding Paul Ryan, author of the Ryan Budget of 'slash benefits and cornerstones for the middle and lower class and spend the result on the wealthy with tax cuts' might well be political suicide.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I 100% bet he bailed on a few years of taxes and paid NONE, Did you hear about the "scam" Romney went for? It's like his entire decisions is based on getting around taxes whether it's legally or illegally.

What a douche, He's 100% for the rich.

Good man Cenk explains it best here.


Enjoy Romney taking 500 bucks from EVERYONE for free and giving it to the rich for NO REASON. If he's president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top