43,
He got "soft-core". Didn't mention the score.
My gripe with this test is that it rates policy positions rather than philosophy. People from all over the political spectrum can support the same policies, but for radically different reasons. It's not what we think should be done that defines our ideology, but rather *why* we think it should be done.
I prefer this test for that reason.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
43,
Economic Left/ Right 3.00
Social Libertarian/ Authoritarian -5.59
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.79
Economic Left/Right: 0.88
Social Authority/Liberty: 4.06
"If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall
Economic: left/right: -0.12
Social libertarian/authoritarian: -3.49
I have no idea what those number mean.
The economic axis is how much control the government should exert in the economy. Negative numbers are high government control.
The social axis is how much control the government should exert in individual behavior. Positive numbers are high government control.
To give you an idea of how you compare to well- known political figures, plot your numbers on this chart:
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Ha, look at ole Mittens and Obama, just a few points off.
Sent from my ADR6325 using Tapatalk 2
Board meltdown in 3...2....1
Sent from my ADR6325 using Tapatalk 2
70 on the first test. 2.38/0.26 on the second.
"If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall
Most of the figures up there are pretty polarizing guys. I'd bet nearly every modern elected official would be right around the same area as Romney and Obama. I'm not saying it's right or wrong for any reason, but I think it's fair to point out that a big difference on issues between two elected officials in the US is generally much smaller in scale than it would be for Nelson Mandela vs. the Pope for example. That chart takes into account many more views than are represented within our government. Therefore most mainstream US citizens would probably fall very close to each other. I'm not referring to Romney vs. Obama specifically, just in general.
Not to mention, all the information here should be taken with a grain of salt. I liked both polls and thought they were fairly accurate. But I wouldn't take anything on a chart as gospel just because a website says so.
"If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall
Give a lib a fish--he eats for a day
Teach a lib to fish--he is back the next day asking for more free fish.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
About what I thought. Little surprised I'm not a tad bit deeper into the libertarian world, but still, not too bad.
The results on that chart for anyone who hasn't actually taken the test are speculative, and the "center" is completely subjective. But having said that, their remarkably similar placement shouldn't be surprising to anybody. Obama is an Illinois academic liberal Democrat who is forced to behave more moderately than he'd like, and Romney is a Massachusetts mainstream Democrat- turned- Republican who was selected because he was the least- conservative in the field. Both are more authoritarian than the average.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Well, at least you didn't try and say the two are "exactly the same" this time. And the "Democrat turned Republican" line is a little misleading. Romney never registered Democrat. He voted for a Democratic candidate in an election before he had registered with a party. And at that time if you were an undecided voter in the state of MA and voted for a candidate in either the Democratic or Republican party the state automatically changed your voting status to that party. He changed his party back to "independent" immediately after learning the state designated him a Democrat.
"If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall
They're not "exactly the same" and the placement on the chart doesn't show them that way. The results of electing them, however, would have been pretty much indistinguishable except for the fact that Congressional Republicans wouldn't have opposed his "progressive" initiatives and we would've ended up in a much worse position.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Only problem with your theory, is that many congressional Republicans aren't straight up opposing Obama's initiatives. As you're well aware, many in the party are now trying to compromise with the President. Which means, like it or not, Obama isn't done passing reforms. And having a somewhat liberal minded Republican President actually doesn't sound like an awful idea to me depending on where the liberal ideals are, as poorly received as that statement might be on this board. I really think we dropped the ball by not electing Romney. More so over the last few days than even before. I know you'll never agree with that, and that's fine, but I need the Libertarian party and Republicans who lean towards Libertarian ideals, to present a more well defined plan of action than what I've seen before I'll ever consider them a viable option to run this nation. There are too many holes, too many versions and too many nut jobs involved with what the libertarian movement wants to do for me to be comfortable supporting it at this point. I've seen Republican and Democratic ideas work before. The system is in turmoil, but it is not broken. Admittedly, getting it back to where it needs to be to do the things this country needs might be as far fetched as a Libertarian overhaul taking place, but I'm inclined to think it is a better option than scrapping everything. Again, I realize you'll disagree.
"If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall
Yeah, I sure do.Only problem with your theory, is that many congressional Republicans aren't straight up opposing Obama's initiatives. As you're well aware, many in the party are now trying to compromise with the President. Which means, like it or not, Obama isn't done passing reforms. And having a somewhat liberal minded Republican President actually doesn't sound like an awful idea to me depending on where the liberal ideals are, as poorly received as that statement might be on this board. I really think we dropped the ball by not electing Romney. More so over the last few days than even before. I know you'll never agree with that, and that's fine, but I need the Libertarian party and Republicans who lean towards Libertarian ideals, to present a more well defined plan of action than what I've seen before I'll ever consider them a viable option to run this nation. There are too many holes, too many versions and too many nut jobs involved with what the libertarian movement wants to do for me to be comfortable supporting it at this point. I've seen Republican and Democratic ideas work before. The system is in turmoil, but it is not broken. Admittedly, getting it back to where it needs to be to do the things this country needs might be as far fetched as a Libertarian overhaul taking place, but I'm inclined to think it is a better option than scrapping everything. Again, I realize you'll disagree.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
"If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall
Those who voted for Romney simply felt he was a better electable option than Obama for the most part.
Just because Romney got 47 times the popular vote your guy did is no reason for a malfunction.
You want gridlock, others aren't so sure.
Now put your bot fangs away and play nice.
"With love, with patience, and with Faith
....She'll make her way" ~ Natalie Merchant
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Don't get pissy because you fell for his bs. He is Obama lite and nothing less. HE WAS'T ELECTABLE EVEN THOUGH YOU AND YOUR ILK THOUGHT SO! Republicans have become a pathetic shell of themselves. All of you should be ashamed that you even considered electing a Rhino.
You're entitled to your opinioin. But so am I. And I can tell you quite clearly I feel no shame or remorse for supporting Romney. I have no doubt the country would be moving in a better direction if he had been elected.
We'll just have to wait and see what the next presendential election will bring. But I'll offer this opinion, you wont find someone right of Romney that will have a snowball in hell's chance of winning a general election.
"A man's got to know his limitations."