Candidate Calculator

[real american]

http://www.vajoe.com/candidate_calculator.html

I tried it and got Huchabee. Even though I can't vote at least I know who I can learn more on, what did you get?

[wahrheit]

My result was

Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D)
91.30% match

I noticed this name before following the news in the US. I hope it means something good.

[vexed]

My Results:
Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich (D)
92.45% match

[TragicMonkey]

My result was

Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D)
91.30% match

I noticed this name before following the news in the US. I hope it means something good.

I got the same guy with the same percentage. Either you and I happen to agree on everything, or there's a flaw in the coding.

[wahrheit]

I got the same guy with the same percentage. Either you and I happen to agree on everything, or there's a flaw in the coding.

I'm afraid it might be the former. I liked you and your posts from the day I joined this forum. And mind you, that was before I realized you would become a repeated TLA winner celebrity and such.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich (D)
83.87% match

I am 83.87% elfish.

[LibraryLady]

I got Gravel with 90.48%. I've never even heard of him!

ETA: I can't wait to see who BPSCG gets!

[Lisa Simpson]

I got Gravel too. I saw this clip on The Colbert Report, I think.

0rZdAB4V_j8

[LibraryLady]

How very....zen....

[Fnord]

First, I entered "Yes" and "Medium" for everything, and "Undecided for the candidate, and got back:

#1) Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) - 82.61% match
#2) Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R) - 73.91%
#3) Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd (D) - 69.57%
#4) Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee (R) - 69.57%


Then I entered "Unsure" and "Medium" for everything, and "Undecided" for the candidate, and got back:

#1) Delaware Senator Joseph Biden (D) - 0.00%
#2) Kansas Senator Sam Brownback (R) - 0.00%
#3) New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D) - 0.00%
#4) Businessman John Cox (R) - 0.00%


Then I entered "No" and "Medium" for everything, and "Undecided" for the candidate, and got back:

#1) Texas Representative Ron Paul (R) - 82.61% match
#2) Businessman John Cox (R) - 73.91%
#3) Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D) - 69.57%
#4) Kansas Senator Sam Brownback (R) - 56.52%


Finally, I entered my real interests, set everything to high importance, Declared "Undecided" for the candidate, and got back:

#1) New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D) - 63.64%
#2) New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D) - 59.09%
#3) Arizona Senator John McCain (R) - 59.09%
#4) Delaware Senator Joseph Biden (D) - 54.55%


I'll keep my "No Political Affiliation" status, and wait until after the primaries.

[Cleon]

I'm one of those weird people who prefers to make up my own mind, rather than have a website tell me who I should vote for.

Call me crazy.

[Lisa Simpson]

I'm one of those weird people who prefers to make up my own mind, rather than have a website tell me who I should vote for.

Call me crazy.

Um...who the candidate calculator picks for you isn't legally binding, you know.

[wahrheit]

You're right, Lisa. How dare I even open that web page, I can't even vote in the US! Silly me.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I, for one, welcome our new brain controlling website overlords!

[Pyrts]

I got a split (within 1% of each other) Clinton/Kucinich.

[UserGoogol]

I'm one of those weird people who prefers to make up my own mind, rather than have a website tell me who I should vote for.

Call me crazy.

You should make up your mind, but you should make up your mind in a rational way which attempts to find the optimal person. (Or, more pragmatically, find the optimal vote, since with tactical voting the two do not always overlap.) What could be more rational than to consider each candidate as a vector of their various political positions and credentials and then assign a score based on the distance between that vector and some sort of hypothetical "optimal candidate." These Internet polls (this one explicitly gives its algorithm) serve to allow you to do this efficiently by giving you some predetermined collection of dimensions which is deemed representative and then showing which candidates are closest to you using a 1-norm weighted according to your own wishes. There's a certain amount of limitations in their choice of dimensions, and thus no poll is exactly perfect, but it is a highly useful way to get a quantified sense of candidates which you can then refine at your leisure. Math is power.

And as is fairly often the case on this sort of poll, I get Kucinich/Gravel (tied), with Obama in third.

[egslim]

What could be more rational than to consider each candidate as a vector of their various political positions and credentials and then assign a score based on the distance between that vector and some sort of hypothetical "optimal candidate."
The problem is how to define those vectors. For example, one might support universal healthcare but be vehemently opposed to how a specific candidate wants to implement it.

Nor would I trust any such result without checking the calculation and input data from the candidates. Call me paranoid.

On the other hand, if the outcome is markedly different from what you expect it may very well be worth it to check the other candidate out. And if such polls help stimulate people to think about issues and politics before an election I'm all in favour.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich (D)
73.91% match


The first time I did it, I said I was going to vote for Mike Gravel and I ended up getting him as a result. I thought my saying that would mess up the results and since he almost definitely won't get the Dem ticket, I said "undecided" the next time and got Kucinich.



Abortion Rights Yes
Death Penalty No
No Child Left Behind No
Federal Embryonic Stem Cell Research Yes
ANWR Drilling No
Kyoto Protocol Yes
Assault Weapons Ban No
Gun Background Checks Yes
Patriot Act No
Guantanamo Detention Camp No
Waterboarding Detainees No
Citizen Path for Illegal Immigrants Yes
Border Fence Yes
Internet Neutrality Yes
U.S. Sanctions Against Iran Yes
Military Action Against Iran No
Support Iraq War No
Increase Minimum Wage Yes
Same-Sex Marriage Yes
Universal Health Care Yes
Free Trade No
School Vouchers Yes
Privatizing Social Security No




It's worth noting that in the state I'm living in right now, Primary elections are closed and limited to party members and I'm a registered independent.

[OldTigerCub]

Well, I guess I'm supposed to vote for Rudy Giuliani, with Mike Huckabee a close second.
Personally I'd rather wait and listen to where all of the candidates stand on the issues and make my decision based on what I think then.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Most people here don't realize that Mike Gravel probably supports most of the things that they do, and they don't even know anything about him or even who he is.

[GreNME]

Most people here don't realize that Mike Gravel probably supports most of the things that they do, and they don't even know anything about him or even who he is.

That's because Gravel supports most of the positive things that pretty much everyone does. He's not non-committal, but he's kind of vague.

[ZenFountain]

82.09% Gravel
79.10% Kucinich
77.61% Richardson
74.63% Clinton

I agree that Gravel picks up a lot of popular issues with liberal progressives simply by being vague and not having a recent political history. His big achievement was ending the draft, which I believe has only made it easier for politicians to send our soldiers off to war without the support of the people. Senator Hagel recently made scathing remarks (http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2798&u_sid=10177959) about the realities of the burdens we have put on our volunteer armed forces and I agree with him entirely. It was thought the total force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_force_policy) policy of integrating the National Guard with active duty would have the same effect of a drafted army (politicians can't start wars wherever they want), but clearly Iraq and Afghanistan have showed that not to be true. Having said that I don't find Gravel attractive at all as a candidate.

[Cain]

96.49% match for Mike Gravel and Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich (D) - 91.23%

According to the weighted measures of the website, most people surveyed match up with Gravel:

* Gravel - 13.31%
* Giuliani - 12.17%
* Romney - 10.99%
* Kucinich - 9.64%
* Huckabee - 7.67%
* Biden - 7.32%
* Cox - 6.34%
* Clinton - 4.57%
* Dodd - 4.20%
* Obama - 4.19%
* Tommy Thompson - 3.99%
* Hunter - 3.95%
* Tancredo - 2.73%
* Fred Thompson - 2.62%
* Paul - 1.95%
* Richardson - 1.67%
* Edwards - 1.35%
* Brownback - 1.02%
* Mccain - 0.33%

[real american]

My answers were;

Abortion Rights-No
Death Penalty-Yes
No Child Left Behind-Yes
Federal Embryonic Stem Cell Research-No
ANWR Drilling-No
Kyoto Protocol-Unsure
Assault Weapons Ban-Unsure
Gun Background Checks-Yes
Patriot Act-Yes
Guantanamo Detention Camp-Yes
Waterboarding Detainees-No
Citizen Path for Illegal Immigrants-Yes
Border Fence-Yes
Internet Neutrality-No
U.S. Sanctions Against Iran-Yes
Military Action Against Iran No
Support Iraq War-Yes
Increase Minimum Wage-Yes
Same-Sex Marriage-Yes
Universal Health Care-Yes
Free Trade-Yes
School Vouchers-No
Privatizing Social Security-No

[marksman]

This is silly, since after Gravel (and it seems to take concerted effort not to get Gravel on top n matter what your views), I had a three way tie between Giuliani, Brownback and Richardson.

[plindboe]

I have a thing about online tests and such, so I had to try it out, despite not being american. Got a 88.06% match with Dennis Kucinich.

[WildCat]

Somehow I ended up with Huckabee at 83.93%.

Hillary was "bottom of the barrel" and she'd get my vote if the election was today. :boxedin:

I call shenanigans!

[bruto]

Good old Gravel. Too bad he can't win. If he were on the ticket I'd be tempted to throw away my essentially worthless portion of the vote (Vermont with its one electoral vote) on him this year, just as a gesture.

[m_huber]

I think I've decided how I'm going to vote:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3LPdTXRjIKQ

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Mike Gravel isn't really that vague.




Views of Mike Gravel

On Abortion
Any abortion decision should remain between woman & doctor.

On Stem cell research
Stem Cell research should not be limited.

On Gay marriage
Supports Gay marriage

On Crime
More justice for the poor
End minimum sentencing laws
Stop punishing people for victim less crimes (Drugs, Gambling, Prostitution)

On Drugs
Lower drinking age to 18
Legalize Marijuana, Allow it to be sold in liquor stores.
Decriminalize hard drugs so we can treat addicts.
Believes Drug War failing now, like Prohibition failed in 1920s.
Legalize the use and possession of marijuana.

On Education
Extend school day and school year.
Supports Vouchers.

On Environment
Supports carbon tax.


http://www.ontheissues.org/Mike_Gravel.htm

[real american]

Legalize Marijuana, Allow it to be sold in liquor stores.

That is why I hope Gravel isn't voted in, Marijuana should stay illegal. Two kids in my town were smoking it one fell unconsis so the other killed himself, the theory is the kid thought he would go to jail. That there is the all I need to hear to know that it shouldn't be legal.

[TragicMonkey]

That is why I hope Gravel, Marijuana should stay illegal. Two kids in my town were smoking it one fell unconsis so the other killed himself, the theory is the kid thought he would go to jail. That there is the all I need to hear to know that it shouldn't be legal.

I suspect one has to be smoking pot in order to parse these, for lack of a better word, sentences.

[IMST]

But two kids in my town refused to smoke marijuana and they BOTH killed themselves. How dare you choose the anecdotes with the worse outcomes? (leaving aside the rediculousness of wanting it to be illegal because some was scared of jail for using it)

[Dustin Kesselberg]

That is why I hope Gravel isn't voted in, Marijuana should stay illegal. Two kids in my town were smoking it one fell unconsis so the other killed himself, the theory is the kid thought he would go to jail. That there is the all I need to hear to know that it shouldn't be legal.

Are you parodying one of those idiots who still believe marijuana needs to stay illegal or are you being serious? I can't tell.

[hgc]

I hit with Gravel at 90.48%. My favored candidate, John Edwards, came in 5th for me at 71.43% (tied with my 2nd favorite, Chris Dodd). Oh well, I guess a calculator's not the best way to choose a candidate.

[Loss Leader]

I got Kucinich at 55. Hillary and Obama were tied at 3rd with 42 which is ... good I guess.

[Dr. Fascism]

Most of the people here are being matched with one of the most socialist in Congress. Not surprised...

Somehow I ended up with Huckabee at 83.93%.

Hillary was "bottom of the barrel" and she'd get my vote if the election was today. :boxedin:

I call shenanigans!


Actually, Huckabee sounds like he'd be your man.

[Pyrts]

The problem is how to define those vectors. For example, one might support universal healthcare but be vehemently opposed to how a specific candidate wants to implement it.
All surveys have problems, but you do bring up an interesting point... the "fuzziness" of the definition. I've been reading up on the discipline of "fuzzy logic" and they point out such vaguenesses with an example: If you define $20,000/year as "poverty level" does this mean that someone making $20,001 is not poor?

On the other hand, if the outcome is markedly different from what you expect it may very well be worth it to check the other candidate out. And if such polls help stimulate people to think about issues and politics before an election I'm all in favour.

I agree! I did check out Kucinich after seeing that he came up close. Still voting for Hillary, though... but if she's out of the race then I have to rethink choices.

[BrooklynAndy]

Obviously, I'm skeptical of a self administered poll on the VAJOE website which I've only just heard of now (though seems a nice enough site)... I mean this is the same way I "discovered" my pirate name for Talk Like Pirate Day (piratequiz DOT com).

However, I find the "disconnect" between who I'm actually thinking of voting for and the candidate who most "matches" my views (assuming the algorithm to be somewhat accurate) is interesting.

Mostly, I think the poll fails to capture "leadership" skills... I may think a single payer health plan is a good idea, but I don't feel that any candidate with the skills to actually be president has advanced this idea. To say nothing of any chance to win. (btw... this should be a huge Republican "pro-business" keep American competitive issue... but its not)

Also, the poll makes it clear to me, I no longer "believe" official positions.

I felt George W was a master at making many groups feel he would be "their guy" even though his stated policy was different from what they said they supported. And I feel that this is a lesson that was well learned by the leading candidates. Can anyone tell me what Giuliani really would do if President? Which of his positions are "real" and which are "expedient"?

[Skeptic Ginger]

I got a split (within 1% of each other) Clinton/Kucinich.That seems odd since the two are pretty far apart on a number of issues. Did you skip some answers?

I think this shows that a lot of our beliefs are similar to some candidates but those are not the deciding factors when it comes to actually voting. If we did vote our actual beliefs, Kucinich and Gravel would not be getting such low poll numbers. Or, if either of those two had a stronger leadership image rather than their strong moral values perhaps the polls would differ.

Of course if I took the paranoid view, I might conclude the influence of the news media's presentation of the candidates really does control public opinion. I was really annoyed the other day to hear a CNN reporter literally making fun of Kucinich in an off hand remark. That was totally unprofessional.

Edited to add, I posted this before reading BrooklynAndy's post above, really.

[bruto]

That is why I hope Gravel isn't voted in, Marijuana should stay illegal. Two kids in my town were smoking it one fell unconsis so the other killed himself, the theory is the kid thought he would go to jail. That there is the all I need to hear to know that it shouldn't be legal.

That is one of the stupidest bits of inverse reason I've read in a long time. Did you think even for one second before you wrote that? If the kid killed himself because he thought he would go to jail, does it not enter into your head at all that if marijuana had been legal HE WOULDN'T HAVE GONE TO JAIL, WOULD HE?

[KoihimeNakamura]

What a surprise:
Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich (D)
82.76% match
Your Other Top Matches
Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D) - 72.41%
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D) - 65.52%
Delaware Senator Joseph Biden (D) - 62.07%

Some.. interesting results:
New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D) - 55.17%
Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd (D) - 55.17%
Texas Representative Ron Paul (R) - 55.17%
Illinois Senator Barack Obama (D) - 51.72%
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) - 37.93%
And the bottom of hte barrel is..
Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson (R) - 13.79%
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R) - 10.34%

This was with the following:
High Against: NCLB, Patirot Act, Waterboarding, Guantanamo Detention Camp, Miltary Action Agaisnt Iran, Minimum Wage

High For: Stem Cell Research, Gun Background Checks, Internet Neutrality, Same Sex Marriage

Medium Against: Border Fence, Support Iraq War, School Vouchers,
Medium For: Privatizing Social Security, Free Trade, UHC, Cit. Path for Illegal Immigrants, Abortion Rights

Unsure: ANWR Drilling, Kyoto Protocol, Death Penalty, US Sanctions in Iran

Shifting ANWR Drilling to Medium For, Kyoto to High For, Death Penalty to Medium Against, US Sanc. in Iran to Low For.. gets me:

Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich (D) 80.00% match
Your Other Top Matches
Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D) - 73.85%
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D) - 69.23%
Delaware Senator Joseph Biden (D) - 56.92%

[littlehulkster]

I got 82.9% Gravel, 81% Richardson.

That's the way I'd actually vote. Too bad this election is going to be between media darlings instead of good politicians, though.

[real american]

Are you parodying one of those idiots who still believe marijuana needs to stay illegal or are you being serious? I can't tell.

I am 100% Serious

[real american]

That is one of the stupidest bits of inverse reason I've read in a long time. Did you think even for one second before you wrote that? If the kid killed himself because he thought he would go to jail, does it not enter into your head at all that if marijuana had been legal HE WOULDN'T HAVE GONE TO JAIL, WOULD HE?

He shouldn't been smoking it in the first place, but that is what happened. All I know is that drugs are a big thing were I am and too many kids do it, if your gonna make it legal lets just hand it out to them What the hell, if were gonna make that legal lets make crack or any other drug legal! Do you see were I'm gettin' at?

[quixotecoyote]

Yay for the Drugs Are Bad, MMkay education system. Setting up unrealistic mindsets so that some kids do hard drugs after they realize the stuff about pot and alcohol was ******** and toss all the warnings aside, and so that other kids kids ultra-scared and promote policies to ruin the lives of the first set.

Beee-utiful

[real american]

I got 82.9% Gravel, 81% Richardson.

That's the way I'd actually vote. Too bad this election is going to be between media darlings instead of good politicians, though.

I saw the name and I couldn't help but ask, are you a wrestling fan? I am myself.

[quixotecoyote]

He shouldn't been smoking it in the first place, but that is what happened. All I know is that drugs are a big thing were I am and too many kids do it, if your gonna make it legal lets just hand it out to them What the hell, if were gonna make that legal lets make crack or any other drug legal! Do you see were I'm gettin' at?

Why would it be handed out free if it was legal?

Why would we make crack legal if we legalized pot?

Do you realize the difference between bad things happening because of using the drug and bad things happening because the drug is illegal?


Do you realize you're sounding like a crazed meth-head when you type without thinking?

[real american]

Why would it be handed out free if it was legal?

Why would we make crack legal if we legalized pot?

Do you realize the difference between bad things happening because of using the drug and bad things happening because the drug is illegal?


Do you realize you're sounding like a crazed meth-head when you type without thinking?

Sadly some of my family members have been screwed up because of drugs. Two have died. And that is why I'm completely against it.

[quixotecoyote]

Sadly some of my family members have been screwed up because of drugs. Two have died. And that is why I'm completely against it.


I'm sorry for your loss, but since you have brought it up, how did drugs being illegal help your family?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I am 100% Serious

If that's the case...


That is why I hope Gravel isn't voted in, Marijuana should stay illegal.

Wrong.

Two kids in my town were smoking it one fell unconsis so the other killed himself,


Essentially impossible. If it happened then marijuana had nothing to do with it. Marijuana doesn't cause suicide or sudden death.

the theory is the kid thought he would go to jail.

He killed himself because he thought he would go to jail? :rolleyes:

That there is the all I need to hear to know that it shouldn't be legal.

That doesn't make a bit of sense. If he killed himself because he thought he would go to jail for smoking marijuana then if it were legal he would never have killed himself!


He shouldn't been smoking it in the first place, but that is what happened.

No it didn't.

[quote=real american;3146943]All I know is that drugs are a big thing were I am and too many kids do it, if your gonna make it legal lets just hand it out to them What the hell, if were gonna make that legal lets make crack or any other drug legal! Do you see were I'm gettin' at?

No. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Decriminalizing drugs won't solve the drug problem. Decriminalizing drugs will solve the violence and crime problem associated with the prohibition of the drugs. Gangs getting revenue from selling marijuana, they would not be able to if legitimate companies sold it. Not to even mention the massive amount of $ that the U.S. govt spends on the "war on drugs" and the amount that it could generate by taxing them.

Marijuana is actually safer than alcohol or tobacco, both of which are totally legal.

I saw the name and I couldn't help but ask, are you a wrestling fan? I am myself.

How old are you? My guess is very young based on your posts.

Sadly some of my family members have been screwed up because of drugs. Two have died. And that is why I'm completely against it.

Do you support outlawing alcohol or tobacco also? Some of my family members have died from both but I know that outlawing them would not only cause more harm than good, it would also be totally ineffective, just like outlawing marijuana and other drugs is.

I'm sorry for your loss, but since you have brought it up, how did drugs being illegal help your family?

Good question.

[Dorian Gray]

I got, no joke, a 100% match with Mike Gravel. 100%. I've never heard a single thing about him.
After him was Kucinich and Obama. The first Republican I had was John Fox, and after him Tom Tancredo. They were down in the double digits.

Why isn't Stephen Colbert on there? He polls higher than half these people.

[real american]

I'm sorry for your loss, but since you have brought it up, how did drugs being illegal help your family?

Stoped many others from using it. Look I'm not saying it going to work all the time. But it will work a good amount of the time.

[real american]

If that's the case...




Wrong.




Essentially impossible. If it happened then marijuana had nothing to do with it. Marijuana doesn't cause suicide or sudden death.



He killed himself because he thought he would go to jail? :rolleyes:



That doesn't make a bit of sense. If he killed himself because he thought he would go to jail for smoking marijuana then if it were legal he would never have killed himself!


[quote=real american;3146943]He shouldn't been smoking it in the first place, but that is what happened.

No it didn't.



No. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Decriminalizing drugs won't solve the drug problem. Decriminalizing drugs will solve the violence and crime problem associated with the prohibition of the drugs. Gangs getting revenue from selling marijuana, they would not be able to if legitimate companies sold it. Not to even mention the massive amount of $ that the U.S. govt spends on the "war on drugs" and the amount that it could generate by taxing them.

Marijuana is actually safer than alcohol or tobacco, both of which are totally legal.



How old are you? My guess is very young based on your posts.



Do you support outlawing alcohol or tobacco also? Some of my family members have died from both but I know that outlawing them would not only cause more harm than good, it would also be totally ineffective, just like outlawing marijuana and other drugs is.



Good question.

I'm 14 years old. And also the theory is that the kid thought he would go to jail for he thought his friend was dead, thats all I know no one in the town talks about the bad things that happen we have had three horrible things happen in this town and no one talks about them. It ould be great if tabaco was illegal but it won't happen. Alcohol has some restrictions for intance corn whiskey.

[bruto]

He shouldn't been smoking it in the first place, but that is what happened. All I know is that drugs are a big thing were I am and too many kids do it, if your gonna make it legal lets just hand it out to them What the hell, if were gonna make that legal lets make crack or any other drug legal! Do you see were I'm gettin' at? Instead of parroting the usual arguments without thought, how about thinking for yourself? To begin with, it ought to be obvious enough that not all drugs are equal, and suggesting that they are is just a way of avoiding difficult choices. I'm sitting here right now with a steaming cup of caffeine in front of me. The choice of which drugs should and should not be legal is not necessarily an easy one, but it is a choice which needs to be made intelligently, without the same old faulty logic and worthless rhetoric that has failed and failed and failed again to solve any problems at all. Your own posts would tell you that if you cared to think harder about what you're saying. There is also a huge difference, as you ought to have figured out had you stopped to think instead of posting the same old knee-jerk junk, between decriminalizing a drug and handing it out. Or do you think that in states where alcohol is permitted, you can just go into the store and carry it off?

Now I don't know whether I'd be in favor of legalizing pot or not. It's a difficult choice. I do think, however, that pursuing, arresting and jailing people for personal use and possession is a waste of taxpayer time and money; and that in general, the war on drugs has accomplished little to control drugs except to move the drug culture into prisons that we end up paying for with tax dollars, some of which could have been spent on programs to make the world a less nasty place to grow up in in the first place.

[cafink]

I got a ninety-odd percent match with Ron Paul.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I got, no joke, a 100% match with Mike Gravel. 100%. I've never heard a single thing about him.
After him was Kucinich and Obama. The first Republican I had was John Fox, and after him Tom Tancredo. They were down in the double digits.

Why isn't Stephen Colbert on there? He polls higher than half these people.

Learn about him.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Stoped many others from using it. Look I'm not saying it going to work all the time. But it will work a good amount of the time.

Uhh... The drugs being illegal stopped many others from using them and that helped the ones who died from the drugs in your family? :confused:


I'm 14 years old.

That explains a lot.


And also the theory is that the kid thought he would go to jail for he thought his friend was dead, thats all I know no one in the town talks about the bad things that happen we have had three horrible things happen in this town and no one talks about them. It ould be great if tabaco was illegal but it won't happen. Alcohol has some restrictions for intance corn whiskey.

1. You don't know anything about the incident. You're making conclusions based on ignorance.

2. Tobacco won't be outlawed simply because it won't work. The same reason why prohibiting drugs doesn't work.

3. What about corn Whiskey? it's not illegal.

[ravdin]

My top candidate was Mike Gravel (87%). I put equal weight on all issues. My views are a bit unorthodox- I'm very liberal on social issues but I'm also staunchly pro-capitalist. I've been accused more than once of having leanings towards the dreaded L-word....

Anyway, given what I know of Gravel's positions, it's too bad that he doesn't have more of a voice in the national debate, let alone a shot in hell of getting the Democrat's nod.

[real american]

Uhh... The drugs being illegal stopped many others from using them and that helped the ones who died from the drugs in your family?
It helped the ones that are alive, like I said nothing is solid put its just as good, yes you get the lawbreakers in every bunch but the only thing that will work is to buckle down on them!


1. You don't know anything about the incident. You're making conclusions based on ignorance.
No I am basing my opinion on what I heard and what I heard is that two dumba$$es smoked weed. One was unconsios and the other killed himself.

2. Tobacco won't be outlawed simply because it won't work. The same reason why prohibiting drugs doesn't work.

3. What about corn Whiskey? it's not illegal.

Corn Whiskey aka white lighting aka Moonshine. Up were I am its called corn whiskey, its illegal from what I see.

Are you telling me that if your kid was smoking weed you would be fine with it?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Corn Whiskey aka white lighting aka Moonshine. Up were I am its called corn whiskey, its illegal from what I see.

Are you telling me that if your kid was smoking weed you would be fine with it?

I don't have children. I don't care if people smoke marijuana or even do drugs for that matter as it is their own personal choice. I would probably be concerned if I had a child who was doing drugs of ANY kind, legal or illegal. This doesn't mean I think they should be illegal. Your question really isn't relevant. Someone can oppose the use of drugs yet still be against their prohibition.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

My top candidate was Mike Gravel (87%). I put equal weight on all issues. My views are a bit unorthodox- I'm very liberal on social issues but I'm also staunchly pro-capitalist. I've been accused more than once of having leanings towards the dreaded L-word....

Anyway, given what I know of Gravel's positions, it's too bad that he doesn't have more of a voice in the national debate, let alone a shot in hell of getting the Democrat's nod.


It's all about money. He can't have more of a voice without money and the media won't give him one either since he is a second tier candidate. During Debates (When he is actually invited) he rarely gets asked questions. Why? The people hosting the debate only care about the more notable candidates because they think that equals ratings which equals money. They are more concerned with making a buck than presenting Americans with a balanced viewpoint on the candidates.



Irony here...CNN and MSNBC both only focus on the more famous candidates dedicating about 90% of the questioning to the top 3 candidates while Fox News is actually more "fair and balanced" in that respect.

[bruto]

Corn Whiskey aka white lighting aka Moonshine. Up were I am its called corn whiskey, its illegal from what I see.

Are you telling me that if your kid was smoking weed you would be fine with it?

I suppose it depends on the age of the kid. But what does how you feel about your children doing something affect the overall question of whether it should be criminalized for the entire population? I would feel pretty bad about a child of mine (if mine were as young as you are, which they no longer are) drinking gin too, but I do not think that this is a good argument for arresting every adult caught with gin in his home, do you?

I see Dustin beat me to the post button with pretty much the same thing. Except I actually have kids. I hope they're not smoking pot, but I would not have them sent to jail if they were. They're all over 21.

[Skeptic Guy]

My result was

Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D)
91.30% match

I noticed this name before following the news in the US. I hope it means something good.

Exactly the same thing for me.

Followed by Kucinich, Obama, and Biden.

[davefoc]

My top candidate was Mike Gravel (87%). I put equal weight on all issues. My views are a bit unorthodox- I'm very liberal on social issues but I'm also staunchly pro-capitalist. I've been accused more than once of having leanings towards the dreaded L-word....

Anyway, given what I know of Gravel's positions, it's too bad that he doesn't have more of a voice in the national debate, let alone a shot in hell of getting the Democrat's nod.

That describes me also and I came in at 85.71% for Gravel.

Kucinich, Dodd and Ron Paul were all high choices also.

In my case, this might be because I see ending the Iraq war and not starting another middle east war as the highest priorities and all other issues as secondary. It would be nice if the next president isn't a corrupt, inept, narcissistic nutjob also but I might vote for one of those if that was the only way that I thought the US was going to end its disastrous run at middle east policeman/imperialist exploiter.

[Dr Adequate]

That is why I hope Gravel isn't voted in, Marijuana should stay illegal. Two kids in my town were smoking it one fell unconsis so the other killed himself, the theory is the kid thought he would go to jail. So if it had been legal, that kid would be alive today.

That there is the all I need to hear to know that it shouldn't be legal. That's it ... you've blown your chances for my "Smart Guy Of The Week" Award.

[Dr Adequate]

Another Gravel fan, apparently.

How come the highest Republican on my list was Ron Paul?

They should have asked some more questions. Like:

* Would you favor a return to the gold standard?

* Do you think that the Constitution says exactly what Ron Paul says it says?

* Are you completely off your head?

[bruto]

Another Gravel fan, apparently.

How come the highest Republican on my list was Ron Paul?

They should have asked some more questions. Like:

* Would you favor a return to the gold standard?

* Do you think that the Constitution says exactly what Ron Paul says it says?

* Are you completely off your head?
Ron Paul is a bit nutty, but at least when he says "smaller government" he seems use the phrase to mean government which is smaller, rather than the usual conservative code for "cheaply run police theocracy."

[Darth Rotor]

Weird results.

Top 4 were, much to my surprise, in order:

Romney
Rudy
Obama
Hillary

Strange, as I have no intention to vote for Rudy, nor Hillary, and would vote Ralph Nader before either of them (should he run.)

My guy wasn't listed, Kinky Friedman, though I think I might be induced to vote for Richardson.

Well, OK, so Kinky hasn't announced, and is still sulking on his goat ranch and ranting about how lottery revenue isn't arriving in the Texas state education fund.

He's still my preference.

DR

[Dustin Kesselberg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Mike_Gravel

[marksman]

That wiki site has some unintentional humorous comments:
Among his proposals and/or remarks to the New Hampshire Institute of Politics were:
* '30% of American children do not finish high school'.
Really? Gravel proposes that 30% of Americans don't finish high school?! ;)

Having now read his platforms I cannot imagine why that website or any person would think I would support him over the candidates I actually do support, except that he's actually bothered to be on record on a bazillion mundane platitudes that everybody would agree with.

[bruto]

That wiki site has some unintentional humorous comments:
Among his proposals and/or remarks to the New Hampshire Institute of Politics were:
* '30% of American children do not finish high school'.
Really? Gravel proposes that 30% of Americans don't finish high school?! ;)

Having now read his platforms I cannot imagine why that website or any person would think I would support him over the candidates I actually do support, except that he's actually bothered to be on record on a bazillion mundane platitudes that everybody would agree with.

Not to argue politics itself, but why is his remark humorous?

Or is it somehow assumed that "proposals and/or remarks" can consist only of proposals?

[JCM]

Texas Representative Ron Paul (R)
81.37% match
I think had chosen No to everything except School Vouchers, Internet Neutrality, and Increase Minimum Wage. I think Ron Paul represents most of my views at least moreso than any other candidate. I got a 57 for Gravel and if I was a Democrat I would probably vote for him to win that party's nomination.
Thanks for posting the link I wouldn't have seen the test otherwise :)

[marksman]

Not to argue politics itself, but why is his remark humorous?

Or is it somehow assumed that "proposals and/or remarks" can consist only of proposals?

It's no assumed. It's just funny when read that way. I like funny.

[The Painter]

It says I like Cox. Hey I'm not gay. That can't be right.