PDA

View Full Version : candidate calculator



aSkeptic
11-02-2008, 07:12 PM
Which candidate really supports your views? Find out at

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

hrgiger
11-02-2008, 07:17 PM
I came up with Ralph Nader with Barack being a close second. I'm still not voting for a sure loser (Nader).

jameswillmott
11-02-2008, 07:22 PM
I got Ralph first, Obama came about third. But I'm not a US citizen so it was just for fun...

hrgiger
11-02-2008, 07:24 PM
I was an 87% match for Nader, 84% match for Obama and a 41% match for McCain.

wacom
11-02-2008, 07:35 PM
That poll is flat out #$#($&!!!

I felt forced into saying yes and no on several things since it was so narrow.

Nadar? WTF? ME? NOPE!

I think that poll is for soccer moms or something...

warmiak
11-02-2008, 09:18 PM
Bob Barr (Libertarian) - 65.00%
John McCain (Republican) 65.00% match
Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) - 60.00%
Barack Obama (Democrat) - 40.00%
Ralph Nader (Independant) - 30.00%

Limbus
11-03-2008, 12:28 AM
I'm not a US citizen either but did it just for fun. I managed to get the exact same precentage for Obama and Nader: 85,71%. McCain comes out with only 38,10%.

Cheers, Florian

zapper1998
11-03-2008, 01:32 AM
mine was obama, ......hmmmmmm
did it 4 times and .... obama was 4 out of 4....
calculator is broken

meatycheesyboy
11-03-2008, 03:17 AM
Nader then Obama for me. Then the green party candidate and in fourth was the Libertarian candidate. McCain came in last for me.

Usually when I do similar calculators the Libertarian candidate rates higher than it did here. I gues either my views are changing or the questions were worded in a way that made me choose differently than other times.

IMI
11-03-2008, 03:57 AM
I somehow ended up with Paris Hilton. Something not quite right there. :confused:

biliousfrog
11-03-2008, 05:46 AM
Nader - 88.24%

Obama + McKinney - 68.63%

Barr - 58.82%
Baldwin - 39.22%

McCain - 27.45%

Seems about right to me, especially McCain being 'Bottom of the Barrel' :D

biliousfrog
11-03-2008, 05:58 AM
I came up with Ralph Nader with Barack being a close second. I'm still not voting for a sure loser (Nader).

I've never understood that mentality...you won't vote for someone because they'll not get elected? Surely that's putting someone else's views before your own which essentially makes your right to vote useless.

I remember the last UK election, almost everyone I spoke to said that they wanted to vote Lib Dem or some other 'outsider' but voted for either Labour or Conservative because it wouldn't be a 'wasted vote'...but, to me, that seems like a wasted vote right there.

You can't instigate change by following everyone else.

DiedonD
11-03-2008, 09:58 AM
Oh my! Who is Ralph Nader? I havent even heard of him (88.89%)!

Green Party 83.33

Barack Obama 72.22 and so on.

But as you know Im not US Citizen neither :)

wacom
11-03-2008, 02:53 PM
I've never understood that mentality...you won't vote for someone because they'll not get elected? Surely that's putting someone else's views before your own which essentially makes your right to vote useless.


...but it might have prevented the Iraq war!

Trust me- I get your freedom and democracy "vibe".

Sorry- some of us have had to get very pragmatic as of late, and when faced with the lesser of two evils, the past has now proven to go for the lesser at all costs!

hrgiger
11-03-2008, 04:16 PM
I've never understood that mentality...you won't vote for someone because they'll not get elected? Surely that's putting someone else's views before your own which essentially makes your right to vote useless.

I remember the last UK election, almost everyone I spoke to said that they wanted to vote Lib Dem or some other 'outsider' but voted for either Labour or Conservative because it wouldn't be a 'wasted vote'...but, to me, that seems like a wasted vote right there.

You can't instigate change by following everyone else.

It's not following anyone. It's helping to prevent somebody I DON'T want in office. I only have to look at any state at random and see that Ralph Nader isn't on the radar and doesn't stand a chance to win. But McCain and Palin do stand a chance of winning so if I were to vote for Nader, that's probably going to help McCain because it's taking away the vote that would have otherwise went to Obama.
But even if Nader was a viable candidate, I still would probably vote for Obama over Nader so it's all a moot point anyway.

mosconariz
11-03-2008, 05:59 PM
Thank you for the link, it helped me to confirm my McCainphobia :D

Ralph Nader (Independant) - 81.54% match
Barack Obama (Democrat) - 76.92%
Cynthia McKinney (Green Party) - 60.00%
Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) - 47.69%
Bob Barr (Libertarian) - 35.38%
John McCain (Republican) - 30.77%

And, yeah. I'm Mexican, so... the future of the world and the downfall of the empire is not my business anyway :yoda:

zapper1998
11-03-2008, 06:04 PM
I somehow ended up with Paris Hilton. Something not quite right there. :confused:

lucky you

mosconariz
11-03-2008, 06:09 PM
--Damn, I wanted to edit my last post but it seems I should call an administrator and blah... So, sorry if I was a little harsh to somebody... I think I was unnecesarily crude--

Verlon
11-03-2008, 07:15 PM
You know something is wrong when you get a tie between Ralph Nader and Bob Barr.

warmiak
11-03-2008, 07:33 PM
You know something is wrong when you get a tie between Ralph Nader and Bob Barr.


Not really ..

Religious conservatives and liberals are for limiting people’s choice … one side is unwilling to let others “redefine marriage” , do drugs or gable … the other side has no problem with these issues but is more then willing to limit people’s choice in terms of how much money they get to keep, which schools they get to send their children to or how many guns they get to own.

So both of them will score some points when measuring against someone like Bob Barr.

jill_alcher
11-04-2008, 02:12 AM
Obama will win, I think. :thumbsup:

biliousfrog
11-04-2008, 03:23 AM
Obama will win, I think. :thumbsup:

Remember who 'won' last time?...vote's don't count for anything in US elections

IMI
11-04-2008, 05:53 AM
Remember who 'won' last time?...

Yeah, Bush beat Kerry by 3 million popular votes and 34 electoral votes. Because Kerry's even more of a dimwit than Bush, if you can believe that.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/



vote's don't count for anything in US elections


But the votes DO count. The popular votes determine the electoral votes, and the electoral votes are divided by state, according to population. Therefore it's possible to win the popular vote and not win the electoral vote and thus, the election.

But I guess you were referring to 2000, which is a perfect example of that:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results/

Gore beat Bush by half a million popular votes, but Bush won more states and thus more electoral votes, and thus the election. And there was much fuss from the masses...

mattclary
11-04-2008, 06:25 AM
Easier than typing:

aSkeptic
11-04-2008, 03:12 PM
Easier than typing:
Yeah I got Baldwin too, with Barr not far behind. I agree with those assessments. However My mom took the test and came up with Obama, and her views couldn't be farther from his. Maybe she took the test wrong.