same results,same shock!
I took it last week.
Only seemed to disagree with Kucinich because the energy question only referred to ethanol. Otherwise he's my man.
Actually was slightly more in "agreeance" with Rudito than Biden (D-MBNA). Heh.
Kucinich for President, apparently, with VP Dodd. Hillary merits Dog Catcher..........
disturbing to disagree with the front runners on the two most important issues. . .cool test.
I had the same results you did, which rather blew me awa too.
Pretty much the same, but two caveats. Lots of forced questions, like ethanol (Cellulosic ethanol or biodiesel are fine, just corn ethanol) or the immigration question. Secondly, it doesn't take into account the "sausage making" factor. I.E. A canidate has to have the right platform and the ability to realize and implement. If Nader's platform was in the mix he'd probably top the list, but I'd never vote for him. Platforms never survive long after impact w/ reality. Kucinich can take the proper position because he has no chance of winning.
Sadly, we probably need an anti-war "LBJ" in, somebody who is a consummate sausage maker (as w/ the civil rights bill not the war). Frankly, I'd be happy with a moderate that can just pull us out of the Bush nosedive and get us back to a mild ascent at this point.
Well, Kucinich is my man, which I already knew, but I still don't think he has a ghost of a chance, mainly for the reasons outlined by SteveK. I could be OK with Edwards, Obama, Clinton, Dodd, maybe Richardson. I love Gravel but recognize his chosen role as a gadfly. Not too keen on Biden for reasons unrelated to his policy stances.
And of course the Republicans stink like poo.
Other than hoping that Kucinich can set the world afire (yeah right), I've begun to think more about Dodd recently. He seems to be on solid ground for most things, and is a lot more up front and consistent than a certain person with a name beginning with Hillary. Obama, Edwards......... not too shabby either. Maybe need a little more time on the big stage. I dunno.
Yep, took it and agreed with Kucinich 100 percent. That line-item veto was kind of a wild card seeing as how it is never discussed. It would require a Constitutional amendment and I am not too willing to officially enshrine more power to the Executive at the moment.
I will be voting for Kucinich in March 2008 just as I did in March 2004. If you don't get to vote for the candidate you want to win in the primary elections, when do you?
I've got a primary in February where I'll be voting for Kucinich.
We all seem similar here -- a general progressive consensus. Immigration was a shitty question (umm, what if you want to actually _prosecute_ employers _and_ naturalize immigrants?) and energy was a pathetic railroad (howabout pure electric), but, despite it all, it comes up Kucinich at the front. . . who is basically irrelevant. Edwards was ahead of the Big Two, not tied, for me, but only by a single point.
Line-item veto wouldn't require a Constitutional Amendment, btw: it would just require 2 more justices in the USSC, and that only requires a modification of a statute.
The idea that the line-item veto could compare to health care is a bit silly, though.
My top choices
Dennis Kucinich , Bill Richardson, Mike Gravel
I'm flummoxed.
My scoring showed that there is someone--me--to whom Richardson and the Peace Elf are similarly positioned.
So why is one of these guys 'not serious' and the other one waiting for NH to tell him whether he's serious?
I actually like the similar site below better. The results came out about the same for me as WQAD's "Select A Candidate" -- Kucinich. Neither sites are perfect, but this one below seems like it's based on a few more variables. Interesting (fun?) to see negative scores, too.
Just wondering, though... These sites wouldn't be rigged to show Kucinich at the top, would they? I've sent both these quiz sites to some right-wing family members; waiting now to hear what they got... I could also play around with the answers too, I guess.
* Pick your Candidate 2008
http://www.dehp.net/candidate/index.php
Stats:
http://www.dehp.net/candidate/stats.php
which is based on data collected here...
* 2008 Presidential Election Candidates on the Issues
http://www.2decide.com/table.htm
Same surprising results - richardson, edwards, and kucinich all in the top...
Dodd & Kucinich
And at the bottom
Fred Thompson
Kucinich, Gravel and Dodd, and not too surprisingly, Fredrick of Hollywood at the bottom.
Kucinich, Richardson, Gravel, Dodd...with the rest flowing down from there. Edwards was far and away the best of the top tier (no surprise there). Hillary, not surprisingly, was ranked as the last Democrat I'd vote for.
The choices in this thing were limited because they only offered the choices that the candidates themselves are offering in their position statements. If you didn't see an option there, it's because none of the candidates supports it.
I had the same struggle, particularly with the energy and immigration options -- and it really brought home to me the ways in which the debate on those two topics have been narrowed to the point that we're no longer discussing some of the very best solutions.
The line-item veto thing is on there because this is what passes for a "serious issue" on the GOP side, so it's a key choice point for Republican voters who take this test. They've been discussing this since Ford was president. For some of the faithful, it's a Big Effing Deal. (I know. You can only roll your eyes.)
i got the Kooch as well. no surprise there. voting for him in the primaries, whomsoever in the "real deal".
What Mrs. R., NOOC, Gravie (and others) said, esp. wrt immigration and alternative energy.
Still, *these* were my results:
Kucinich as Numero Uno (that's who I'd like, in a perfect world);
Hillary/Obama (I *KNOW!!) in 2nd place tie;
Dodd/Edwards/Richardson in 3-way tie for 3rd.
Gravel & the Senator from MBNA in last place (I don't count the Repubs - they all suck).
Commenting by HaloScan
