This is a Discussion, not a debate - because it's all opinion.

Here's a quiz:

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

It aligns the candidates with your thinking, and I suppose it's possible you'll be surprised at the results.

Please share who the unofficial quiz picked as YOUR candidate, and whether it sounds right to you.

It picked Kucinich for me, but I don't think that'll surprise anyone who knows me.

I tried taking it but my beliefs can't be categorized in simple yes or no answers.

well, I took it too.... I ran into the same issue as Atom Apple.
The survey just couldn't capture my beliefs accurately or mention the issues most important to me. All the same it matched me with Ron Paul at 49.62% with John Edwards a close second. In real life I wouldn't want either one. I've yet to pick somebody for real.
Go figure.

It's too simplistic. I could go straight down and it would tell me Romney but there is no way I will ever vote for that man.

Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D)
82.61% match

Who?

I have no fear of the Kucinich revolution.

Myself...

Or Obama/Clinton.

I think I'm voting for Obama for very racist reasons... so it's a little unfair.

Although the quiz told me I should choose Gravel.

I'm a democrat, but I like Ron Paul. Kucinich is good too. Both of them seem to be fairly transparent. It's refreshing to hear politicians tell the truth. I am hopeful that secrets and secondary agendas will find the information age a bit inhospitable and encourage more plain talk.

I am getting fed up with spin and doubletalk.

He's a good guy!

It gave me Gravel as well, but I'm more a Biden guy. Also, why is the "importance" not working on the survey?

Yeah I guess Biden is ok too.

Then I guess I have some research to do... although having not heard of him, I'm not sure he'd get the nomination. Guess time will tell.

can i pick none of the above? i do not feel represented by any prez wannabes at all. this is a pretty sore lot of choices if you ask me. on second thought ill take arnold

I'm pretty surprised at how many people won't take this quiz, or at least share the answers.

No one said it was perfect. It's a stupid internet quiz. I was curious to find out how many people thought it chose a good candidate for them and how many people thought it was way off. It pretty much pegged me, but I actually have some opinions on the topics mentioned and couldn't think of many that the candidates talked about that were omitted.

I'm not. People decide by cult of personality. Not a stand on issues.

Well, I took the quiz and it gave me Romney, but the problem is that I don't trust the words coming out of the man's mouth.

I got a 96% match for Gravel, a 3% match for Obama (my favorite), 2% match for Clinton (who I think would be very good), and a 0.7% match for Edwards (who I like as well). oh, and Kucinich was 22%. In one of the Democratic debates, I thought Gravel came across as a crazy guy who, although I agreed with some of his basic points, seemed unhinged.

For Republicans, Tommy Thompson was highest at 5%, then Romney at 4.5%, Paul at 4%, Giuliani at 3.6%, McCain at 0.5%, and Fred Thompson at 0.02%. Just based on my own reading, I don't like any of the Republican candidates, but I find McCain the least objectionable of them all. So I don't think the quiz was accurate here either.

Thing is, for the Dems, I don't think their positions are THAT far off from each other, so to have that wide of a variance seems strange. Plus I wonder how they are matching the candidates to the issues. For example, do they put Clinton in the pro-Iraq side because she voted for it? And since no one has voted for Kyoto, how do they calculate that? What does "pro-death penalty" really mean in this context?

For me, I thought this internet quiz was waaaaay off.

Without situation context its kinda hard to be pro or anti much.

I didn't realize context played into that issue.

I guess I'd consider the crime as context.

I matched Kucinich the most, but he's unelectable. I keep imagining Dr Strangelove when I visualize him.

I would like to see an Edwards & Obama Ticket. In whatever order. I find both of them to be mildly progressive, probably electable and at least thinking about helping the middle class, instead of the ultra rich.

I don't like Hillary. I find her too calculating. I also feel she's too tied to corporation interests. While I work for a HUGE corporation, I would like to limit their power and reach. Yet, I'll vote for her if I have to.

There is not a single republican I could vote for this round. I find them corrupt or totally wrong.

This is my current dream administration:
I just want a government, when given a choice, would choose policies that promote small and local businesses over large monopolistic corporations. I just want a government, when given a choice, would choose to protect key American jobs and economic infrastructure instead of promoting it's outsourcing. I just want a government, when given a choice, would choose policies that support labor's ability to unionize, instead of the corporation ability to destroy unions. I just want a government, when given a choice, would choose policies that promote ordinary people to be become wealthier. I just want a government, when given a choice, would policies that allow a small group of very very rich people to become even richer. I just want a government that will try to solve terrorism with a police and intel solution, not a military solution.

Does that make me anti rich and anti corporation? I guess, because I'm pro small business and pro average person. ( I know many HATE unions, but unions came to being for a reason, to counter the excesses of the capitalists of the day. ) When it comes to economic concerns, I'll vote for the democrat or republican or libertarian or whoever who promotes those values, who is electable.

What are your values for your mythical government?

For me, I am not anti-death penalty like it should never be done. I think there are some extraordinary situations where I'd be in favor of the death penalty, such as terrorist attacks killing hundreds or thousands, serial killers over a long period of time, etc.

But in the common venacular, I am anti-death penalty because I believe that it is done too frequently, there are racial questions about its administration, and the number of people on death row who are found to be innocent is much higher than I'm comfortable with for people who have gone so far through our justice system and are so close to death.

And again, if a politician is in favor of the death penalty for Timothy McVeigh, does that automatically put them in the pro-death penalty category, even if they share the same overall concerns I do? I have no idea how politicians' views are calculated in this quiz.

So simply asking "Death penalty - yes no or unsure" doesn't come close to capturing where I'm at (or where the politician might be at). That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, I'm completely the other way. I am 100% against giving any government the ability to kill it's own citizens. So that was an easy one.

As for the unelectable factor, I have to agree. But then that is really sad, isn't it? Someone like Kucinich, who I am only opposed to on the issues of gun rights is never going to make the cut MOSTLY because he's looks kind of weasly and has a goofy voice.

Vindi - I hear you on Romney. And that is the problem with the quiz. It only uses their stated positions, and you have to decide if they're their real positions. I think Romney will say whatever it takes to get elected. I think only Ron Paul isn't guilty of that on the Republican side. Unelectable though, apparently.

...which is the same for Clinton, Obama and Biden. Edwards, Kucinich and Gravel not so much, but there's the unelectability factors there.

Hmmmm.... that quiz pinned me with democratic Delaware Senator Joseph Biden. It was fun to see who it would choose, but I think like everyone else I doubt how truly accurate the whole quiz is... just fun.

Edit -- Wow, looks like I also tied with three other politicians. Yeah, this definitely isn't the way to choose your vote.

I finally took the poll, and I came up with Kucinich at a 94.59% match.

Gravel, Hillary and Edwards were my top 3 alternates.

While a scientific readout of matching positions is fun, I believe i will factor in character, integrity and electability when I decide.

Are you saying you pick on who'd you'd most rather have a beer with?

Since i quit drinking long ago, I guess I'd pick whoever was less likely to bust me for smoking a joint.! ===~~~

Ah, the Leary party! (Timothy, not Dennis, though I'm sure Dennis wouldn't care either)
Better known as 'The Party Party'

In that case: Fidel Castro, or Hugo Chavez. Just for the fact that they have the biggest rock hard iron balls on the planet. ^_^

Those guys are leaders with a capital "L"

But according to that silly quiz it's 88% Dennis Kucinich... heh, him getting in is as realistic as Chavez or Castro
Not that I have any say about it, but then again, even US citizens don't have that much of a say given how many actually vote and your electoral/political system.

I chanced across a US political forum a while ago and most people on it, whether Democrat, Republican, libitarian, or the few real left wingers (all the other parties mentioned being right of centre, realistically), hated Hillary Clinton. Why is that? They're afraid of a woman in that position? Too much of a change? The association with her Husband? The fact that people are tired of "families" in the top sopt now? Or is she genuinely an undesirable candidate?
-Even the ones who supported her did so because of her party, they said she wasn't a choice they liked.

She's always struck me as being a bit too conservative in a lot of ways, maybe that's it?

Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel (D)
100.00% match


Never heard of him. But maybe it's because he makes too much sense? And a president can't do that.

Joking, by the way. I don't think this thing is true, it's just a quiz, but an interesting one.

I suspect she has learned from Bill that to push progressive issues past the right wing curmudgeons in congress, one has to pay lip service to the center. Let's not forget all this nice discussion about universal health care was her idea, one which she was sternly punished for. UHC is about as liberal as it gets.

As for her likability factor, or lack thereof, I chalk it up to the fact that she is an intelligent, nondomestic, agressive career woman. America still has some ingrained cultural prejudices, and one is that women shouldn't assume too much, especially when they encroach on male territory. Men find it pushy and women find it arrogant.

Granted I am generalizing, but you'll find this goes way past ideology. Elizabeth Dole would get as much resistance as Hillary, and they are about as polar opposites as you can get.

Barack Obama is likely to suffer the same problem as it relates to race. People are just to indoctrinated with presumptions when it comes to race. It's one of the things that makes me sad as an American, that racism and mysogony can still exist in this century.