Also how the fuck does the quiz reconcile all of Trumps contradictory, nonsensical and non-existent political positions?
How does it avoid any questions about graft, kickbacks, foreign pay-for-play schemes, multiple felonies, and serial rape?
Okay, updating, now that the candidate field is updated: Looks like Castle is the least useful to me. Considering his name, that's no surprise.
Good God, so many Hillary lovers. I guess that's to be expected since most of you majored in liberal arts and let your brains rot away.
What's amusing is that if Hillary Clinton took that test, she wouldn't score more than 60% with Hillary Clinton.
I'm curious what you mean by that. If somebody agrees to a significant extent with the positions held by a candidate and promoted by that candidates party, doesn't it make sense for the person to speak to that? Or are you noticing that some people who are very partisan actually don't agree strongly with their candidate?
No, I am noticing that people who are partisan, on both sides, are suspiciously close to their chosen candidate's beliefs....yet if one answers all the questions in that test objectively (including the additional questions and using the drop down boxes) I don't believe that one could score, for instance, in the 90s for Clinton and less than 10% for Trump or vice versa as the opinions often expressed by various people getting such scores on this board would not result in such extreme shifts. Well, either that or some here simply aren't honest on certain topic they take a more centrist line on. Plus, and this is just my personal opinion, I don't think one can objectively consider all those issues and steer too far too the right or left on almost every issue, as the factors involved in the consideration of each question will be very different each time. But then, this is why I am a Third Way-er.
That's why they're called leaders. They meet our expectations, but they also influence our expectations. It's a two way street. Nothing wrong with that.
*raises hand* Although in fairness, I wanted the order to be reversed, Hillary, Hillary, and after some seasoning, Obama, Obama.
It shouldn't be that much of a surprise. The "Hillary is corrupt" mantra is just a load of whale poo, a steady stream of propaganda used against the Clinton's for thirty years. And outside of a blowjob, there has never been anything there. Yet people believe it anyway. Hillary has been on the political landscape for 30 years, somewhat hawkish, middle of the road liberal, and combative. You cannot be in this game for that long without making so missteps, and a few deals. It is the nature of the beast. She's somewhat compromised and divisive, but she's the best of that bunch for the foreseeable future. In my perfect world, Colin Powell would have run in 2000 and none of the past 16 years would have happened.
If you mean voting for her and not against Trump, then yes, she is my chosen candidate. Do I wish there were a better candidate? Yes. It wasn't Bernie. My problem with Hillary is the baggage she brings. I'm over presidential dynasties. But I think of all the candidates this election, she brings the best qualities and experience. As far as this "test" is concerned, I don't think it was comprehensive. The questions were two dimensional, along party lines. Hot button topics. The results tend to support this. But it did make me think about the topics.
Yeah, I meant the latter. Of course any sane person, including libertarians, real conservatives, and neo-cons, would choose her over Trump.