Still on the fence about which candidate to support?

[asthmaticeog]

Perhaps this can help: http://www.dehp.net/candidate/index.php

It picked Dennis Kucinich for me, which came as no surprise. I'm interested to know how accurately it matches other people's policy priorities tp their preferred candidates, and if anyone got any big surprises.

(link via metafilter)

[Kolesar]

1. That story was on WCPN this morning...eom

[RB TexLa]

2. Richardson, followed by Biden then Clinton

[truebrit71]

3. Interesting. DC number one (always has been a personal fave)

...but of the more media annointed "feasible" candidates Edwards was number 2....

Just like I was leaning....

[Clark2008]

18. Why do you like Edwards?

Doesn't his Senate record bother you? Particularly since it doesn't match much of what he gives lip service to now.

[truebrit71]

21. Of the ones that are in the running now, he's the one that is least "owned" by the MSM...

...I also like Bill Richardson, but he's been deemed a 'marginal' candidate at this point too...

I really don't care who it is because neither of my guys are in the race, all I hope for is that it is NOT Hillary...that would be kiss of death to our chances in '08...

[SteppingRazor]

4. I took this test a few days back...

blogged about it here under the title "The Presidential Taste Test, or Return of the Ohio Gnome."
http://blogs.southflorida.com/citylink_dansweeney/2007/08/the_presidential_blind_taste_t.html

As my title suggests, Kucinich placed first, far in the lead at 65. Then Gravel at 50, followed by Obama at 49.

And indeed, I had supported Kucinich before the pragmatic bastard in me forced my hand to Obama. So, while my head and heart continue to fight with each other, at least according to this test, they're both in the right place.

[Vilis Veritas]

5. Holy Moly

Kucinich by an astounding landslide...there was nothing listed under him. We agree on everything.

I knew I liked the guy...man. Gore/Kucinich would be unstoppable and we would get 16 years of great leadership...

Peace

edited to remove the score, i guess i did not understand it properly...i forgot to weight them...

[bicentennial_baby]

6. My results:

Kucinich 67
No Child Left Behind

Gravel 63
(you have no disagreements with this candidate)

Obama 31
Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Clinton 27
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Edwards 26
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Dodd 25
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action

Richardson 24
Death Penalty, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Biden 23
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Paul 15
Abortion Rights, Embryonic Stem Cells, ANWR Drilling, Kyoto, Guns - Background Checks, Citizenship Path for Illegals, Border Fence, Minimum Wage Increase, Same-Sex Marriage, Universal Healthcare

Thompson -14
McCain -21
Giuliani -31
Brownback -35
Cox -35
Huckabee -49
Tancredo -61
Romney -67
Hunter -68

[Ravy]

7. That is one thing that bothers me about this poll.....

You have no disagreements with Gravel, and one with Kucinich, yet it rates Kucinich higher.

It makes the numbers suspect to me.

BTW, it rated Dennis highest for me as well.

[iverglas]

15. that would be the weighting

I'm not sure how, but that must be it. ;)

It would depend on whether you identified your position on something as meh, important or key.

I'm a foreigner, so I'd be slightly uninformed/uncaring about somethings of more importance to US voters. I don't know how I disagree with Kucinich on No Child etc., but it could be because we disagreed but it wasn't key to me. Maybe they have some weighting system for whether issues are key to the candidates that your responses are compared to.

edit: here it is --

Here's how it works, if you want to know. If you agree with a candidate, he gets point(s). If you disagree, take point(s) away. Unkown/other results in no points. The number of points given or taken depends on the weight you set. "Meh" is worth 1 point, "important" 2, and "key" is worth 5. The items you disagree about will be listed directly underneath each candidate (if they score greater than zero).

although I admit I still don't quite get it ...



Kucinich 99
No Child Left Behind

Gravel 81
(you have no disagreements with this candidate)

Obama 62
Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Clinton 55
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Dodd 53
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action

Edwards 52
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Biden 48
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Richardson 41
Death Penalty, Assault Weapons Ban, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Paul -7
Giuliani -27
McCain -31
Thompson -39
Cox -40
Brownback -48
Huckabee -59
Romney -81
Tancredo -82
Hunter -94

I'm sure glad to see I'm negative on Paul, and question the sanity of anyone who isn't ...

[Ravy]

33. I think this questionaire is questionable.

I think I found what might be their weighting scale on the net. It doesn't appear to be as complete as it should be.

For instance, it shows Gravel with "no position" on ANWR, which I thought odd since he is from Alaska. I was curious to know what his position actually was, so I just googled "Mike Gravel ANWR" and got this:

quote:
PJV: Energy, the environment, and foreign policy all seem to be linked through our dependence on oil. What are your thoughts on this? And since you are from Alaska, what is your position on Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil production?

I would just drop ANWR like a hot potato. At one point in my career I was very supportive of that. I think that we should end it, because I see that off Florida people don’t want any drilling. What we need is to get off carbon, and so the way to do that, from my perspective, is to put a carbon tax on at the source, at the barrel of oil and at the ton of coal. And it filters up through the system in a fair fashion and that would contribute.

Source:
http://www.pjvoice.com/v26/26300words.aspx

I am not sure they are using the key I found at:

http://www.dehp.net/candidate/candidate.txt

However, I did check it and my answer on ANWR had no effect on Gravel's total, but it added one to others.

Similarly, the weighting chart shows Biden's position as "Unknown" on Kyoto, and I found that strange since it has been a Senate issue. A 2001 press release from Biden begins with:

quote:
WASHINGTON -- In a letter to President Bush expressing "deep concern" about the Administration's decision to reject the Kyoto Protocol combating global warming, U.S. Senator Joe Biden (D-DE), the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee and Senator John Kerry (D-MA) strongly criticized the Administration for retreating from the nation's commitment to international environmental negotiations.

http://biden.senate.gov/newsroom/details.cfm?id=229521&&

Similarly, I did check, and no matter how strongly I felt about Kyoto, it had no effect on Biden's total.

I guess this proves that you can use statistics to show whatever you want, given you control the questions and the catagorizing of the answers.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

27. That's almost exactly like my results.....

n/t

[Nickster]

8. Kucinich, Gravel, Obama for me.

[flvegan]

9. Kucinich, by a ton, then Gravel

followed distantly by Clinton.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

10. Kucinich, Obama, Clinton

[enigmatic]

11. no surprise for me

http://www.love22.com/

[Katherine Brengle]

12. This makes no sense.

How is it that a candidate with whom I apparently have no disagreements can come in after one with which I have a disagreement?

Also, I don't understand the numbered scoring system - the candidates listed at bottom have higher scores than some of those in the list, but are rated lower.

Interesting idea, but it doesn't seem to function properly, unless I am missing something.

--------------------------------------------------------------


Kucinich 78
No Child Left Behind

Gravel 70
(you have no disagreements with this candidate)

Obama 42
Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Clinton 38
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Edwards 37
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Dodd 36
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action

Richardson 35
Death Penalty, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Biden 34
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Paul 10
Abortion Rights, Embryonic Stem Cells, ANWR Drilling, Kyoto, Guns - Background Checks, Citizenship Path for Illegals, Border Fence, Net Neutrality, Minimum Wage Increase, Same-Sex Marriage, Universal Healthcare

Thompson -26
McCain -32
Giuliani -36
Brownback -38
Cox -40
Huckabee -48
Tancredo -61
Hunter -73
Romney -74

[asthmaticeog]

23. The candidates listed at the bottom have *negative* scores.

Those are minuses, not dashes.

The weird disconnect a few people have with the Kucinich/Gravel "no disagreements" thing might have something to do with how each question is weighted by the user, by the candidate and by the survey, but I'm nowhere near a mathematician, so I can't answer to that except to say that for my part, I'm not interested in perfect clinical accuracy so much as I'm intersted in general discussion fodder.

[VWolf]

13. Kucinich (35), Gravel (31), Clinton (27)

Wouldn't it be cool if that's how you voted?
You just go in to the booth, pick your issues, and your vote is determined for you.

(Yeah, it would suck in practice)

[Dawgs]

14. This test is BS. Doesn't Clinton support the Iraq war?

;)

[krispos42]

16. Hmmm.... I guess I'm Kucinich fan

Kucinich 84
Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Assault Weapons Ban

Gravel 71
Death Penalty

Richardson 57
Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Edwards 48
No Child Left Behind, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Clinton 48
No Child Left Behind, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage

Obama 46
Death Penalty, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Dodd 46
No Child Left Behind, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action

Biden 44
No Child Left Behind, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage

Paul 10
Abortion Rights, Death Penalty, Embryonic Stem Cells, ANWR Drilling, Kyoto, Guns - Background Checks, Citizenship Path for Illegals, Border Fence, Net Neutrality, Minimum Wage Increase, Same-Sex Marriage, Universal Healthcare

McCain -18
Thompson -36
Brownback -38
Huckabee -39
Giuliani -44
Cox -47
Tancredo -70
Hunter -76
Romney -83

Romney... negative 83!

[Clark2008]

17. Gravel and Kucinich.

I'll probably go with Kucinich if Gore or Clark don't get in, but it's sad in that I know he doesn't have a shot.

[youthere]

29. Gravel and Kucinich for me too..

and I want Gore and/or Clark too..but it doesn't look like it's going to happen.

[Maestro]

19. Kucinich 76

Gravel 71. Not really any surprises either.

[flying rabbit]

20. There were really no economic issues questioned

So I think my lack of disagreements with Gravel are suspect- Kooch came out #1 I'll buy that, and Romney was the anti-Kooch.

[JVS]

22. Thanks. I need to figure out whom to support as so many candidates give me a feeling of mild nausea

[rucky]

24. Mine said Noel Gallagher ?!

sorry Zoccolo.

[asthmaticeog]

25. Score one for Oasis. nt

[kerry-is-my-prez]

26. The candidates never really stick to these things once they get in - it's alll b.s.

The only person I would really trust to stick to their issues is probably Kucinich - and then he'd be impeached within a month - lol!

[Hissyspit]

28. "This account has exceeded its CPU quota." n/t

[helderheid]

30. Kucinich - I was surprised that Clinton was ahead of Edwards for me.

Kucinich
Gravel
Obama
Clinton
Edwards

[loser_user]

31. Ron Paul #3??????

Both Kucinich and Gravel ended up in a landslide #1 and #2 on my list, but what I find interesting is how Ron Paul came up in a distant #3. Weird...I must have clicked on something wrong or funny. Romney is at the bottom of the list, followed by Hunter and Tancredo.

[asthmaticeog]

32. This is a hell of a lot of Kucinich. Were all of you Kucinich supporters to begin with?

:shrug:

[Ravy]

34. I am pretty sure this poll is skewed. See post #33

I didn't have to look very far or very hard to see that there are a lot of innacuracies in people's positions.

To believe the results of this, you have to believe John Edward's has no position on the Border Fence

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2932278

Or Biden has no view on Civil Unions, or that Richardson has no opinion on the Iraq War, etc. etc.

[eggman67]

35. It was accurate for me

Richardson