Where Do You (Really) Fit On The Political Spectrum?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 1:34 PM GMT
    Take this simple short test to find out where you really fit into the "red-VS-blue political map".
    You just might be surprised.


    http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 3:30 PM GMT
    Card carrying member of the Libertarian party here for over 20 years.icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 3:38 PM GMT
    The questions were too extreme. It just isn't that simple.

    I did the other one ppsted on a topic and I came out left leaning libertarian, which is partly true only, because I have some conservative leaning when it comes to finance.

    At this point Bill says he fits no political party, having just abandoned conservatism (though I keep telling him being fiscally conservative is fine, as long as you don't toss out your humanity in the process).

    -Doug

    PS both sides have something huge to offer if they meet in the middle. Bill and I both like the 'Coffee Party".



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 4:32 PM GMT
    StudlyScrewRite said Card carrying member of the Libertarian party here for over 20 years.icon_cool.gif


    Many in this country who claim to be Libertarian I am sure would fail on the part of personal liberties.


    I am Liberal according to the test and was not surprised.

    I had a score of 100% on personal issues and 40% on economic. I agree with Doug that the test is too extreme. My 40% comes from answering most economic questions as 'maybe'. Take the Social Security question. It is presented as either privatize it or keep it the way it is. There is no middle ground about giving someone the choice if the want to keep putting their money in the current system or instead take their money and put it in a private plan. It is 'either/or' on the quiz.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 10:28 PM GMT
    While I agree that the questions were extreme, how much different were they than any campaign poll calls you received this last go-around? Just because you spread butter on it don't make it cornbread!


    BTW: As a true Libertarian (not just a Dem or a Rep who wants cover) and many of my fellow Libertarians alike want the government to get the fuck out of everybody's bedroom, gay, straight, or whatever.
    The same goes for what you eat, drink, snort or sniff! icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 10:29 PM GMT
    meninlove said Bill and I both like the 'Coffee Party".





    Regular or decaffeinated?icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2010 10:37 PM GMT
    I got Libertarian as well. I think people should be allowed to do what they want. Obviously if your actions are truly impending on others (like drunk driving) there should be punishment in place. At the same time I've witnessed way too many people taking advantage of the welfare system, and does not allow some people to take advantage of it who truly need it..but that's a WHOLE other topic.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 23, 2010 2:03 AM GMT
    Photobucket
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 1:15 PM GMT
    NCReal06 saidI got Libertarian as well. I think people should be allowed to do what they want. Obviously if your actions are truly impending on others (like drunk driving) there should be punishment in place. At the same time I've witnessed way too many people taking advantage of the welfare system, and does not allow some people to take advantage of it who truly need it..but that's a WHOLE other topic.


    Quoted for emphasis.icon_wink.gificon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 1:25 PM GMT
    Unsurprising result:

    80_20.gif?1286462207
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 3:29 PM GMT
    I'm 80/100.

    Some of those questions are agree in concept but not in reality, for instance, something like a national ID card should not be necessary, but when you have people who take advantage of a system that isn't set up to be bankruptcy proof, then it's necessary to implement measures to preserve that institution, like welfare, for instance. Some times you have to vote for the practical reality, not the abstract idea.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 3:31 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidI'm 80/100.

    Some of those questions are agree in concept but not in reality, for instance, something like a national ID card should not be necessary, but when you have people who take advantage of a system that isn't set up to be bankruptcy proof, then it's necessary to implement measures to preserve that institution, like welfare, for instance. Some times you have to vote for the practical reality, not the abstract idea.


    Have you any idea of the cost of a National ID card system?

    What a profligate waste of public money. Fucking socialist.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 3:33 PM GMT
    meninlove said The questions were too extreme. It just isn't that simple.

    I did the other one ppsted on a topic and I came out left leaning libertarian, which is partly true only, because I have some conservative leaning when it comes to finance.

    At this point Bill says he fits no political party, having just abandoned conservatism (though I keep telling him being fiscally conservative is fine, as long as you don't toss out your humanity in the process).

    -Doug

    PS both sides have something huge to offer if they meet in the middle. Bill and I both like the 'Coffee Party".





    Being fiscally conservative has nothing to do with removing humanity, it just places it in different and more efficient hands. It also has to do with realizing that the lesser of the two evils is for civilization to continue for the greater good of most people. Your thinking about being "humane" is shortsighted because it would attempt to "rescue" a few by jeopardizing fiscal stability and thereby sacrificing the future of virtually everyone. No system is perfect. No matter which way you cut it someone is going to get hurt, all you're doing is saying you'd rather have it happen later and to a greater extent. So please, don't pretend this is humanity vs greed or compassion versus having no heart.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 3:35 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidI'm 80/100.

    Some of those questions are agree in concept but not in reality, for instance, something like a national ID card should not be necessary, but when you have people who take advantage of a system that isn't set up to be bankruptcy proof, then it's necessary to implement measures to preserve that institution, like welfare, for instance. Some times you have to vote for the practical reality, not the abstract idea.


    Have you any idea of the cost of a National ID card system?

    What a profligate waste of public money. Fucking socialist.


    I didn't state that clearly. I don't agree with a national ID card, but I was making a reference to some form of identification in order to determine eligibility or legality. We already have one somewhat -- the drivers license. But it's all contingent on whether or not we have welfare.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 3:47 PM GMT
    BTW, I should also say that libertarianism is awesome as a philosophy and I identify as one in that sense, but actually implementing it 100% in reality is impossible -- some libertarians don't seem to realize this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 3:52 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidI'm 80/100.

    Some of those questions are agree in concept but not in reality, for instance, something like a national ID card should not be necessary, but when you have people who take advantage of a system that isn't set up to be bankruptcy proof, then it's necessary to implement measures to preserve that institution, like welfare, for instance. Some times you have to vote for the practical reality, not the abstract idea.


    Have you any idea of the cost of a National ID card system?

    What a profligate waste of public money. Fucking socialist.


    I didn't state that clearly. I don't agree with a national ID card, but I was making a reference to some form of identification in order to determine eligibility or legality. We already have one somewhat -- the drivers license. But it's all contingent on whether or not we have welfare.


    The drivers license is NOT and NEVER has been a proof of citizenship or even identity. They DO NOT prove eligibility for anything. They are easy to forge and administration varies tremendously by state [as is right and proper].

    Errors in eligibility are due mainly to administrative incompetence---it's the back end that needs to be improved not the front end.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 23, 2010 5:12 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidI'm 80/100.

    Some of those questions are agree in concept but not in reality, for instance, something like a national ID card should not be necessary, but when you have people who take advantage of a system that isn't set up to be bankruptcy proof, then it's necessary to implement measures to preserve that institution, like welfare, for instance. Some times you have to vote for the practical reality, not the abstract idea.


    Have you any idea of the cost of a National ID card system?

    What a profligate waste of public money. Fucking socialist.


    Knowing mocktwinkie he would be like I and perform a cost benefit analysis. icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 5:58 PM GMT
    jprichva said
    mocktwinkie said
    Being fiscally conservative has nothing to do with removing humanity, it just places it in different and more efficient hands.

    I used to trade options on the floor of the stock exchange in New York, and I also later traded commodities for my clients on the various commodity exchanges. You obviously know nothing about markets: they are not efficient, and they are constantly manipulated. Cheating is rampant, and the deck is enormously stacked against the small investor.

    Not for the first time (and surely not the last) you really have no idea what you're talking about.


    This may have more been the case in the past, and even more so a few decades ago (do people even trade on the floor of the exchange anymore?), but having also worked on Wall Street, I can also say specifically that there is sufficiently enough volatility and costs involved to run a good prop trading desk to stack the decks against smaller traders being bigger isn't always an advantage either. Calling it cheating is simply not true - sure there is insider trading from time to time, but this doesn't mean smaller investors can't outperform by having better insight because of a longer term view. You could even argue that the insider trading makes the markets even more accurate what little there is of it. Insofar as concerns about markets go, markets are far more efficient than governments.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 6:07 PM GMT
    jprichva said
    riddler78 said Calling it cheating is simply not true - sure there is insider trading from time to time, but this doesn't mean smaller investors can't outperform by having better insight because of a longer term view

    I'm not even chiefly talking about 'insider trading'. I'm talking about various other scams, such as front-running, pump & dump (just to name a couple).


    These are trading strategies around the margins. This doesn't make the markets inefficient - and with program trading, what little advantage these strategies have for trading desks has diminished such that you need massive amounts of leverage now even to gain from them. (Pump and dump notwithstanding - but there will always be scams amongst the penny stocks - but the research here suggests that markets are not terribly efficient - though they are reasonably so elsewhere).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 6:21 PM GMT
    My personal issues score is 80.
    My economic issues score is 10.

    I am a LIBERAL.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 6:48 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie said
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidI'm 80/100.

    Some of those questions are agree in concept but not in reality, for instance, something like a national ID card should not be necessary, but when you have people who take advantage of a system that isn't set up to be bankruptcy proof, then it's necessary to implement measures to preserve that institution, like welfare, for instance. Some times you have to vote for the practical reality, not the abstract idea.


    Have you any idea of the cost of a National ID card system?

    What a profligate waste of public money. Fucking socialist.


    I didn't state that clearly. I don't agree with a national ID card, but I was making a reference to some form of identification in order to determine eligibility or legality. We already have one somewhat -- the drivers license. But it's all contingent on whether or not we have welfare.


    The drivers license is NOT and NEVER has been a proof of citizenship or even identity. They DO NOT prove eligibility for anything. They are easy to forge and administration varies tremendously by state [as is right and proper].

    Errors in eligibility are due mainly to administrative incompetence---it's the back end that needs to be improved not the front end.


    Just shut up please, yes it is some FORM of identity.