Did I Mention I Hate the Current Parties?

[selenite0]

The Christian Science Monitor has a quiz to match your views on the issues against the candidates. (hat tip to btripp)
http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/decision2004/quiz/econ.php

I came out as Badnarik (libertarian) for economic issues, Bush for foreign policy, and Kerry for cultural. That's why I'm an independent. But don't call me a moderate. I'm just extreme in different directions.

Comments

[tygerr.livejournal.com]

And none of this comes as a surprise to those who know you *at all*.

There are many advantages to multiparty political systems. The ability to vote without holding one's nose is often among them.

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Eh--I look at some of the European systems and don't have a huge desire to trade. Divvying the votes up among two dozen parties is nice for voters but bad for the country when an issue gets important enough that you actually need a solid decision. If I keep brooding on this I'll have to pull out my "systems engineer reworks the constitution" essay again and finish it.

[tygerr.livejournal.com]

Well, yes, there are many *dis*advantages to multiparty systems too.

[kd5mdk.livejournal.com]

Well, I can't claim I beat you to it or anything. But at least I'm fairly consistantly bipolar. You've got some extra axis to deal with.

All of the Above

[abovenyquist.livejournal.com]

7. How can the US win the war on terrorism?

A) By not interfering in other nations' business.

B) It must lead a truly global effort to root out terror networks.

C) US leaders must revise arrogant foreign policies that breed anti-American hatred.

D) It must act preemptively, alone if need be, to wipe out terror networks and governments that support them.

Why can't I choose (E), All of the Above?

Re: All of the Above

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Um . . . because C and D are incompatible?

Re: All of the Above

[abovenyquist.livejournal.com]

C and D incompatible? As implemented now, yes. But they don't need to be. The key words are "arrogant" and "need be".

There must be a bug!

[abovenyquist.livejournal.com]

It's got me coming out on the side of John Kerry on Cultural Issues, but it has me - ME - coming out as siding with George W. Bush on Economic issues, and it has me - ME of all people - coming out on the side of George W. Bush on Foreign Policy issues. Considering that I find Bush's foreign policy since shortly after the invasion of Afghanistan to be utterly disasterous and leading us headlong towards catastrophe (to the point that I'll actually have to hold my nose and vote for Kerry), I think there's a bug somewhere in the script. :)

Hmm, looking closer, it just has me slightly towards the G.W. Bush side. It pretty much has me between Bush and Kerry.

The Libertarians are an odd bunch since they don't really fit on the scale. They are liberal on personal freedom, but conservative on economic - sort of. You really need another axis to place them.

Of course, _Kerry_ hasn't quite figured out his foreign policy yet, and seems to shift it every three days, so I can't complain at the CGI script if it's a bit confused either.

Re: There must be a bug!

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Given that it has Bush and Badnarik on the same side of the scale for foreign policy I figured there had to be some screwy reasoning.

My rant on political axes:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/iclysdale/36775.html?thread=192167#t192167