It says "You might be surprised," and I was, more than fifty percent of Tennessee apparently agrees with me in a general sort of way.  



It said I disagree with Obama on this issue:

I think banning offshore drilling would incentivise the green industries, if only indirectly.  But hey, that's just me.

So, where does everybody side?  http://www.isidewith.com/

(I am not aware of any international themed one, sorry)

This post was last modified: 08-23-2012 05:46 AM by Lang.

82% Jill Stein on economic, domestic policy, immigration, and social issues
74% Barack Obama on foreign policy, social, science, and immigration issues
67% Mitt Romney on foreign policy, domestic policy, and environmental issues
63% Gary Johnson on domestic policy, healthcare, and immigration issues
54% Ron Paul on domestic policy, healthcare, and science issues
51% Virgil Goode on domestic policy issues
55% American Voters on foreign policy, domestic policy, social, environmental, and immigration issues

84% Democratic
70% Green
58% Republican
54% Libertarian

Although I fancy myself a moderate progressive, I've honestly never heard of Jill Stein before ten minutes ago. I'll probably vote for Barack Obama again because let's face it, Stein has no chance of winning the general election, and a vote for her would be one less vote for the more visible Obama.

If we limit all contributions to five dollars, then people like Jill Stein might become more visible, and our two current parties would be fast on the way to being distant memories.

Sadly, I did not see that option on the test.

This post was last modified: 08-23-2012 06:21 AM by Lang.

Something else that was not on the test: Ron Paul believes we should stop disenfranchising people for committing felony crimes.

This post was last modified: 08-23-2012 06:28 AM by Lang.

Looks like i'm quite balanced across the parties, with a bit less support for the republicans - who i'm told are basically the tories of the US, so that makes sense.

Its rigged, nothing more than another political ad

This post was last modified: 08-24-2012 03:59 AM by skyblue1 .

I don't know a thing about politics... I try to avoid anything political.... :/

***!! Mitt **** Romney and his magic underwear. -_-

Rigged by whom?

If your numbers surprise you, it might be helpful to look at your results broken down.  The importance I assigned to different stances changed the candidates I agree with a great deal, despite not editing my actual response.  For instance, Mitt Romney wants to increase our space budget.  I feel that that is important--not important enough to vote against women, minorities, and the lower and middle classes, but it still brought me two points closer to mitt romney than when I assigned them all equal importance.

This post was last modified: 08-24-2012 06:33 AM by Lang.

I wasn't going to do this, since I'm Australian, but thought, why not?  It might be fun.  Now I wish we had something similar for the Australian elections, but most of our candidates are so hopeless they couldn't find their a**es with both hands and a torch clenched between their teeth.




Alison (who just has one question: who is Jill Stein?)

This post was last modified: 08-24-2012 07:01 AM by Alison.

Jill Stein would be the Green party candidate. I'd probably vote for her if we didn't have a two-party system here. As it stands, there are only two realistic choices, and voting for anyone else is almost the same as not voting.

Doesn't matter who wins their all corrupted in some way or another..... :/

That's exactly the attitude that increases the corruption.  As long as passive mooks exist that will bumble along never voting, all they have to do is get a lot of people pissed off at each other, and they'll be reelected forever.