So just to be open minded, AOL was offering this quiz that you can take to see which candidate you line up with for the presidency. So I answered the questions.
Turns out apparently my man is Dennis Kucinich, who matched 85% of my search criteria. So that falls into the “Oh well” category. Next was Kerry with 77%. Interestingly–or maybe unsurprisingly–Bush matched up with exactly 9% of my search criteria. Which may prompt some cynics to say, “That much, huh?” and that’s a fair point. I almost wonder where we DO overlap.
Nader didn’t factor into the quiz because they hadn’t included third party or independent candidates. Would’ve been interesting to see if, ideologically, Nader scored the highest.
PAD
• 
I took a similar quiz almost a year ago during the primaries. Bush got the highest for me at over 80%. Of the Dems, Edwards was highest at 43%. With having such a strong result for Bush, I was surprised that any Democrat got close to 50%.
(Tim will no doubt say that means there is hope for me or something.)
(Tim will no doubt say that means there is hope for me or something.)
Moi?
I took a similar quiz in the primaries also. Dean was up in the high 90s, Kucinich around 90, and Bush at something like 2%, if that.
I honestly don’t remember where Kerry was, other than “not as high as Dean or Kucinich.” Mark will no doubt say that means something about Kerry. 🙂
TWL
You know, we were so disenchanted with Edwards here in his home state that we weren’t even going to put him back into office if he ran for Senate again, and you people want to make him vice President? I guess you really do mean anybody but Bush.
PAD, for the benefit of those of us who aren’t on AOL, I’d sure like to know what points you matched Kucinich on or not. Think you could list them?
Wasn’t Edwards’ home state the only one that he won in the primaries? It hardly sounds like he was that unpopular with everyone there.
I had, in first place, Kerry with 54% and Bush right behind with 53%. How about THEM apples?
Kucinich was third with 35%. THAT’S the one that makes me want to check to see if I’ve been mixing my medications again.
Anyone else who wants to give it a try– http://www.presidentmatch.com/Main.jsp2?cp=main
Kucinich 82%, Kerry 80% and Shrub 2%.
Bush 81%, Kerry 34%, Kucinich 9%
Thanks, Bill. Now I got to refresh things.
This one gave me Kucinich 89%, Kerry 80%, Bush 4%. (Apparently, what, I agree with Bush on one more item than Mike does above?)
I’m a bit surprised Kerry’s that high, personally.
The survey I was thinking of is over at http://www.selectsmart.com/president/ , in case people want to do some comparison shopping. It gives a much broader set of candidates than just the three above if you want.
TWL
Gorginfoogle asked:
“Wasn’t Edwards’ home state the only one that he won in the primaries? It hardly sounds like he was that unpopular with everyone there.”
Edwards’ home state of SC is the only one he won. He’s a senator from NC, and there’s no chance he would have been reelected here. When someone shows up for work less than 50% of the time they should be fired, not expect to be promoted.
Heh… Kerry 76% Bush 21%
Ah. After the fifth try I am finally logged in.
This topic always strikes a nerve with me. First of all, no doubt about it, what this person did was wrong. It may have to do with “freedom of speech” but it is no freedom *I* would support. That also applies to the troublemaker who caused all these annoyances that led to the changes here.
I think a recipient of such messages, whoever it may be – including people who are working for – would certainly not cause you, PAD, any trouble. They know what kind of message it is and that it is nothing to be taken seriously. I remember, when Paramount broadcast the episode in which two women kissed, they got some nasty remarks from certain viewers. Each time something is written or broadcast that might offend some extremists (and not even only them), it can cause such reactions, may it be by anti-abortionists, racists, animal rights activists or, as here, devoted followers of a political direction you disagree with (and me too, by the way).
As you added, on top of that this coward didn`t even give his full real name and email address. Before you point at me, I am Baerbel Haddrell and always use my full real name. But certain registration systems, like this one and another website I participate in, doesn`t like it and it was quite a wrestling match to get registered.
I am a But-person and, no, I don`t think there is anything wrong with that attitude as long as it is for the right reasons. Freedom of any kind is something precious BUT it stops there where it harms the freedom of someone else. As I said before also in this website, at least Germany and Britain have restriction for “free speech” when it goes into extremes, like inciting racial hatred and violence. In Britain there is now a discussion going on if this should be extended to religious hatred as well. And in Germany, certain political parties are forbidden if their aims are against the German constitution. I think this is right. After WWII there is one saying in Germany: Stop it at the very beginning. Discussions are fine. Education is even absolutely essential. But it stops when it enters the realm of vile propaganda and hatred.
Concerning freedom of speech and definitely other aspects of human rights, I think when a country is pointing fingers at others, it should look into a mirror first and clean up its own act. The USA under Bush is certainly not a country that can act as a role model. I think the more European attitude towards “freedom of speech” could do it some good.
Ah. After the fifth try I am finally logged in.
This topic always strikes a nerve with me. First of all, no doubt about it, what this person did was wrong. It may have to do with “freedom of speech” but it is no freedom *I* would support. That also applies to the troublemaker who caused all these annoyances that led to the changes here.
I think a recipient of such messages, whoever it may be – including people who are working for – would certainly not cause you, PAD, any trouble. They know what kind of message it is and that it is nothing to be taken seriously. I remember, when Paramount broadcast the episode in which two women kissed, they got some nasty remarks from certain viewers. Each time something is written or broadcast that might offend some extremists (and not even only them), it can cause such reactions, may it be by anti-abortionists, racists, animal rights activists or, as here, devoted followers of a political direction you disagree with (and me too, by the way).
As you added, on top of that this coward didn`t even give his full real name and email address. Before you point at me, I am Baerbel Haddrell and always use my full real name. But certain registration systems, like this one and another website I participate in, doesn`t like it and it was quite a wrestling match to get registered.
I am a But-person and, no, I don`t think there is anything wrong with that attitude as long as it is for the right reasons. Freedom of any kind is something precious BUT it stops there where it harms the freedom of someone else. As I said before also in this website, at least Germany and Britain have restriction for “free speech” when it goes into extremes, like inciting racial hatred and violence. In Britain there is now a discussion going on if this should be extended to religious hatred as well. And in Germany, certain political parties are forbidden if their aims are against the German constitution. I think this is right. After WWII there is one saying in Germany: Stop it at the very beginning. Discussions are fine. Education is even absolutely essential. But it stops when it enters the realm of vile propaganda and hatred.
Concerning freedom of speech and definitely other aspects of human rights, I think when a country is pointing fingers at others, it should look into a mirror first and clean up its own act. The USA under Bush is certainly not a country that can act as a role model. I think the more European attitude towards “freedom of speech” could do it some good.
I don’t like the AOL one, because of the screen that asks you to select your “highest” category. For me economic issues are very high, but the environment is not. Lumping them together gives me no way to specify. The selectsmart one is better, IMHO.
You know its funny when i took a survey a few months ago,my strongest was Kerry,first with Bush dead last .The most frightening thing Al Sharpton was higher than Bush .I hate Al sharpton!!!!!