Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Socialist

16 (32%)

Green

8 (16%)

Peace and Freedom

2 (4%)

Democratic

1 (2%)

Transhumanist

11 (22%)

Libertarian

8 (16%)

Republican

2 (4%)

Constitution

2 (4%)

Total Members Voted: 49

[Tiruin]

There's a lot of lacking other details in the two choices given ._.
It feels so...erh. Not that deep in considering ideas.

[XXSockXX]

Your best fit is...
Hard-Pressed Skeptic
along with 13% of the public.
2012 vote: 62% for Obama | 23% for Romney

Deeply financially-stressed and distrustful of government, Hard-Pressed Skeptics have reservations about both political parties, but more lean toward the Democratic Party. In general, they want government to do more to solve problems, but have doubts about its efficiency. Hard-Pressed Skeptics are among the most cynical about the ability of individuals to improve their lot through hard work. These attitudes may reflect their distressed financial conditions: Hard-Pressed Skeptics have the lowest average family incomes of any of the typology groups.

Huh, Crap.
Thanks Obama...

[Vector]

.

[Teneb]

I'm a Liberal Crime Squad member, it seems. Then again, this test is pretty bad.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Young Outsider

2012 vote: 37% for Obama | 48% for Romney

This relatively young, largely independent group holds a mix of conservative and liberal views. And while more lean toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, Young Outsiders generally express unfavorable opinions of both major parties. They are largely skeptical of activist government, as a substantial majority views government as wasteful and inefficient. Yet many diverge from the two conservative typology groups – Steadfast Conservatives and Business Conservatives – in their strong support for the environment and many liberal social policies.

[Helgoland]

Displeased with Obama != Wouldn't vote for the guy. When the only alternative is someone like Romney (whose ass Wall Street has stuck its hand up into so far that he's called 'Mitt'), that ineffective centrist becomes slightly more appealing...

[Angle]

Yeah, Romney is pretty damn terrible. Even as displeased with Obama as I am, I'd still vote for him over Romney.

[MaximumZero]

Unfortunately, with American politics, it's almost always the lesser of two evils, and usually at least one of the two would put Sauron to shame.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

"Solid Liberal", apparently, with 89% for Obama and 3% for Romney. People in my group are solid Democrats and "unflagging supporters" of Barack Obama. This is rather amusing given that I wouldn't vote for Obama if you paid me.

How about if you knew that Rick Santorum would become President of the United States if you didn't? Keep in mind that the American right-wing agrees with this sort of thing. Can't afford to be picky.

It feels so odd being described as a "Liberal". It's incorrect terminology, American customs be damned.

It's not even remotely incorrect. Classical Liberalism became fused with Socialism during the New Deal Era, and the former name stuck while the latter did not.

[Owlbread]

Displeased with Obama != Wouldn't vote for the guy. When the only alternative is someone like Romney (whose ass Wall Street has stuck its hand up into so far that he's called 'Mitt'), that ineffective centrist becomes slightly more appealing...

Actually in my case it does. I would write in Stewart Alexander given that Bernie Sanders chose not to run.

How about if you knew that Rick Santorum would become President of the United States if you didn't? Keep in mind that the American right-wing agrees with this sort of thing. Can't afford to be picky.

Tactical voting. That's a hard one. It's like asking me if I'd vote Tory to keep UKIP out. I probably would if it was really that close and if Rick Santorum or Rick Perry was the Republican candidate, but it would have to be a very close race. Nine times out of ten I'd be writing in Bernie Sanders or Stewart Alexander or even Peta Lindsay depending on who chose to run.

EDIT:

Thinking about it, I dislike the Democrats so intensely I would probably end up writing in Stewart Alexander anyway. I'm usually an advocate of tactical voting but when the choices are as bad as that I'd probably just go for what I actually believe in.

It's not even remotely incorrect. Classical Liberalism became fused with Socialism during the New Deal Era, and the former name stuck while the latter did not.

Can you explain why it is correct to call American Liberals "Liberals" and not Social Democrats when they are predominantly Social Democrats? The only "Liberal" thing about them seems to be their heritage, but that smells an awful lot like calling British Labour "Socialists" because they used to be Socialist decades ago.

I suppose it is possible to be a "socially conservative" Social Democrat i.e. you advocate the redistribution of wealth and the creation of an American NHS but you disagree with drug legalisation and equal marriage, so American Liberals are "socially liberal" Social Democrats in that sense.

[SalmonGod]

Displeased with Obama != Wouldn't vote for the guy. When the only alternative is someone like Romney (whose ass Wall Street has stuck its hand up into so far that he's called 'Mitt'), that ineffective centrist becomes slightly more appealing...

May have been true in 2012, but keep in mind that Obama received way more support from Wall St vs McCain in 2008...  May have had a thing or two to do with how things played out after the financial crisis that same year...

As for tactical voting, my stance is still that when you have two shitty choices forced upon you, the only way not to legitimize the power being plainly exercised over you is to not choose.

[Angle]

Have Palin for vice president? ehhehhehheh...No.

Frankly, I think we need to start making an end run around the government. much of what we want can be instituted in other fashions.

[Owlbread]

As for tactical voting, my stance is still that when you have two shitty choices forced upon you, the only way not to legitimize the power being plainly exercised over you is to not choose.

Or to express what you really believe, so in my case it would have involved writing in Alexander or Lindsay.

[Vector]

.

[Darvi]

So I'm still the only Bystander? *puts on his hipster glasses which he clearly owns and are not something he pretends to have on the internet*