For those who haven't seen 'em yet:
This is a particularly useful tool for the undecided (or decided) voter going into Super Tuesday. It's a tool to help you measure how your own personal views line up with those of the Presidential candidates, tailored to the issues you find the most compelling.
And if you'd like a second opinion, there are many other sites that offer other mechanisms for this, too. (There's another one at http://www.ontheissues.org/, but it takes forever to load the "PresidentMatch2008" page.)
See you Tuesday! That glassbooth site is really cool. According to it, I am an Obama supporter. Since I still haven't decided who I'm voting for, I might take this a little into consideration. On the other hand, though, I don't know if I want to trust this.
Bah, those tools are really quite awful. You need to follow the candidates and read up on them to make an informed choice, because there is much more to them than just the issues. Obama and Clinton are not that different on policy and yet there is a huge rift on personal issues.
| Quote: |
| Bah, those tools are really quite awful. |
I agree 100%, you can't go by any of those tools because they really do suck. Anyway, you should research it yourself and see who you think best matches your political viewpoints, not let some machine decide it. These programs are often wrong because you really can't make a program complex enough to figure out the best candidate for everyone. Plus, some of these programs will certainly have a bias to them due to their creator's political views. Bottom line is, don't vote based on what this tells you.Well, before 'Super Tuesday', here's a perspective from someone living outside the US.
Judging from our news reporting here in the UK it seems that the Republican vote is going to be with McCain. The Democratic nomination seems much less clear - the reports I'm seeing put Clinton slightly ahead of Obama but it seems too close to call at the moment.
The rest of the world IS listening, we just have smaller headphones 
I agree, those things can be a useful tool, in determining who you may support. But I wouldn't put my vote on someone just because a machine tells me too. Research the candidates yourself, especially through there background. Anyone can tell you they support this or that but when it comes down only there voting background can really show you what they believe.
| quex wrote: |
| ... a particularly useful tool for the undecided (or decided) voter ... |
I am unconvinced that these rather simple Q&As are of any great help in making informed decisions. Perhaps for those who are not aware that social security, Iraq, gun control, (cont. list at will) are some of the issues, it could assist them in at least getting a blurred image of what is at stake, but to choose a person with the power to change the face of the earth in the next 4 to 8 years, it seems no help at all. My result (Gravel=79%, Clinton=77%, Obama=74%) is at best meaningless, at worst detrimental if I thought about acting on it. If my personal three most important issues (education, gun-control, social security) were the only items averaged into my vote then both Fidel Castro and Manuel Noriega would score much better than 90%.Personally, I think you're much better off doing your own research =/ If you care enough to figure out who you want to vote for, you'll take a few minutes every now and then and read up on the candidates you're thinking about voting for. These little "games" as I like to call them don't particularly help the situation we're in...which is trying to get a good President in charge.
Reminds me of the anecdote attributed to various sources.
"I've spent my whole life studying politics, working out an ethically correct world-view, and examining the personal and political qualifications of the politicians who are standing. I get to the poll and, in an instant, my views are cancelled-out by an unemployed trench-digger from Ireland who doesn't understand the issues, can't spell the word 'political' and voted for the person who promised free beer."
Democracy is a terrible system - but it's the least worst of the bunch
(PS - the Irish reference is not intended to insult - I am 1/4 Irish myself) I too thought it too simplistic to base a decision upon. However I gave it a whirl and it matched with what I already knew about the candidates and how I feel politically: Huckabee ranked #1 with Romeny in a very close second, followed by McCain about 5 points later.
But that doesn't mean I'll vote for Huckabee. 
Respectfully,
M | ZenFountain wrote: |
| Bah, those tools are really quite awful. You need to follow the candidates and read up on them to make an informed choice, because there is much more to them than just the issues. Obama and Clinton are not that different on policy and yet there is a huge rift on personal issues. |
A tool is only as strong as the one using it. I agree with you entirely if you let the site make the decision for you... but if you utilize it as a source of information, well, that's much more along the lines of responsible (and intended) use.
In any case, it's a lot better than the mass media. I cannot begin to count how many people come to the polls undecided and simply pick the name they've heard the most on television.Well I did the test to see what a non-US person might get.
My result were: Mike Gravel - 78%, Obama - 77%, Clinton - 76%
I did notice a bug, though. My views on education were exactly the same as Gavel yet were reported as different...
I got Gravel too, initially. o.o I didn't even think he was running anymore...
