How do the candidates line up with your views?
I was clicking around the net slightly aimlessly and came across this "Candidate Matchup" diary leading to a test that matches up candidates with your issues... So, being a lazy Saturday I took the test:
95% Dennis Kucinich
93% Mike Gravel
87% John Edwards
84% Chris Dodd
84% Barack Obama
80% Hillary Clinton
77% Joe Biden
77% Bill Richardson
35% Rudy Giuliani
25% John McCain
21% Ron Paul
20% Mike Huckabee
18% Tom Tancredo
17% Mitt Romney
10% Fred Thompson
2008 Presidential Candidate Matching Quiz
I don't put too much faith in tests like this, in as far as their accuracy goes, because they usually don't cover every possible issue that people may be interested in. In this test's case there is a total disregard of religious issues like the separation of church and state, which is an issue that can provide a huge defining line between party and candidate support. And it does not address the issue of "Single Payer" universal healthcare head on, only universal healthcare ("We need a national health insurance system that makes sure everyone is covered."), but the candidates have never had a chance to vote on that issue so it would be hard to match up a person with a candidate. Nor does this test completely address some of the very real racial and gender issues, which would mark some serious differences beyond just GLBT issues and immigration issues that are highlighted in the media and by candidates, IMHO.
But these tests do give you an idea of candidates that are close to your ideology, as imperfect as they are.
Previously, I had posted on the Political Compass:
How Does Your Candidate Measure up?
Many of us are familiar with the Political Compass. Some at MLN even had their compass score in their signatures for a while, and even took the time to chart some of their own personal scores in March. But do you know where the 2008 Presidential Candidates sit on this political chart?
You should:My kingdom for a real progressive candidate!
Perhaps you've heard of the Political Compass website, where you can take a test that places you on a grid based on the degree to which you are "left" or "right" on the economic scale as well as how socially libertarian or authoritarian you are.
I'm damn near as moonbatty as it gets: -6.50, -6.67, which puts me in, for lack of a better term, the "deep Southwest" of the grid.
Anyway, thanks to a recent article on London's TimesOnline, we can see how the 2008 U.S. presidential candidates fit on the grid.
This should worry those on the left, and I know that many at MLN scored even further left than I did (I am a Liberal, but I am a moderate Liberal), as they watch the next candidate chosen for the Democratic party who is nothing less than a conservative. That is, if they chose anyone other than Kucinich or Gravel. And right now they aren't even counted in the top 3 contenders.
This is where the Democratic party is failing miserably. They are not really providing any different ideology than the GOP, just a moderate version of it, if they choose any of those conservative candidates on that chart.
Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden... They are all conservatives, as moderate as some of them may be, they are conservatives nonetheless.
These tests often elicit surprising responses from people:
MattW: "I find it hard to believe that I'm actually 3 times more liberal and libertarian than Dennis Kucinich."Well Matt? You probably are... The problem is that moderate conservative candidates, and ones that are somewhat authoritarian to boot, have been labeled as "Liberals" for so long by the corporate owned MSM it has skewered the views of the American people to accept candidates that are far more conservative than many of the American people really are.
IOW: People have been conditioned to reject candidates that would better represent their own views through years of propaganda.
This is a direct result of the MSM's incompetence in addressing real issues and, instead, sticking to their scripts of Horse Races, Manipulation of Polling Popularity Contests, Who Smells the Best, The Prettiest Face, Masculintity, The Money Game, Crying Games and a myriad of other exercises in avoidance and misdirection from the real issues that are truly important and could do a lot to shape your support based on what is actually best for you, the voter.
Information is the best weapon you have to fight this propaganda:
So it is left up to you to seek out the important information, at least, until the media finally meets our demands that they AND the candidates address the issues honestly.
The short version of this post?
Because We The People are getting tired of doing all of the heavy lifting.
[update] edited and rewritten a few times - CM1