I know that a lot of the times people post messages that are nothing more, but cheap shills or advertisements, but today I was informed of a most interesting website in http://presidentmatch.com/Guide.jsp2 . By taking a short quiz you get to see who your ideas match the most and also a quick rundown of each candidates political posistions. Here's what I got
1. Kucinich
2. Kerry
3. Sharpton (D'oh)
4. Edwards
5. Dean (I thought he'd be no.1)
6. Clark
7. Lieberman (D'oh)
8. Bush (ICK)
Feel free to express your opinions and take the quiz.
My list came out as follows:
1. Kerry: whom I'll probably vote for even though he hasn't a chance in hell
2. Kucinich: ummmm.....NO
3. Dean: was very interested in at first, but probably has no hope of getting
the nomination.
4. Sharpton: WTF?
5: Clark: my choice.
6: Edwards: Opie Goes To Washington
7: Lieberman: Droopy Dog For President.
8: Bush: God help us all.
I got Kucinich too. Not gonna vote for him though.
The most important question for Democrats is probably "Is this person able to beat George W. Bush?"
These things are usually flawed. I have definite opinions about certain issues but don't really have a litmus test regarding them for candidates. In some cases, I think that certain issues are either mostly settled in the United States or are issues that don't affect me personally and don't affect a large number of people.
I'm more interested in how candidates stand on the issues that do affect me personally and that are important to a large group of people. Right now I care more about economics and Iraq more than anything else.
After today it's looking like Kerry and Edwards are the only viable candidates anyway. My state doesn't vote till March, but I'll probably support Edwards. But I would have no problem voting for either of them in November. I liked Clark at first just because I thought he would mop the floor up with Bush but he seems to have trouble winning people over.
I'm really glad Dean seems to be toast. I just didn't think he would appeal to middle-of-the-road voters and would be an easy opponent for Bush.
BTW, a poll released today shows Kerry defeating Bush by more percentage points than the margin of error, which apparently is a big deal. It shows Edwards basically in a tie, and Clark barely losing.
Clark has gotta win somewhere today or he's probably out, though I've heard he has the money to stick with it a little while longer. Exit polls show Edwards winning two states today, including Oklahoma which Clark was favored to win. Even worse, Clark seems to be finishing third in Oklahoma. Kerry seems to have done much better than expected.
I think what hurts Clark is that he was basically a Republican until very recently.
Lieberman says he's quitting today if he doesn't win anything.
The polls haven't closed anywhere yet, though.
Clark! No one else matters...
jmc wrote:
> BTW, a poll released today shows Kerry defeating Bush by more
> percentage points than the margin of error, which apparently is
> a big deal. It shows Edwards basically in a tie, and Clark
> barely losing.
>
These polls, while entertaining, really mean nothing. The campaign has not even begun, and if it measures ANYTHING, it shows partisanship (viewed by most on both sides as bad).
I don't mean to start a flame war, but Bush will wipe the floor with Kerry in a debate for one key reason: Kerry's voting record over the past several years as Senator is undefensible. When that voting record begins being the topic of campaign ads and possible debate points, Kerry will slide very fast. His record just won't stand the scrunity.
On the other hand, Bush is having a lot of problems with REPUBLICANS right now because of some of his collosal spending increases. In other words, a lot of conservatives are viewing President Bush as quite liberal, on domestic policy anyway, and they see it for what it likely is: vote buying. He's going to have a hard time reversing his own slide on the domestic side over the past year with his own base.
It's an important election, folks. No matter your stance, please vote. :)
I think most of those Republicans will put aside their differences in November, though, because with all his flaws Bush probably seems better to them than anyone on the other side with whom they have close to zero in common. Some might stay home, I guess, but I really think most of those people are the type that voted for Buchanan in 2000.
I don't know how much the debates matter anymore, and the more they get into things like voting records the more the public will probably tune it out. I think a lot of people will vote on emotion this time. It's probably bad, but people seem to vote emotionally and for the candidate's personality more than anything else.
Bush's approval rating seems to be dropping too.
I took that test and my top 3 results are as follows:
1. Kerry
2. Kucinich
3. Edwards
Oh by the way, everybody seems to think that Bush is absolutely unbeatable in 2004 but remember the election in 2000?
He BARELY won that race. Barely.
Gore gave him a helluva run for his money and nearly kicked his ass!
Remember how close that vote was?
I think Kerry is a much stronger candidate than Gore ever was.
I think Kerry does have a good chance!
Gore was a really bad candidate. In general, people don't like voting for former Vice-Presidents, and historically, when they do get elected their administrations aren't usually considered successful ones [like the first President Bush.] This goes even more if the candidate, like Gore, has failed at running for President before [he was a candidate in 1988.] Gore also dropped the ball by distancing himself from Clinton and was just too vague about what he planned to do. Gore caused me to vote Republican for the first time in my life, that's how poor a candidate he was.
I think what's going to come into play is just the general perception that everything began going to hell as soon as Bush was elected. It's not entirely fair to Bush, but I think that's how a lot of people will see it. I really feel like this is similar to 1992, which is part of why I like Edwards due to similarities to Clinton, mainly positive ones.
Looks like Kerry and Edwards were the big winners today. Everyone else's days are probably numbered. Clark keeps spending money but can't seem to buy a win. It sounds like the race is tighter in Oklahoma, though.
Kucinich Score: 100%
2 Kerry Score: 86%
3 Sharpton Score: 80%
4 Edwards Score: 79%
5 Dean Score: 78%
6 Clark Score: 77%
7 Lieberman Score: 64%
8 Bush Score: 22%
I picture a funny scene in my mind.
I see all the democratic candidates running a marathon but they're running in slow motion with the Chariots of Fire music playing.
They all wear those marathon clothes....you know, the shorts and a tank top with a number pinned to it.
As each candidate falls out of the race they tumble to the ground in slow motion.
Lieberman, the human cariacature has just went down.
Hehe!
Post Edited (02-04-04 02:32)
I think one of the biggest ways the 'alienated' republicans might effect Bush is that he will have to, in a sense, compaign against himself somewhat to keep them in the fold. In other words, I think he might have to spend money on ads that get those people back.
The debates don't matter for issues and topics discussed, but they do matter for perceptions, at least it seems that way, but only for those on the fence of voting/not voting. I think there are very few people that don't already know who they will vote for once the nominees are actually named at the conventions.
Maybe they should debate "Night of the Living Dead" 1968 vs. 1990. We'd learn a lot about them that way.
Bush - 100%
Lieberman - 68%
Sharpton - 65%
These top three scores make me question the website. While Bush and Lieberman indeed would be my top picks, I find it impossible that my answers pointed 100% in favor of Bush. For instance, I registered strongly in favor of abolishing the death penalty. How does that make me 100% for Bush?
And Sharpton??? Edwards was ranked last, and I kind of like him (though that opinion is based largely on how he's running his campaign).
Not to sound like a giddy optimist, but I think so long as Dean gets whacked in the primaries, we're pretty much assured of winding up with a good president - or at least an acceptable one.
I can see it now...."Senator Kerry, do you prefer shuffling zombies or running zombies?"
"I can see it now...."Senator Kerry, do you prefer shuffling zombies or running zombies?""
BUSH: We must not ban assault weapons lest we succomb to the zombie horde.
KERRY: Aha! Everybody knows you can only kill a zombie with a shotgun or a machete!
Yeah, he can hold up a copy of THE ZOMBIE SURVIVAL GUIDE where it says that the best defense is a bolt action rifle and a crowbar. It also says most assault weapons aren't good unless the user can resist the urge to go to full auto.
>3. Sharpton
What is the point of Sharpton even trying? Does he seriously think he'd ever even come close to being elected?
"What is the point of Sharpton even trying? Does he seriously think he'd ever even come close to being elected?"
Well for one thing, if Bush and Lieberman both died tomorrow, he'd apparently be my number one candidate. But Sharpton is doing on a national scale the same thing he did in NY for years: getting his mug on TV any way he can.
My first three results were:
1. Kucinich
2. Kerry
3. Dean
Originally, I had high hopes for both Clark and Dean. Clark seems level headed enough to seriously run our nation. The man is a respected General and would possibly think harder about going to war (BIG point with me).
I liked Dean's fire directly from the start. It is fantastic to see someone get enthused about politics the way that he does. It has been my belief for years that the Democratic party has lost it's energy. It has been getting to the point that it's hard to tell Democrats and Republicans apart. I was seriously hoping Dean would get in there and get the party back on track......................looks like this will probably never happen.
So, at this point I'm starting to turn my focus towards Kerry and Edwards. I need to check on Kerry's ideas and stances though. Guy kinda creeps me out as well. Just looks creepy.
As for Edwards, I believe he would make a fine president. Being as he has held office here in NC, I'm already quite familiar with his views. Unfortunatly, I do believe that he might be a little too meek to make it to office.
Oh well.
Strangely, I was JUST reading that before I saw this post.
I got 100% for Kucinich, followed by Sharpton and Kerry. I hope the candidate is the one most likely to beat Bush, but I'll probably vote for Kucinich; living in Massachusetts, it's pretty clear who's gonna win (both in the primary and the election), giving me the freedom to support the underdog.
You know what would kickass about an Al Sharpton presidency?
Best Inaugural party EVER!!!
I'm 100% Bush. Which sort of sounds like this porn flick I saw once...