short test to see what candidate you should vote for
- Thread starter 2-0-Sixx
- Start date
Hrmm. Why does it matter? Why should it matter one bit?
"Fair and balanced" idiot logic strikes again. If you are exactly 50% Republican, and 50% Democrat, are you somehow better than everyone else? Is your view inherently more correct?
Maybe so many of us are so far from Regurgitates because they are idiots, their entire mindset is fucking horrible, and either they have no fucking clue or they don't care who or what they affect.
George Bush is, as we speak, straight up wreaking havoc on our environment. Does anyone give a shit? Bush's administration has been rolling back workplace safety standards since they began their assault on poor people. Does anyone give a shit? Bush's "War on Terror" is going to create more terror than we could ever ask for. Does any one of them give a shit? No. Do you give a shit? No.
You say you're a "moderate", with "liberal social views", but you're an O'Reilly independant...you support Bush - one of the most far-out and faulty ass presidents/administrations in recent history. You insist that you don't support Bush and bla bla, but you worry more about the "communist/socialist" government we might get with Kerry than the problems and the hundred foot high pile of shit that Bush creates.
But in the end, do you give a shit? No. And this is why so many of us are miles away from Bush or anyone else who basically uses politics to benefit the rich, the oligarchy, and the exploitative.
"Fair and balanced" idiot logic strikes again. If you are exactly 50% Republican, and 50% Democrat, are you somehow better than everyone else? Is your view inherently more correct?
Maybe so many of us are so far from Regurgitates because they are idiots, their entire mindset is fucking horrible, and either they have no fucking clue or they don't care who or what they affect.
George Bush is, as we speak, straight up wreaking havoc on our environment. Does anyone give a shit? Bush's administration has been rolling back workplace safety standards since they began their assault on poor people. Does anyone give a shit? Bush's "War on Terror" is going to create more terror than we could ever ask for. Does any one of them give a shit? No. Do you give a shit? No.
You say you're a "moderate", with "liberal social views", but you're an O'Reilly independant...you support Bush - one of the most far-out and faulty ass presidents/administrations in recent history. You insist that you don't support Bush and bla bla, but you worry more about the "communist/socialist" government we might get with Kerry than the problems and the hundred foot high pile of shit that Bush creates.
But in the end, do you give a shit? No. And this is why so many of us are miles away from Bush or anyone else who basically uses politics to benefit the rich, the oligarchy, and the exploitative.
assault on poor people? GIVE IT UP YOURE FUCKING KILLING ME HERE!!!!
UNEMPLOYMENT IS THE SAME RATE IT WAS WHEN SLICK WILLIE WAS RE ELECTED IN 1996.
DESPITE A TERROR ATTACK ON 9/11 OUR ECONOMY HAS STILL BEEN BROUGHT OUT OF A RECESSION LEFT TO OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT.
MORE PEOPLE INCLUDING MINORITIES OWN HOMES IN AMERICA NOW.
YOU SAY THAT BUSH IS ANTI ENVIRONMENT, BUT IF THATS THE CASE THEN LIBERALS HAVE BEEN SO ANTI BUSINESS WITH THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA ITS STRANGLING OUR ECONOMY. THERES TWO SIDES TO THAT COIN. I HAVE FAMILY IN THE HAZARDOUS WASTE AND WASTE MANAGEMENT INDUSTRIES. WHY DONT YOU ASK THEM WHAT ITS LIKE TRYING TO GET SOMETHING DONE WORKING ALONGSIDE THE EPA NAZIS!!
YOURE BACK IN LIBERAL WORLD WHERE IF YOURE NOT SOME HIPPIE FRISCO FAG YOURE A KENTUCKY BACKROADS KKK MEMBER. YOU ARE NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM AS MUCH AS IT BOTHERS YOU, YOU ARE NOT THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I AM AND IT BURNS YOUR ASS. YOU CAN USE EVERY POST YOU WANT TO DIG UP TO PROVE IT. GO AHEAD I KNOW YOU GOT PLENTY OF TIME.
UNEMPLOYMENT IS THE SAME RATE IT WAS WHEN SLICK WILLIE WAS RE ELECTED IN 1996.
DESPITE A TERROR ATTACK ON 9/11 OUR ECONOMY HAS STILL BEEN BROUGHT OUT OF A RECESSION LEFT TO OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT.
MORE PEOPLE INCLUDING MINORITIES OWN HOMES IN AMERICA NOW.
YOU SAY THAT BUSH IS ANTI ENVIRONMENT, BUT IF THATS THE CASE THEN LIBERALS HAVE BEEN SO ANTI BUSINESS WITH THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA ITS STRANGLING OUR ECONOMY. THERES TWO SIDES TO THAT COIN. I HAVE FAMILY IN THE HAZARDOUS WASTE AND WASTE MANAGEMENT INDUSTRIES. WHY DONT YOU ASK THEM WHAT ITS LIKE TRYING TO GET SOMETHING DONE WORKING ALONGSIDE THE EPA NAZIS!!
YOURE BACK IN LIBERAL WORLD WHERE IF YOURE NOT SOME HIPPIE FRISCO FAG YOURE A KENTUCKY BACKROADS KKK MEMBER. YOU ARE NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM AS MUCH AS IT BOTHERS YOU, YOU ARE NOT THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I AM AND IT BURNS YOUR ASS. YOU CAN USE EVERY POST YOU WANT TO DIG UP TO PROVE IT. GO AHEAD I KNOW YOU GOT PLENTY OF TIME.
AND BY THE WAY YOU SAID I WAS BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE NOT ME. I JUST POINTED OUT THAT EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD SEEMS TO SLANT TO AN EXTREME SIDE. I WAS THE ONLY ONE WITH MODERATE RATINGS. THATS A FACT. JUST LIKE MCLEAN IS 90 PERCENT CONSERVATIVE, YOURE 90 PERCENT LIBERAL. DONT HATE ME BECAUSE I DONT FOLLOW THE "POLITICAL PARTY CHECKLIST OF ISSUES I ENDORSE AND AM AGAINST" GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.
Unemployment is the same rate eh? Where is the deficit at? Have real wages decreased or increased? Why is our minimum wage less, in real dollars, than it was in the 1950s? Why has the disproportional income gap continued to widen? Why have overseas outsourcing, NAFTA, and the Bush push for privatization of social security remained largely unopposed?
Despite one terrorist attack 3 years ago, our economy has barely been able to wobble to a stand, and this is a sign of progress? Our economy would have been far beyond normalized had Bush and the Republicans not continued to stoke the fears of terrorism for political gain. Cheney and Bush at this very moment continue to hype terrorism in order to scare the American people into voting for them.
If 9/11 happened in England, France, or Spain (as terrorist attacks have), it would have had basically little to nothing of the effect it has here. Why? Because Americans are afraid. Conservatives, especially, fear gun laws, homos, a more comprehensive government medical assistance plan, and communism or "socialistic government", as you like to put it, measures that would improve, not hinder, our way of life here.
Look at the incarceration rate of America compared to other countries. We have 2 million people in jail. One percent of our population! It's fucking ludicrous. All the "big government European countries" have little to no crime because they take care of their citizens. The income gaps between rich and poor are nothing over there like they are over here.
BushCo and friends are only concerned with corporate welfare, and the belief that corporations and big business should reamin unchecked, a view that inevitably and wholly harms society. Even you yourself said that opposing drug importing is simply a measure to make money for our companies, when in fact it hurts Americans. That is not the only example of "business helpers" making ore money for the ultra rich, and fucking over the rest of us. It occurs in myriad areas, especially under the Bush administration.
The home ownership rise was due to income increases during the Clinton administration. Even fair and balanced O'Reilly admits to this.
Their environmental agenda? Do some research on the effects of carbon pollution phil. Try google. Europe is already seeing ill effects from warming trends, including record heat waves and the migration of insect and animal species accustomed to warmer climates, such as stinkbugs and roaches.
Let's work with concepts phil.
A man sits in an enclosed garage for 15 minutes with his car running...and the man dies. That will kill you.
Now, multiply that 15 minutes of carbon monoxide by about 6 billion, and you have the amount of shit 'just the United States' puts up in the air daily.
We output enough carbon monoxide into the atmosphere every day to kill every human on the entire planet. And you think this has no effect whatsoever? Environmentalists are "nazi wackos"?
Perhaps they actually want something to be around 100 years from now. What fucking spoilsports!
Let me tell you a real pro-business policy. Make it so that CEOs and members of the board make only 400 times the salary of their average employee, instead of 500. Institute a top-tier income slash, and redistribute it to cover environmental expenses. This is reasonable, right? Does Bill Gates need to waterski behind 7 yachts instead of 6, while workers in his factories struggle everyday to pay their bills?
Im sure your friends in hazardous waste and waste management get shit from the EPA. Their disposables cause cancer. They have to be heavily regulated, or the ill effects of living near factories and chemicals that only some of us deal with will have to be dealt with by all of us. Do research on cancer and leukemia rates in towns near industrial plants and factories, especially those near refineries and processing plants.
It's funny you mention environmental reforms as anti-business...here's a suggestion to improve the business climate...regulate monopolies, encourage competition, and stop people like Cheney and Michael Powell who allow money-grubbing, socially hazardous megacorps to run free. Allow a larger amount of Americans to live at a decent level...and then guess what? They spend money! It's awesome.
I give a fuck how "moderate" you are. 70% of Americans thought Saddam had something to do with 9/11...does that make them correct? A moderate person would probly agree with the Iraq War, as you did....does that make you correct? Hardly. If you say I am two feet tall, and I say I am 6 feet tall, does that automatically make me 4? Is being a "moderate" any better than a "conservative" or a "liberal"?
Despite one terrorist attack 3 years ago, our economy has barely been able to wobble to a stand, and this is a sign of progress? Our economy would have been far beyond normalized had Bush and the Republicans not continued to stoke the fears of terrorism for political gain. Cheney and Bush at this very moment continue to hype terrorism in order to scare the American people into voting for them.
If 9/11 happened in England, France, or Spain (as terrorist attacks have), it would have had basically little to nothing of the effect it has here. Why? Because Americans are afraid. Conservatives, especially, fear gun laws, homos, a more comprehensive government medical assistance plan, and communism or "socialistic government", as you like to put it, measures that would improve, not hinder, our way of life here.
Look at the incarceration rate of America compared to other countries. We have 2 million people in jail. One percent of our population! It's fucking ludicrous. All the "big government European countries" have little to no crime because they take care of their citizens. The income gaps between rich and poor are nothing over there like they are over here.
BushCo and friends are only concerned with corporate welfare, and the belief that corporations and big business should reamin unchecked, a view that inevitably and wholly harms society. Even you yourself said that opposing drug importing is simply a measure to make money for our companies, when in fact it hurts Americans. That is not the only example of "business helpers" making ore money for the ultra rich, and fucking over the rest of us. It occurs in myriad areas, especially under the Bush administration.
The home ownership rise was due to income increases during the Clinton administration. Even fair and balanced O'Reilly admits to this.
Their environmental agenda? Do some research on the effects of carbon pollution phil. Try google. Europe is already seeing ill effects from warming trends, including record heat waves and the migration of insect and animal species accustomed to warmer climates, such as stinkbugs and roaches.
Let's work with concepts phil.
A man sits in an enclosed garage for 15 minutes with his car running...and the man dies. That will kill you.
Now, multiply that 15 minutes of carbon monoxide by about 6 billion, and you have the amount of shit 'just the United States' puts up in the air daily.
We output enough carbon monoxide into the atmosphere every day to kill every human on the entire planet. And you think this has no effect whatsoever? Environmentalists are "nazi wackos"?
Perhaps they actually want something to be around 100 years from now. What fucking spoilsports!
Let me tell you a real pro-business policy. Make it so that CEOs and members of the board make only 400 times the salary of their average employee, instead of 500. Institute a top-tier income slash, and redistribute it to cover environmental expenses. This is reasonable, right? Does Bill Gates need to waterski behind 7 yachts instead of 6, while workers in his factories struggle everyday to pay their bills?
Im sure your friends in hazardous waste and waste management get shit from the EPA. Their disposables cause cancer. They have to be heavily regulated, or the ill effects of living near factories and chemicals that only some of us deal with will have to be dealt with by all of us. Do research on cancer and leukemia rates in towns near industrial plants and factories, especially those near refineries and processing plants.
It's funny you mention environmental reforms as anti-business...here's a suggestion to improve the business climate...regulate monopolies, encourage competition, and stop people like Cheney and Michael Powell who allow money-grubbing, socially hazardous megacorps to run free. Allow a larger amount of Americans to live at a decent level...and then guess what? They spend money! It's awesome.
I give a fuck how "moderate" you are. 70% of Americans thought Saddam had something to do with 9/11...does that make them correct? A moderate person would probly agree with the Iraq War, as you did....does that make you correct? Hardly. If you say I am two feet tall, and I say I am 6 feet tall, does that automatically make me 4? Is being a "moderate" any better than a "conservative" or a "liberal"?
1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%
2. Dennis Kucinich (86%) Information link
3. Christopher Dodd (80%) Information link
4. Barack Obama (79%) Information link
5. Joseph Biden (78%) Information link
6. Hillary Clinton (76%) Information link
7. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (75%) Information link
8. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (73%) Information link
9. John Edwards (71%) Information link
10. Al Gore (not announced) (68%) Information link
11. Michael Bloomberg (says he will not run) (65%) Information link
12. Mike Gravel (63%) Information link
13. Bill Richardson (56%) Information link
14. Elaine Brown (48%) Information link
15. Kent McManigal (campaign suspended) (44%) Information link
16. Ron Paul (44%) Information link
17. Rudolph Giuliani (44%) Information link
18. John McCain (36%) Information link
19. Tommy Thompson (withdrawn, endorsed Giuliani) (30%) Information link
20. Mitt Romney (24%) Information link
21. Chuck Hagel (not running) (24%) Information link
22. Sam Brownback (withdrawn, endorsed McCain) (22%) Information link
23. Mike Huckabee (21%) Information link
24. Newt Gingrich (says he will not run) (20%) Information link
25. Fred Thompson (17%) Information link
26. Alan Keyes (13%) Information link
27. Jim Gilmore (withdrawn) (11%) Information link
28. Tom Tancredo (10%) Information link
29. Duncan Hunter (9%) Information link
30. Stephen Colbert (campaign ended) (6%) Information link
2. Dennis Kucinich (86%) Information link
3. Christopher Dodd (80%) Information link
4. Barack Obama (79%) Information link
5. Joseph Biden (78%) Information link
6. Hillary Clinton (76%) Information link
7. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (75%) Information link
8. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (73%) Information link
9. John Edwards (71%) Information link
10. Al Gore (not announced) (68%) Information link
11. Michael Bloomberg (says he will not run) (65%) Information link
12. Mike Gravel (63%) Information link
13. Bill Richardson (56%) Information link
14. Elaine Brown (48%) Information link
15. Kent McManigal (campaign suspended) (44%) Information link
16. Ron Paul (44%) Information link
17. Rudolph Giuliani (44%) Information link
18. John McCain (36%) Information link
19. Tommy Thompson (withdrawn, endorsed Giuliani) (30%) Information link
20. Mitt Romney (24%) Information link
21. Chuck Hagel (not running) (24%) Information link
22. Sam Brownback (withdrawn, endorsed McCain) (22%) Information link
23. Mike Huckabee (21%) Information link
24. Newt Gingrich (says he will not run) (20%) Information link
25. Fred Thompson (17%) Information link
26. Alan Keyes (13%) Information link
27. Jim Gilmore (withdrawn) (11%) Information link
28. Tom Tancredo (10%) Information link
29. Duncan Hunter (9%) Information link
30. Stephen Colbert (campaign ended) (6%) Information link
1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%
2. Ron Paul (69%) Information link
3. Barack Obama (61%) Information link
4. Christopher Dodd (57%) Information link
5. Dennis Kucinich (53%) Information link
6. John Edwards (53%) Information link
7. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (51%) Information link
8. Bill Richardson (51%) Information link
9. Mike Gravel (50%) Information link
10. Kent McManigal (campaign suspended)
im not gonna vote 4 ron paul cause it would be a wasted vote and i will more that likely vote for obama
2. Ron Paul (69%) Information link
3. Barack Obama (61%) Information link
4. Christopher Dodd (57%) Information link
5. Dennis Kucinich (53%) Information link
6. John Edwards (53%) Information link
7. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (51%) Information link
8. Bill Richardson (51%) Information link
9. Mike Gravel (50%) Information link
10. Kent McManigal (campaign suspended)
im not gonna vote 4 ron paul cause it would be a wasted vote and i will more that likely vote for obama
1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%
2. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (78%) Information link
3. Barack Obama (74%) Information link
4. Dennis Kucinich (74%) Information link
5. Christopher Dodd (69%) Information link
6. Joseph Biden (68%) Information link
7. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (68%) Information link
8. Al Gore (not announced) (67%) Information link
9. Hillary Clinton (67%) Information link
10. John Edwards (66%) Information link
2008 SelectSmart.com
Presidential Candidate Selector
Candidate Positions
Alan Augustson - Green Party
Mr. Auguston wrote on June 11, 2007, "I am 43 years old." "I consider myself a scientist by trade." and that he is "currently married to second spouse." Responses and comments were supplied directly by the candidate. On 6/30/2007 Mr. Augustson announced that "I will cease to actively pursue the 2008 Green Party nomination for President". However, "I may re-visit the possibility of a Presidential bid at some later time. For now, I am turning my attention to the pursuit of a different target: the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois".
IRAQ WAR A²: Would have opposed Bush’s original request to use military force against Iraq. Priority: HIGH Comment: I distrusted the motives and evidence for the invasion from the very beginning.
LEAVING IRAQ A²: Would support a deadline for withdrawal in Iraq. Priority: HIGH Comment: As near to 'immediate' as possible.
BALANCING CIVIL LIBERTIES & SECURITY A²: Would lean toward protecting civil liberties even though it might risk our security. Priority: HIGH Comment: We are no safer, though considerably less free, than on 'September Tenth'.
SOCIAL SECURITY A²: Would work to make it solvent, possibly raising the earnings ceiling and/or the retirement age, etc. Priority: HIGH Comment: I would also protect the Social Security Trust Fund from further pillaging by other programs.
EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH Would support federal expansion of embryonic stem cell research. Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
SCHOOL CHOICE A²: Would oppose publicly funded "voucher" programs that allows students to choose to attend any of various participating private and public schools. Priority: LOW Comment: Publicly-funded vouchers would illegally give tax money to schools that practice religious indoctrination.
GAY & LESBIAN ISSUES A²: Would support both marriage and civil unions for same sex couples. Priority: HIGH Comment: A same-sex marriage performed in any state, shall be recognized in all fifty states.
TRADE ISSUES A²: Would support fair trade policies. Priority: HIGH Comment: I would also support heavy tariffs on imports from countries with records of excessive environmental and human-rights abuses.
TAXES & GOVERMENT SERVICES A²: My ideal candidate would favor the "government should help people" positions of groups such as the Children's Defense Fund and the Alliance for Retired Americans. Priority: HIGH Comment: Government exists to do those things that people cannot do for themselves.
THE DEFICIT A²: Neither Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
BUSINESS & LABOR A²: Would favor the pro-labor positions of the AFL-CIO and similar groups. Priority: LOW Comment: Labor's position does not go far enough. I would support both tougher labor protection, and a closure of the ever-increasing gap between the highest- and lowest-paid workers.
ABORTION A²: Would support the pro-choice positions of organizations like NARAL. Priority: HIGH Comment: However, I would still encourage contraception, 'Plan-B' measures, and adoption choices.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT A²: Would oppose the death penalty. Priority: HIGH Comment: There may be some cases where capital punishment is appropriate, but the way in which we pursue and prosecute them now is disproportionately biased toward the killing of the poor and minorities.
MARIJUANA laws A²: Would support a general decriminalization of marijuana. Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
GUN CONTROL A²: Neither Priority: LOW Comment: Other countries, such as Canada and the UK, have lots of privately-owned firearms. Interestingly, they generally do not use them on each other. Clearly, the problem is our society of aggression and violence.
MINIMUM WAGE A²: Would have a history of supporting increases in the minimum wage. Priority: HIGH Comment: I also intend to propose a Federal _MAXIMUM_ Wage.
HEALTH CARE A²: Would favor a government-provided, universal health care program for Americans. Priority: HIGH Comment: Universal Health Coverage is an inevitability. If we do not create it soon, the entire health system in America will suffer economic collapse.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS A²: Both the above. Priority: HIGH Comment: n/a
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES A²: Would favor positions of environmental groups like the League of Conservation Voters. Priority: HIGH Comment: LCV's positions do not go far enough. We have ten years to reduce GHG emissions by 80%, before a permanent climate catastrophe ensues.
LEGAL IMMIGRATION A²: Would favor a more open immigration policy, holding the opinion that foreign workers are a valuable and necessary addition to our labor pool. Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION A²: Would support temporary legalization (guest worker programs) for illegal aliens, but oppose permanent amnesty. Priority: LOW Comment: Permanent amnesty may give sweatshop owners and other illegal employers a 'green light' to abuse laborers.
2. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (78%) Information link
3. Barack Obama (74%) Information link
4. Dennis Kucinich (74%) Information link
5. Christopher Dodd (69%) Information link
6. Joseph Biden (68%) Information link
7. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (68%) Information link
8. Al Gore (not announced) (67%) Information link
9. Hillary Clinton (67%) Information link
10. John Edwards (66%) Information link
2008 SelectSmart.com
Presidential Candidate Selector
Candidate Positions
Alan Augustson - Green Party
Mr. Auguston wrote on June 11, 2007, "I am 43 years old." "I consider myself a scientist by trade." and that he is "currently married to second spouse." Responses and comments were supplied directly by the candidate. On 6/30/2007 Mr. Augustson announced that "I will cease to actively pursue the 2008 Green Party nomination for President". However, "I may re-visit the possibility of a Presidential bid at some later time. For now, I am turning my attention to the pursuit of a different target: the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois".
IRAQ WAR A²: Would have opposed Bush’s original request to use military force against Iraq. Priority: HIGH Comment: I distrusted the motives and evidence for the invasion from the very beginning.
LEAVING IRAQ A²: Would support a deadline for withdrawal in Iraq. Priority: HIGH Comment: As near to 'immediate' as possible.
BALANCING CIVIL LIBERTIES & SECURITY A²: Would lean toward protecting civil liberties even though it might risk our security. Priority: HIGH Comment: We are no safer, though considerably less free, than on 'September Tenth'.
SOCIAL SECURITY A²: Would work to make it solvent, possibly raising the earnings ceiling and/or the retirement age, etc. Priority: HIGH Comment: I would also protect the Social Security Trust Fund from further pillaging by other programs.
EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH Would support federal expansion of embryonic stem cell research. Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
SCHOOL CHOICE A²: Would oppose publicly funded "voucher" programs that allows students to choose to attend any of various participating private and public schools. Priority: LOW Comment: Publicly-funded vouchers would illegally give tax money to schools that practice religious indoctrination.
GAY & LESBIAN ISSUES A²: Would support both marriage and civil unions for same sex couples. Priority: HIGH Comment: A same-sex marriage performed in any state, shall be recognized in all fifty states.
TRADE ISSUES A²: Would support fair trade policies. Priority: HIGH Comment: I would also support heavy tariffs on imports from countries with records of excessive environmental and human-rights abuses.
TAXES & GOVERMENT SERVICES A²: My ideal candidate would favor the "government should help people" positions of groups such as the Children's Defense Fund and the Alliance for Retired Americans. Priority: HIGH Comment: Government exists to do those things that people cannot do for themselves.
THE DEFICIT A²: Neither Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
BUSINESS & LABOR A²: Would favor the pro-labor positions of the AFL-CIO and similar groups. Priority: LOW Comment: Labor's position does not go far enough. I would support both tougher labor protection, and a closure of the ever-increasing gap between the highest- and lowest-paid workers.
ABORTION A²: Would support the pro-choice positions of organizations like NARAL. Priority: HIGH Comment: However, I would still encourage contraception, 'Plan-B' measures, and adoption choices.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT A²: Would oppose the death penalty. Priority: HIGH Comment: There may be some cases where capital punishment is appropriate, but the way in which we pursue and prosecute them now is disproportionately biased toward the killing of the poor and minorities.
MARIJUANA laws A²: Would support a general decriminalization of marijuana. Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
GUN CONTROL A²: Neither Priority: LOW Comment: Other countries, such as Canada and the UK, have lots of privately-owned firearms. Interestingly, they generally do not use them on each other. Clearly, the problem is our society of aggression and violence.
MINIMUM WAGE A²: Would have a history of supporting increases in the minimum wage. Priority: HIGH Comment: I also intend to propose a Federal _MAXIMUM_ Wage.
HEALTH CARE A²: Would favor a government-provided, universal health care program for Americans. Priority: HIGH Comment: Universal Health Coverage is an inevitability. If we do not create it soon, the entire health system in America will suffer economic collapse.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS A²: Both the above. Priority: HIGH Comment: n/a
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES A²: Would favor positions of environmental groups like the League of Conservation Voters. Priority: HIGH Comment: LCV's positions do not go far enough. We have ten years to reduce GHG emissions by 80%, before a permanent climate catastrophe ensues.
LEGAL IMMIGRATION A²: Would favor a more open immigration policy, holding the opinion that foreign workers are a valuable and necessary addition to our labor pool. Priority: LOW Comment: n/a
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION A²: Would support temporary legalization (guest worker programs) for illegal aliens, but oppose permanent amnesty. Priority: LOW Comment: Permanent amnesty may give sweatshop owners and other illegal employers a 'green light' to abuse laborers.
1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%
2. Barack Obama (76%)
3. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (76%)
4. Al Gore (not announced) (72%)
5. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (70%)
6. Christopher Dodd (70%)
7. Dennis Kucinich (67%)
8. Ron Paul (65%)
9. Hillary Clinton (61%)
10. Mike Gravel (61%)
looks like my choice is Obama...
2. Barack Obama (76%)
3. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (76%)
4. Al Gore (not announced) (72%)
5. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (70%)
6. Christopher Dodd (70%)
7. Dennis Kucinich (67%)
8. Ron Paul (65%)
9. Hillary Clinton (61%)
10. Mike Gravel (61%)
looks like my choice is Obama...