Political Compass test - Page 4 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-06-2012, 02:12 PM   #61
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
fooger03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 4,132
Total Cats: 187
Default

Who's most likely to beat out Obama in a head-to-head? Santorum, Romney, or Paul?
fooger03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 02:13 PM   #62
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Santorum's dead if Obama gets him in a debate.

Romney has a small-to-decent chance.

Paul will rock Obama's world. Remember, Paul's only actual problem is the near-media blackout he has.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 02:34 PM   #63
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 178
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
Paul will rock Obama's world. Remember, Paul's only actual problem is the near-media blackout he has.
Paul has way more problems getting elected than media coverage. He has to be the least telegenic of all the nominees: he looks old and his speaking style often comes across to the average citizen as that of a ranting old kook (and his voice is not soothing in any way).

Don't kid yourself, that is important to a lot of the voting populace. Also, I think we often underestimate the number of Americans who hold views apart from our own. I think it is natural to subconsiously assume most people think like you do. I often subconsiously assume all intelligent, educated Americans reject the premise of organized religions whether they go through the social motions of attending church/temple/mosque or not.

That is obviously a false assumption as there are a lot of Americans who take their faith in a defined higher power and their associated texts and tenets very seriously (even if they do so selectively).


Plenty of people think that legalizing drugs, getting the government out of marriage, abolishing various Federal programs like the Department of Education and fixing the economy by possibly making it way worse in the short-term are bad ideas.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:00 PM   #64
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,814
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Romney has the best chance, aboslutely. Especially given how handsome and well-spoken he is.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:08 PM   #65
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fooger03 View Post
Who's most likely to beat out Obama in a head-to-head? Santorum, Romney, or Paul?

It would be wrong to assume that the Republican Establishment would prefer Paul to Obama as president.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:16 PM   #66
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 4,682
Total Cats: 216
Default

Ron Paul is not a bible thumping, war mongering, buzz-word factory, therefor has no chance as a republican candidate. Even if he stands for everything the republican party is supposed to stand for.

All these douche bags are throwing around terms like "free-market" and "capitalism" simply because republicans like those words. They have no real meaning other than improving their popularity.
They'll get into office and it will be business as usual, just like the last 4 years, and the years before that, and the years before that.

"Republican, Democrat. Thats just Pepsi and Coke. Same ----, different can."
-Christopher Titus
Full_Tilt_Boogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:18 PM   #67
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,165
Total Cats: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Full_Tilt_Boogie View Post
Ron Paul is not a bible thumping, war mongering, buzz-word factory, therefor has no chance as a republican candidate. Even if he stands for everything the republican party is supposed to stand for.

All these douche bags are throwing around terms like "free-market" and "capitalism" simply because republicans like those words. They have no real meaning other than improving their popularity.
They'll get into office and it will be business as usual, just like the last 4 years, and the years before that, and the years before that.

"Republican, Democrat. Thats just Pepsi and Coke. Same ----, different can."
-Christopher Titus
gearhead_318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:19 PM   #68
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (18)
 
olderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,437
Total Cats: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post

It would be wrong to assume that the Republican Establishment would prefer Paul to Obama as president.
I'm afraid that the Republican establishment has already accepted that Obama will be around for four more years, regardless of Romney getting the nomination.
olderguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:21 PM   #69
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post

It would be wrong to assume that the Republican Establishment would prefer Paul to Obama as president.
^This, times a thousandfold to Scrappy.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:27 PM   #70
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olderguy View Post
I'm afraid that the Republican establishment has already accepted that Obama will be around for four more years, regardless of Romney getting the nomination.
You missed the point.

The Republican insiders prefer Obama for prez to Paul, because the former will continue their gravy train while the latter will try to stop it.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:29 PM   #71
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (18)
 
olderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,437
Total Cats: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
You missed the point.

The Republican insiders prefer Obama for prez to Paul, because the former will continue their gravy train while the latter will try to stop it.
I agree with that statement, and raise you mine.
olderguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:38 PM   #72
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Here's a good analogy I found:

Quote:
Only the neocons and their allies in Israel want war with Iran. Politically, the elite are in a rift. CFR Team A vs CFR Team B

Think of it like the Godfather.

David Rockefeller is Don of the Corleone Family.

Team A:
Brzezinsky is "Tom Hagen", Vito Corleone's consiglieri. He is old school. He prefers to operate behind the scenes out of the limelight via backroom deals, buyouts, and covert operations. Those he speaks for do not want war with Iran. Bad PR, and destructive to their global aims. They don't need Luca Brasi yet.


The Neocons are Team B, with numerous mouthpieces. They are the "Sonny" wing of the Corleone family. They are hotheads who would destroy the family.
They grew up within the Family but never learned tact. Their governance, like "Sonny's" was brief. The policies they instituted and the wars they started, like Sonny's, must be cleaned up.


CFR Team A and Brzezinsky, the "Tom Hagen" of the Corleone Family, have gotten cozy with Obama. This angers the Neo-cons and threatens their fast track, scorched earth approach to the revamping of the middle east.

Obama is a young "Michael", He will come of age in his second term. The Neo-cons have no "Michael", only "Fredo". We know what happens to Fredo.

Brzezinsky has made his mark on Obama on foreign policy. Obama's second term will undo much of the damage done by the NeoCons. Events however have been set in motion making it more difficult for Brzezinsky and Team A. Their methods are to tweak events to steer into the light of "American Interest".

Team A for now has the reigns. Let's hope the in-fighting becomes more public.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:04 PM   #73
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 178
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
^This, times a thousandfold to Scrappy.
I would be happy to add "establishment Republican antagonism" to the list of Ron Paul's many problems with getting elected.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:50 PM   #74
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 14,353
Total Cats: 1,319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fooger03 View Post
Wouldn't republicans have a better chance of winning the presidency if they elected a candidate that democrats could agree with? An authoritarian on one side of the spectrum would never get a vote from anyone on the other side of the spectrum, but I would suspect that a libertarian on one side of the spectrum would attract the votes of everyone on his side of the spectrum as well as a strong number of voters in the middle and from the other side of the spectrum.
Can I join you in your fantasy world where the average American voter is an educated, rational person? It sounds awfully nice
Savington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:51 PM   #75
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,814
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

+1 props.


Average uninformed moron:




I'm having a Super Tuesday, thanks for askin'
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:55 PM   #76
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Looks like Brainy got himself all dressed up purdy to vote now!
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:55 PM   #77
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Few voters are "educated and rational". <edited>
That is the problem with democracy.

In a democracy the psychopathic megalomaniacs just need to propagandize the people to allow the gov't to do this or do that for "the common good". All this does is increase gov't power.

The answer is de-centralization of power and for people to realize that a free society solves numerous problems which they think only gov't can solve.

Last edited by JasonC SBB; 03-07-2012 at 03:16 AM.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 05:34 PM   #78
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,315
Total Cats: 1,913
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
No voters are "educated and rational".
That is the problem with democracy.
(...)
The answer is de-centralization of power and for people to realize that a free society solves numerous problems which they think only gov't can solve.
So, up to this point, we've mostly discussed ideals and abstract hypotheticals. Not a bad thing, but you raise a specific call-to-action here, so I'm going to posit a practical dilemma.

We'll accept as read that "No (or few) voters are educated and rational."

Given that, is it realistic to expect those same ignorant and irrational people to suddenly "realize that a free society solves numerous problems which they think only gov't can solve"?

I'm being totally serious here. How can a population which is too ignorant to democratically elect a leader within the constraints of a mature and well-defined electoral system be expected to suddenly become enlightened as to the vast and manifold benefits of a "de-centralized" system of government, especially given that many would be functionally incapable of distinguishing such a proposal from actual anarchy, and that this belief would undoubtedly be reinforced by the more sensationalist elements of the mainstream media?

In other words, I predict that the first "leader" who proposes that America's government be "de-centralized" will likely find himself at the working end of a hangman's noose, and I am genuinely curious to hear a contrarily point of view which describes how such a policy might actually be implemented in a practical manner.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 05:59 PM   #79
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,684
Total Cats: 555
Default

Maybe we'll get lucky and the Iranians will nuke Washington D.C.
rleete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 06:26 PM   #80
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Economic Left/Right: -2.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.23



I'm with good company in history and on here it seems.
Attached Thumbnails
Political Compass test-pcgraphpng.png  
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3rd Time's a Charm...hopefully. zephyrusaurai Meet and Greet 2 09-28-2015 11:59 PM
Are my coils failing? viriiguy General Miata Chat 5 09-28-2015 08:39 PM
Compression test results Colipto General Miata Chat 3 09-11-2015 02:44 PM


Tags
authoritarian, compass, libertarian, political, test

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:17 AM.