December 16, 2011
— JohnE. Earlier in the week, USA Today put out a short interactive Candidate Match Game. There are eleven questions on eleven different issues. You can weigh the questions based on their level of importance to you on the left. The results may surprise you.
There are no questions specifically on Iran or Israel, which is probably why Ron Paul finished second in my results. One thing to watch for: some of the cob loggers were noticing that Romney was actually finishing behind Obama.
Posted by: JohnE. at
01:59 PM
| Comments (171)
Post contains 92 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: redc1c4 at December 16, 2011 02:01 PM (d1FhN)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 16, 2011 02:01 PM (UlUS4)
Posted by: NC Ref at December 16, 2011 02:03 PM (WCQp7)
Posted by: NC Ref at December 16, 2011 02:03 PM (WCQp7)
Posted by: Rev dr L Ron Miller at December 16, 2011 02:05 PM (lAt8c)
Posted by: Joffen at December 16, 2011 02:06 PM (zLeKL)
Posted by: Newt's Purdy Lips at December 16, 2011 02:06 PM (EL+OC)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at December 16, 2011 02:08 PM (SB0V2)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 16, 2011 02:08 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 16, 2011 02:08 PM (UlUS4)
Only Perry (53.2) and Paul (51.1) broke 50% on my chart, with Gingrich and Obama tied for third at 45%.
Somehow, I don't think the system works right.
Posted by: wooga at December 16, 2011 02:09 PM (vjyZP)
Posted by: IreneFingIrene at December 16, 2011 02:09 PM (/VMLD)
Posted by: fluffy
For the children at December 16, 2011 02:10 PM (O6q63)
Posted by: Phoenixgirl at December 16, 2011 02:11 PM (HE+yF)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at December 16, 2011 02:11 PM (6IV8T)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at December 16, 2011 02:12 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: SFGoth at December 16, 2011 02:12 PM (dZ756)
Even when I fiddle with the sliders, Romney and Huntsman are always the bottom two for me. Was there a question about underpants in there?
Posted by: wooga at December 16, 2011 02:12 PM (vjyZP)
Posted by: Dr Spank at December 16, 2011 02:13 PM (H/kgP)
Posted by: jjshaka at December 16, 2011 02:14 PM (QG7EQ)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:14 PM (r2PLg)
Because guess what. For me Ron Paul (!...?) edged out a 4 way tie between Michelle, the Ricks, and Jon; Guess who got edged out by zero? yup Mittens.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at December 16, 2011 02:15 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:16 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Joffen at December 16, 2011 02:16 PM (zLeKL)
It made me a Paulbot which is understandable if you throw out the nutso shit and Jew hate.
Posted by: Vic at December 16, 2011 02:17 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: doug at December 16, 2011 02:18 PM (gUGI6)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:18 PM (r2PLg)
Bachmann
Santorum
No. Just no. They have a problem with their algorithms.
Most questions, the answers were obviously pointing at a specific candidate.
Give me Perry or give me enough liquor to get me through the next four years.
Posted by: Fuloydo at December 16, 2011 02:18 PM (1WRsn)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:19 PM (r2PLg)
I'm happy with the overall result, but having Paul placing and Bachmann showing make me think I might be due for that CAT scan. Results questionable, ask again later.
Posted by: Keith Arnold at December 16, 2011 02:19 PM (Jdtsu)
Posted by: Rex Harrison's Hat at December 16, 2011 02:20 PM (4136b)
Posted by: Iowa Bob at December 16, 2011 02:20 PM (RJ+Yj)
Posted by: Splunge at December 16, 2011 02:20 PM (2IW5Q)
That's weird. I ended up with Huntsman and no Romney.
(Fro the record: Huntsman, Santorum, and Bachmann; with Perry 4th. At least I dodged Laup Nor.)
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at December 16, 2011 02:21 PM (bjRNS)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:21 PM (r2PLg)
I guess the central problem is that the survey doesn't consider how much you are concerned that your candidate is not bat shit insane in some areas.
There is such an enormous area for someone to jump in right now, it amazes me that we don't have a "White Knight" coming in from the right of Newt McRomney...
Posted by: 18-1 at December 16, 2011 02:21 PM (7BU4a)
Posted by: innominatus at December 16, 2011 02:21 PM (tq6K2)
Posted by: John E. at December 16, 2011 02:22 PM (nRTou)
I got Huntsman, Mitt, Newt. I think the outcome is randomized.
Posted by: jwb7605 at December 16, 2011 02:22 PM (Qxe/p)
It's too late to register. There is a timetable, you know.
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at December 16, 2011 02:22 PM (bjRNS)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:23 PM (r2PLg)
Nah, there's just not that much daylight between some of their positions.
This is the reason why character and actual track record are important.
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at December 16, 2011 02:23 PM (bjRNS)
Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston training for the ONT mudwrestling match at December 16, 2011 02:24 PM (ijjAe)
Posted by: John E. at December 16, 2011 06:22 PM (nRTou)
Whew, thanks John.
Posted by: Rex Harrison's Hat at December 16, 2011 02:25 PM (4136b)
Posted by: Deety at December 16, 2011 02:25 PM (Pm8ax)
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at December 16, 2011 06:22 PM (bjRNS)
So you lose a few early states. If Jindal, Ryan, or the likes are interested there is time. Not much...but enough.
Posted by: 18-1 at December 16, 2011 02:25 PM (7BU4a)
Posted by: John E. at December 16, 2011 06:22 PM (nRTou)
Whew, thanks John.
Posted by: Rex Harrison's Hat at December 16, 2011 06:25 PM (4136b)
Word.
Posted by: ErikW at December 16, 2011 02:26 PM (YdEbS)
Perry 41.6%
Santorum 41.6%
Then Gingrich,Bachman,Huntsman,Romney and Obama significantly lower.
Pretty accurate,interesting that Huntsman was top three until I adjusted the ratings.
Posted by: SDH at December 16, 2011 02:27 PM (8B7Xp)
My colleague Trish Turner reports that Aides say members are being offered 2 plans - a long term and a 2-month extension on payroll tax.
Posted by: Miss'80s at December 16, 2011 02:27 PM (d6QMz)
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at December 16, 2011 02:27 PM (+lsX1)
So I just retook the test, answering with the worst possible answers (but no "none of the above" choices!), and my choices were Obama (67), Paul (50), and Huntsman (42). When I answered truthfully, my choices were Perry, Paul, and Gingrich/Obama.
So whether I go with what I want or what I hate, Ron Paul is always my second choice.
Posted by: wooga at December 16, 2011 02:27 PM (vjyZP)
Posted by: Christina Hendricks' Mighty Jugs Supports Rick Perry's Hair for President at December 16, 2011 02:28 PM (GlT5B)
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, im Tal der wilden Rosen at December 16, 2011 02:28 PM (UqKQV)
It made me a Paulbot which is understandable if you throw out the nutso shit and Jew hate.
Posted by: Vic at December 16, 2011 06:17 PM (YdQQY)
Yeah - if you could give him back a few marbles, Nor Luap would be ok on the economy, but still toxic on foreign policy and da JOOOs.
When you just find the candidate whose position is closest to yours on the high priority issues it ignores that.
Or, to put it another way, if you put Mussolini on the poll, he would probably get more Democrat support then Obama, since his economic policies were slightly to the left of Obummer. However, most liberals would presumably veto him on his stance on colonialism or international institutions....
Posted by: 18-1 at December 16, 2011 02:29 PM (7BU4a)
If the president was only in charge of economics....sure Ron Paul would be the guy. If the president's job was to make sure the world around us becomes even more dangerous....Ron Paul would be the guy.
If the president's job included economics and security for America....Ron Paul is NOT the guy.
Posted by: gride at December 16, 2011 02:29 PM (wPKc6)
Newt, Bachmann, Paul. 55-53 %
And yet...Perry!
Posted by: Mama AJ at December 16, 2011 06:27 PM (XdlcF)
Yeah, I'm with Perry.
I'm guessing the immigration question is what knocked him off the top of the list.
Posted by: ErikW at December 16, 2011 02:30 PM (YdEbS)
Posted by: Zeus at December 16, 2011 02:30 PM (sFRTj)
The US should handle the Iranian nuclear program by.
1. Using military force if necessary to prevent the development of a nuclear weapon.
2. Imposing severe sanctions.
3. Working with dissidents to promote a political shift away from the mullah system.
4. Withdraw all military forces from the Mideast, and nuke Israel first so Iran has no reason to develop a weapon.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at December 16, 2011 02:30 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: doug at December 16, 2011 02:30 PM (gUGI6)
Aaaarrrghhhh!
Posted by: Fritz at December 16, 2011 02:31 PM (FabC8)
Posted by: Mr. Bachmann at December 16, 2011 02:31 PM (R4oqL)
Posted by: Dave at December 16, 2011 02:31 PM (Xm1aB)
At least SCOAMF was lowest on my list.
Posted by: Brendan at December 16, 2011 02:32 PM (2jQGY)
Add a "None of the Above" option to the ballot for President. If NotA wins, the Speaker of the House becomes the president temporarily while we schedule another election that all candidates in the first election are not allowed to run in...including those that ran in the primaries.
Sound good?
Posted by: 18-1 at December 16, 2011 02:32 PM (7BU4a)
Posted by: Yip in Texas at December 16, 2011 02:33 PM (Mrdk1)
Posted by: Austin in TX at December 16, 2011 02:33 PM (F9Hpt)
F this poll.
Posted by: Looking closely at December 16, 2011 02:33 PM (8vTCm)
Not really surprising for me...
My list of matches?
1) Rick Perry 67%
2) Newt Gingrich 61%
3) Michelle Bachmann 59%
4) Rick Santorum
5) Ron Paul
6) Jon Huntsman
7) Mitt Romney
Barack ObamaWhat part of that should be surprising?
I like Rick Perry; I'd be more than happy voting for him, but I worry about his polling numbers and "electability". But given that I've got issues with everyone, my issues with him aren't that bad.
Gingrich? I like Gingrich. I know people don't, but it's no surprise that he's good on my major issues. And he's my dad's first choice and we're alike on many topics.
Bachmann? I've had issues with her campaign style, not her positions.
Paul comes 5th... not that high.
Romney barely beats Obama for me? That fits my feelings of Romney.
Obama comes dead last with no movement on any question... who could that surprise?
Posted by: gekkobear at December 16, 2011 02:33 PM (X0NX1)
Posted by: Alamo at December 16, 2011 02:33 PM (JUtDq)
Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 02:33 PM (r2PLg)
The question they forgot to ask is:
"How important is it that you not loathe the candidate as a detestable bomb thrower and opportunist who believes every hair-brained rumor that suits them?"
If they had asked that Bachmann would surely not have been my #1.
Posted by: Bill Mitchell at December 16, 2011 02:34 PM (uVlA4)
2. Imposing severe sanctions.
3. Working with dissidents to promote a political shift away from the mullah system.
4. Withdraw all military forces from the Mideast, and nuke Israel first so Iran has no reason to develop a weapon.
This is rigged. I don't see go golfing as an option.
Posted by: Barack Obama at December 16, 2011 02:34 PM (7BU4a)
You mean convicted felon, governor and mayor Curley? The guy responsible for instigating a 60 year decline of the city of Boston, machine identity politics, and turning one of the leading cities of the world into a backwater forever playing catch up?
Hey, I did it for a friend!
Votes!!
Posted by: zombie James Michael Curley at December 16, 2011 02:34 PM (O6q63)
Poll still sucks.
Posted by: Looking closely at December 16, 2011 02:34 PM (8vTCm)
Posted by: huerfano at December 16, 2011 02:35 PM (CLqgW)
The first two - spot on! Newt as my third, well I guess if you go on what he is saying and take out his lobbyist shill cheatn' past. My third right now is Santorum - wonder why he never made not Romney status.
Posted by: Evan at December 16, 2011 02:35 PM (O3OlP)
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at December 16, 2011 02:35 PM (bjRNS)
Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at December 16, 2011 02:35 PM (tKFT6)
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, im Tal der wilden Rosen at December 16, 2011 06:28 PM (UqKQV)
I could guarantee meat in every American's pot!
Ok, half of Americas.
Posted by: Idi Amin at December 16, 2011 02:36 PM (7BU4a)
My #3 was Newt - which would make sense.
Oddly enough my least likely candidate was Romney.
Posted by: Bill Mitchell at December 16, 2011 02:36 PM (uVlA4)
I got Ron Paul, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman.... the triple crown of unelectable crazy. And yes, Mitt finished behind Obama.
I officially denounce myself.
Posted by: AndrewsDad at December 16, 2011 02:37 PM (C2//T)
Posted by: 18-1 at December 16, 2011 02:37 PM (7BU4a)
I'm guessing the immigration question is what knocked him off the top of the list.
Part of it is that I mis-read the part about experience and chose legislative not executive!
Posted by: Mama AJ at December 16, 2011 02:37 PM (XdlcF)
Rigged.
Posted by: gride at December 16, 2011 02:38 PM (wPKc6)
Huntsman 1st. Lol, I'm not sure if I know his first name. Then Bachman and Ron Paul tied.
Posted by: snowcrash at December 16, 2011 02:38 PM (w3YD7)
I'm surprised, for example, to see Santorum showing up as a won't vote for...
Posted by: 18-1 at December 16, 2011 02:38 PM (7BU4a)
I got Huntsman when I answered the questions unweighted than with weighted answers it was Paul. But both times the bottom two were Obama and Mitt
Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at December 16, 2011 02:40 PM (tKFT6)
Huntsman 1st. Lol, I'm not sure if I know his first name. Then Bachman and Ron Paul tied. Posted by: snowcrash at December 16, 2011 06:38 PM
I think it's Mike.
Posted by: huerfano at December 16, 2011 02:40 PM (CLqgW)
Posted by: Zeus at December 16, 2011 02:40 PM (sFRTj)
And yes, Mitt finished behind Obama.
Oddly enough my least likely candidate was Romney.
Lower than Obama!
Posted by: Mama AJ at December 16, 2011 02:40 PM (XdlcF)
Something is wrong!
I took the test 5 times and either Ron Paul or Rick Perry won each time.....the problem is....if either one of them is the nominee I am voting for Obammer!
Posted by: Dirk Buttfuckler at December 16, 2011 02:41 PM (JMsOK)
There are fewer answers to each question than there are candidates.
That means that some of the candidates (like Luap Nor) are tied into questions with other candidates. Go exactly opposite, and the answer might be only tied to one candidate.
You're right, it's rigged.
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at December 16, 2011 02:42 PM (bjRNS)
This is fucking satanic:
Bachmann
Santorum
Huntsman.
How the fuck do I agree with Mrs Batshit McTardisil?
Posted by: CAC at December 16, 2011 02:43 PM (v2kiV)
The third time I took the test I got Tebow, don't know how that happened.
Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at December 16, 2011 02:43 PM (tKFT6)
Posted by: sherlock at December 16, 2011 02:44 PM (2DD2m)
Yep...It's rigged!
Doesn't matter how I anser the questions, I can't get Newt to win, unless I have made an accounting error...let me try again!
Posted by: Spicoli at December 16, 2011 02:46 PM (JMsOK)
The third time I took the test I got Tebow, don't know how that happened.
Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at December 16, 2011 06:43 PM (tKFT6)
Tebow is everywhere. Like a more Jesus-y Chuck Norris.
Posted by: CAC at December 16, 2011 02:46 PM (v2kiV)
You know if you asked me and Obama which iron to use in a particular ball lie we would probably agree.
Bachmann is a solid conservative. You got asked about views not methods.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at December 16, 2011 02:47 PM (0q2P7)
2. Perry (67.4%)
3. Bachmann (61.3%)
4. Santorum
5. Huntsman
6. Paul (6th even without the Joos)
7. Romney
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at December 16, 2011 02:48 PM (bCCFu)
Posted by: t-bird at December 16, 2011 02:49 PM (FcR7P)
Honey Badger Party... Randall does Rick Perry? not really a slam,some on the left will think it is...
no link cause I don't know how to sm url thingy. youtube search .. Rick Perry - Wrong
Posted by: Yip in Texas at December 16, 2011 02:50 PM (Mrdk1)
also, the weighting of the questions feature at the left seems to make a difference
Posted by: chemjeff at December 16, 2011 02:52 PM (eWrLf)
"also, the weighting of the questions feature at the left seems to make a difference"
Ahhhhh! I got it!
When I weight the questions......my picks come out just as I would expect they would... Coooool....Thanks for the heads up!
Posted by: Spicoli at December 16, 2011 02:56 PM (JMsOK)
Posted by: BurtTC at December 16, 2011 02:56 PM (Gc/Qi)
Posted by: buzzsaw90 at December 16, 2011 02:59 PM (3Zo6I)
Posted by: toby928© Perrykrishna with tattooed knuckles at December 16, 2011 03:03 PM (GTbGH)
For me, Perry is #1 with the others as runners up. Paul went bat shit crazy last night on Iran, no way I'd vote for him in the primary. Newt has good ideas, but still gives me heartburn.
Romney scored lower than 0.
Posted by: Willy at December 16, 2011 03:03 PM (PlLjX)
Nope it didn't work....I was wrong! I answered different than I normally would. When I really pick what I want.......
I AM A PAULBOT!...Nooooooooooooo!
Posted by: Spicoli at December 16, 2011 03:03 PM (JMsOK)
I guess that means I should support Perry, since the questions are skewed. "Bush Tax Cuts . . . ." Really?
Posted by: Flounder at December 16, 2011 03:03 PM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Zeus at December 16, 2011 03:03 PM (sFRTj)
I, too, came out with Paul - but could never live with his foreign policy, which isn't even on the chart.
Posted by: Roger at December 16, 2011 03:04 PM (tAwhy)
at the bottom,
Obama is more like me than RonPaul and Huntsman.
Posted by: franksalterego at December 16, 2011 03:06 PM (9XykO)
Posted by: snowcrash at December 16, 2011 03:09 PM (w3YD7)
I didn't agree with Huntsman on one single issue, and weirdly....I agree with Obama on Afghanistan!
So my order was!
1.) Paul
2.) Perry
3.) Noot
4.) Bachmann
5.) Santorum
6.) Romney (Only agreed with him on Taxes)
7.) Obama (Only agreed on Afghanistan)
8.) Huntsman ( Please get out of the way you RINO scum)
Posted by: Spicoli at December 16, 2011 03:11 PM (JMsOK)
Posted by: embittered redleg at December 16, 2011 03:14 PM (CuPwN)
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at December 16, 2011 04:15 PM (O7ksG)
Perry
Santorum
Huntsman finished tied with Obama at the bottom.
Too bad uncle Paul is so crazy on foreign policy. All he had to do to be president was not hate Jews so much. I guess they really do control US politics.
Posted by: Voluble at December 16, 2011 04:21 PM (JKX4x)
Posted by: Bill Clinton at December 16, 2011 04:22 PM (k4bdL)
Posted by: AoSHQ's DarkLord© sez F--- Nevada (and the silicone plague)! at December 16, 2011 04:28 PM (Fs7RJ)
Posted by: NJRob at December 16, 2011 04:28 PM (FVp26)
I stand sit dumbfounded after taking this quiz.
Can you imagine a Libertarian Conservative such as myself scoring a 61% selection of Ron Paul? And this despite the libral lean of the questions, with some of the best alternatives left out.
I just wish he were electable.
Posted by: Mister Money at December 16, 2011 04:47 PM (wN82N)
Hey, just a thought for Mitt.
If you promise to create a position in the cabinet called the Auditor General, then promise to appoint Ron Paul to the office and authorize him to audit the Federal Reserve Bank, then you have my support, my vote, and my time and efforts on your behalf.
I would make the same offer to Newt, but I heard he is a progressive communist, courtesy of Glenn Beck.
Posted by: Mister Money at December 16, 2011 04:52 PM (wN82N)
The Paul thing surprised me with a significant gap to boot.
Now how is it that I don't think he's "won" a single debate yet? His "debate answers" just don't seem to match his "policy answers."
Something's not right... except the SCoaMF was in last.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 16, 2011 05:06 PM (eHIJJ)
I am not clear if I totally understand the full thought pattern behind this.
Posted by: D.C. Dead epub at December 16, 2011 05:13 PM (GeprT)
Posted by: Rmoney Voter at December 16, 2011 05:22 PM (7MFxV)
Posted by: Minuteman (aka trainer) until Juggy is Gone at December 16, 2011 05:22 PM (DGxyd)
Posted by: L Rob in OK at December 16, 2011 05:27 PM (7yvLv)
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at December 16, 2011 05:31 PM (2v+KF)
Posted by: Rmoney Voter at December 16, 2011 05:35 PM (7MFxV)
That is useful information and its quite easy to come a croper if you are not vigilant.
Posted by: Sharpen A Plane Blade at December 16, 2011 05:39 PM (l94RK)
Posted by: BornLib at December 16, 2011 05:50 PM (zpNwC)
Posted by: RSS Newsreader Apps at December 16, 2011 06:02 PM (fA4z/)
1. L. Ron Paul
2. Perry
3. Huntsman
Heh heh. Mittens just barely eeks out SCOAMF for not-last.
What. The . Fuck? I'm honestly more blindsided by Huntsman at 3 than L. Ron at 1, but then I remembered it's a horse shit online survey, so whatevs...
Posted by: holygoat at December 16, 2011 07:13 PM (2ptZ1)
Posted by: Zombie Hunter Thompson at December 16, 2011 07:24 PM (GOG1H)
Nice commentary. last thirty days I uncovered this internet site and desired to permit you be conscious that iÂ’ve been gratified, heading via your siteÂ’s posts. I should certainly be signing equally as much as the RSS feed and can wait around for another post.
Posted by: Apollo’s Angels ePub at December 16, 2011 09:27 PM (m1psR)
1. Crazy Uncle
2. Rick Perry
3. Michele Bachmann
I would find it very, very difficult to vote for Luap Nor, and am on the Perry bandwagon again, so all is good.
Posted by: Palandine at December 16, 2011 10:31 PM (g7D8V)
2. Paul 59.3%
3. Perry 57.2%
Huntsman ranked even below Obama. In reality, I would rank Huntsman at least ahead of Paul. I support Perry.
Posted by: T.J. at December 17, 2011 01:16 AM (04UbZ)
1. Obama 55%
2. Paul 37.4%
3. Bachmann 33.5%
What the heck?
Posted by: T.J. at December 17, 2011 01:28 AM (04UbZ)
Posted by: joewm315 at December 17, 2011 02:49 AM (oGSBO)
Posted by: Doc at December 17, 2011 06:09 AM (XECOp)
Posted by: CmDemsRun at December 17, 2011 01:19 PM (6fQsp)
Posted by: l-train at December 17, 2011 01:26 PM (dHqot)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2485 seconds, 299 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Tebowow at December 16, 2011 02:00 PM (sYrJ8)