Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: 2012 Presidential Candidate Selector

  1. #1
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,945
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default 2012 Presidential Candidate Selector

    I did this yesterday but didn't save the results (I got Obama, Biden, Clinton though I think)

    ★☞ SelectSmart.com 2012 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SELECTOR: Obama, Clinton, McCain, Palin, Limbaugh, Cantor, McConnell, Boehner, Sanford, Pawlenty.

    Of course you may wonder why I care so much .

    If you did the one for the 2008 election, this is pretty much the same, and I suspect won't provide any new insights for you.

  2. #2
    star stuff April's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chatbox
    TIM
    NG human sorcerer
    Posts
    917
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    I got Obama, Biden, Clinton
    Same here, and with Palin at the bottom.

  3. #3
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    some of the questions were too simplistic. for instance, I think that there should be a rough timetable for withdrawal, yet I think that it should appear as if there isn't, for strategic reasons.



    1. Ideal Theoretical Candidate (100%)
    2. Joseph Biden (69%)
    3. Barack Obama (62%)
    4. Hillary Clinton (62%)
    5. John McCain (57%)
    6. Newt Gingrich (56%)
    7. Mike Huckabee (55%)
    8. Rob Portman (49%)
    9. John Boehner (49%)
    10. Mitch McConnell (48%)
    11. Eric Cantor (48%)
    12. Lindsey Graham (48%)
    13. Wayne Allyn Root (46%)
    14. Bobby Jindal (46%)
    15. Jeb Bush (44%)
    16. Mark Sanford (effectively eliminated by scandal) (42%)
    17. Rush Limbaugh (42%)
    18. Sarah Palin (41%)
    19. Ron Paul (40%)
    20. Charlie Crist (38%)
    21. Mitch Daniels (38%)
    22. Tim Pawlenty (33%)
    23. Mitt Romney (32%)

  4. #4
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,945
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    1. Ideal Theoretical Candidate (100%)
    2. Barack Obama (84%)
    3. Joseph Biden (76%)
    4. Hillary Clinton (73%)
    5. John McCain (49%)
    6. Ron Paul (44%)
    7. Mike Huckabee (43%)
    8. Wayne Allyn Root (30%)
    9. Newt Gingrich (29%)
    10. Jeb Bush (26%)
    11. Tim Pawlenty (26%)
    12. Rob Portman (25%)
    13. Lindsey Graham (25%)
    14. Mitt Romney (24%)
    15. Mitch McConnell (24%)
    16. Mark Sanford (23%)
    17. Bobby Jindal (22%)
    18. Eric Cantor (21%)
    19. John Boehner (21%)
    20. Rush Limbaugh (19%)
    21. Charlie Crist (17%)
    22. Sarah Palin (14%)
    23. Mitch Daniels (14%)

    I had to copy and paste my results to notepad and then search and replace the irritating bits with "".

  5. #5
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,945
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bionicgoat View Post
    some of the questions were too simplistic. for instance, I think that there should be a rough timetable for withdrawal, yet I think that it should appear as if there isn't, for strategic reasons.
    how could a candidate possibly convey such a policy to the public? I think the best that could be done is to set a rough target, and then to explain why that target has been changed later, if things don't go according to plan.

  6. #6
    CILi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    635
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1. Ideal (100%)
    2. Newt Gingrich (74%)
    3. Lindsey Graham (73%)
    4. Eric Cantor (71%)
    5. John Boehner (71%)
    6. Rob Portman (70%)
    7. John McCain (68%)
    8. Mitch McConnell (67%)
    9. Bobby Jindal (66%)
    10. Mitt Romney (66%)
    11. Rush Limbaugh (65%)
    12. Mark Sanford (61%)
    13. Sarah Palin (59%)
    14. Mike Huckabee (58%)
    15. Wayne Allyn Root (53%)
    16. Jeb Bush (53%)
    17. Ron Paul (49%)
    18. Tim Pawlenty (49%)
    19. Joseph Biden (48%)
    20. Barack Obama (41%)
    21. Hillary Clinton (41%)
    22. Mitch Daniels (40%)
    23. Charlie Crist (38%)


    Having heard of (maybe) five of these, which of 'em have a realistic shot at the throne?

  7. #7
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    how could a candidate possibly convey such a policy to the public? I think the best that could be done is to set a rough target, and then to explain why that target has been changed later, if things don't go according to plan.
    I was going by what I want the candidate to do, not what I want them to tell people they are going to do.

  8. #8
    ragnar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    635
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Got this, I found some of the questions had an awkward list of answer alternatives though:
    1. Ideal Theoretical Candidate (100%)
    2. Lindsey Graham (81%)
    3. Mitt Romney (79%)
    4. Eric Cantor (78%)
    5. Newt Gingrich (78%)
    6. Rush Limbaugh (78%)
    7. John Boehner (77%)
    8. John McCain (76%)
    9. Sarah Palin (73%)
    10. Mitch McConnell (72%)
    11. Ron Paul (69%)
    12. Wayne Allyn Root (67%)
    13. Tim Pawlenty (66%)
    14. Bobby Jindal (65%)
    15. Mark Sanford (effectively eliminated by scandal) (64%)
    16. Rob Portman (63%)
    17. Mike Huckabee (62%)
    18. Jeb Bush (58%)
    19. Mitch Daniels (53%)
    20. Charlie Crist (44%)
    21. Joseph Biden (41%)
    22. Hillary Clinton (36%)
    23. Barack Obama (27%)
    Greetings, ragnar
    ILI knowledge-seeker

  9. #9
    heath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,722
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    fwiw, While vehemently complaining about the size of government in public as speak of house, Gingrich continually funnelled huge amounts of government money to his home district of Dekalb county Atlanta where a large defense contractor is located. More government subsidies than anyone else that year. Hooray
    asd

  10. #10
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    7,966
    Mentioned
    568 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heath View Post
    fwiw, While vehemently complaining about the size of government in public as speak of house, Gingrich continually funnelled huge amounts of government money to his home district of Dekalb county Atlanta where a large defense contractor is located. More government subsidies than anyone else that year. Hooray
    A staggering portion "conservative" voters are people who are being fleeced by the people they vote for. It forms a master servant relationship where their resentment is displaced onto other groups based on ideological, racial, religious as well as other reasons.

    Recently, there have been many political ads here to address unemployment, such as lowering taxes and giving incentives to the rich to create employment.

    But said in another way what it means is to lower taxes and give them incentives on the rich so they can hire servants. Doesn't sound so nice does it.

    Trickle down economics again, but as it has show in the last 30 years, it doesn't really trickle down and the wealth disparity gap widens.

    Wealth disparity is approaching 1920's pre-depression rates. The only real meaningful changes in wealth disparity thru history has been war, real economic collapse such as the great depression and various hardships like revolution that had to be weathered thru.

    I'm not sure what will happen in the next 50 years or so, but it'll probably be a bumpy ride as long as people think that rich people paying less taxes will actually hire anything but servants.

  11. #11
    Poster Nutbag The Exception's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    my own personal bubble
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    4,108
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    1. Ideal Theoretical Candidate (100 %)
    2. Barack Obama (85 %)
    3. Joseph Biden (79 %)
    4. Hillary Clinton (72 %)
    5. Michael Bloomberg (53 %)
    6. Mike Huckabee (48 %)
    7. Ron Paul (38 %)
    8. Newt Gingrich (33 %)
    9. Wayne Allyn Root (29 %)
    10. Rob Portman (28 %)
    11. Lindsey Graham (26 %)
    12. Mitt Romney (23 %)
    13. Bobby Jindal (21 %)
    14. Eric Cantor (21 %)
    15. Jeb Bush (21 %)
    16. John Boehner (19 %)
    17. Mitch Daniels (17 %)
    18. Rick Santorum (17 %)
    19. Tim Pawlenty (16 %)
    20. Haley Barbour (11 %)
    21. Mike Pence (11 %)
    22. Sarah Palin (11 %)
    23. Rick Perry (8 %)
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  12. #12
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,122
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I didn't like the choices of answers very much. Very shallow. But, whatever.

    1. Ideal Theoretical Candidate (100%)
    2. Wayne Allyn Root (73%)
    3. Rob Portman (69%)
    4. Lindsey Graham (63%)
    5. Newt Gingrich (63%)
    6. Joseph Biden (62%)
    7. Eric Cantor (56%)
    8. Bobby Jindal (55%)
    9. John Boehner (54%)
    10. Mitt Romney (54%)
    11. Barack Obama (53%)
    12. Hillary Clinton (53%)
    13. Mike Pence (52%)
    14. Rick Santorum (52%)
    15. Sarah Palin (51%)
    16. Ron Paul (50%)
    17. Mike Huckabee (46%)
    18. Mitch Daniels (42%)
    19. Rick Perry (42%)
    20. Tim Pawlenty (41%)
    21. Jeb Bush (38%)
    22. Haley Barbour (36%)
    23. Michael Bloomberg (31%)

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hkkmr View Post
    A staggering portion "conservative" voters are people who are being fleeced by the people they vote for. It forms a master servant relationship where their resentment is displaced onto other groups based on ideological, racial, religious as well as other reasons.

    Recently, there have been many political ads here to address unemployment, such as lowering taxes and giving incentives to the rich to create employment.

    But said in another way what it means is to lower taxes and give them incentives on the rich so they can hire servants. Doesn't sound so nice does it.

    Trickle down economics again, but as it has show in the last 30 years, it doesn't really trickle down and the wealth disparity gap widens.

    Wealth disparity is approaching 1920's pre-depression rates. The only real meaningful changes in wealth disparity thru history has been war, real economic collapse such as the great depression and various hardships like revolution that had to be weathered thru.

    I'm not sure what will happen in the next 50 years or so, but it'll probably be a bumpy ride as long as people think that rich people paying less taxes will actually hire anything but servants.
    Well said. Pity no ones listening.

  14. #14
    force my hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,334
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Barack Obama (92%)
    Joseph Biden (80%)
    Hillary Clinton (75%)
    Ron Paul (52%)
    Michael Bloomberg (52%)

    Bottom:

    Mike Pence (12%)
    Rick Santorum (12%)
    Sarah Palin (11%)
    Rick Perry (9%)
    Haley Barbour (3%)

    If Perry and Barbour are coming after Palin, I shudder to think of what they're like.
    SLI/ISTp -- Te subtype

  15. #15
    fka lungs ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,630
    Mentioned
    635 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    1. Ideal Theoretical Candidate (100%)
    2. Barack Obama (82%)
    3. Joseph Biden (80%)
    4. Hillary Clinton (75%)
    5. Michael Bloomberg (43%)
    6. Mike Huckabee (42%)
    7. Ron Paul (31%)
    8. Newt Gingrich (30%)
    9. Mitt Romney (30%)
    10. Wayne Allyn Root (30%)
    11. Mitch Daniels (26%)
    12. Bobby Jindal (24%)
    13. John Boehner (23%)
    14. Rob Portman (22%)
    15. Jeb Bush (22%)
    16. Sarah Palin (22%)
    17. Eric Cantor (20%)
    18. Lindsey Graham (20%)
    19. Mike Pence (20%)
    20. Rick Santorum (20%)
    21. Tim Pawlenty (14%)
    22. Haley Barbour (13%)
    23. Rick Perry (12%)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •