Mitt Romney Sucks and Other Machine-Derived Insights

August 6th, 2007  |  Published in etc  |  2 Comments

Evidently I’m supposed to be voting for Dennis Kucinich even though I have no disagreements with Mike Gravel.

That’s kind of an opaque little quiz, to the extent you aren’t told how important/unimportant a criterion is. On the other hand, it does help narrow down www.2decide.com‘s ginormous table, which it’s meant to supplement.

Going back to my results, here’s the score breakdown:

  1. Kucinich 82

  2. Gravel 74

  3. Obama 47

  4. Clinton 40

  5. Richardson 39

  6. Edwards 37

The anti-me, at -81 points, appears to be Mitt Romney. I accept the test’s accuracy in that regard, though I don’t take him seriously enough to think we’d need to battle over a pit of molten lava or anything.

Kucinich and I only seem to disagree on No Child Left Behind and he has no “unknown” positions. Gravel and I may not disagree on anything, but he’s marked as “unknown” on wiretapping, ANWR drilling, and both gun issues (registration & assault weapon bans).

I’m squishy on gun stuff because no, I don’t think the National Guard is a militia: It’s a fully Army-indoctrinated force the president can federalize at will, and it has been used to violently suppress people who aren’t actual threats to state security. Since there aren’t many people who are comfortable talking about militias in any practical sense, being opposed to an “assault weapon” ban for any constructionist reason is a quaint formality. I guess I have plenty of opinions but no particular sense of urgency on the matter. ANWR drilling and warrantless wiretapping, on the other hand, are deal breakers.

Anyhow, if we weed out Kucinich and Gravel on the basis that I probably won’t get a chance to vote for them in the general election, my next pick is supposed to be Obama, and we disagree on the PATRIOT Act, the border fence, “Iran Sanctions,” and same-sex marriage.

Then comes Clinton, with whom I disagree on all of the above plus the death penalty, No Child Left Behind and military action in Iran. I’m not clear on what “military action in Iran” would be for (killing U.S. soldiers? building nukes? taking over our embassy and holding hostages?), but at the moment I’m against it and consider anyone who’s for it most likely a natural enemy. Generally the same with the death penalty.

Ron Paul, at 15 points, is the leading Republican in my results (after all the Democrats). I don’t know much about Ron Paul, so I ambled over to his Web site where I learned he’s “the leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital.”

Against abortion. Against embryonic stem cell research. For the border fence. Against a citizenship path for illegal immigrants. He lost me on the first one so I knew to be unsurprised by the second.

The third and fourth … lost me there, too. Especially with “taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.” Evidently those immigrants won’t see any return on the billions they annually pay in taxes.

He also offers that “estimates suggest … 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.”

We should throw them out and keep their money.

Responses

  1. Oakleaf says:

    August 6th, 2007 at 7:08 pm (#)

    I think Mike Gravel did an excellent job, and thank you for giving him the credit he deserves, even for as brief as it was.

    I really wish they’d give more of a chance to the most experienced candidate (Gravel) or to the candidate who’s accomplished the most in congress (Gravel) or to the only candidate not accepting huge corporate sponsor ships (Gravel again).

    If you vote in the democratic primaries, please vote for who you think is the best candidate, not who has the most votes or cash.

    Thanks

  2. dot unplanned » Realism Isn’t for Primaries (a Machine-Derived Observation) says:

    August 6th, 2007 at 8:17 pm (#)

    […] Regarding this fragment from my last post: […]

Leave a Response

© Michael Hall, licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States license.