Originally posted by: C3PX
Did anybody bother reading the analysis ro the FAQ? It freely admits to not being perfect, and it explains the reason for using ambiguous questions. Again, it is based on European politics, so it is quite a bit off when it comes to US politics. That is why they placed Hilary deep within the conservative section, because to them she is a conservative. I bet if she took this thing on her own, she would be much more on the left side.
Well, that's weird. If their only purpose is to measure "feelings and prejudices" and whether we "lean towards extremism or moderation" on their compass, those are extremely subjective ideas. Therefore, someone like me, who likes to moderate and double-think every decision I make, despite being extreme with my political principles, can come out dead center and left of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, which is absurd. This is more a test of moderation than anything else.
Oh and the whole FAQ sounds like it was written by a snippy, know-it-all asshole. Every question has a quick, inconsiderate reply like this one which replies to concerns that the test might influence test-takers to be more politically correct than they otherwise would be:
"Not really, because we've assured them that not only are their identities unknown, but their responses totally unrecorded. So the only actual pressure will come from themselves. We've found that a lot of people aren't comfortable with the first result, so they go through the propositions again, changing some of their earlier responses. It's a bit like an overweight person stepping back on the scales after removing their shoes."
And, whoever wrote the FAQ up is heavily biased:
"Interestingly, many economic libertarians express to us their support for or indifference towards capital punishment; yet the execution of certain citizens is a far stronger assertion of state power than taxation."
Is he (or she) serious?! Executing a human being that kills another human being (a MURDERER) as a way to protect every other human being's right to have their own life is a "far stronger assertion" of state power? I can practically call it self defense! This person can't claim to know how to classify people on a scale of political rhetoric and then turn right around and defend the test with more rhetoric.
Essentially, the FAQ tells me that this person believes that they are scientifically gauging something (relating to their "compass") and I would disagree. This is for more than just fun as far as they are concerned and I find that odd.
Originally posted by: C3PX
Hmm, I missed the part where the site claimed to be able to tell you who you should vote for.
Did anybody bother reading the analysis ro the FAQ? It freely admits to not being perfect, and it explains the reason for using ambiguous questions. Again, it is based on European politics, so it is quite a bit off when it comes to US politics. That is why they placed Hilary deep within the conservative section, because to them she is a conservative. I bet if she took this thing on her own, she would be much more on the left side.
Well, that's weird. If their only purpose is to measure "feelings and prejudices" and whether we "lean towards extremism or moderation" on their compass, those are extremely subjective ideas. Therefore, someone like me, who likes to moderate and double-think every decision I make, despite being extreme with my political principles, can come out dead center and left of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, which is absurd. This is more a test of moderation than anything else.
Oh and the whole FAQ sounds like it was written by a snippy, know-it-all asshole. Every question has a quick, inconsiderate reply like this one which replies to concerns that the test might influence test-takers to be more politically correct than they otherwise would be:
"Not really, because we've assured them that not only are their identities unknown, but their responses totally unrecorded. So the only actual pressure will come from themselves. We've found that a lot of people aren't comfortable with the first result, so they go through the propositions again, changing some of their earlier responses. It's a bit like an overweight person stepping back on the scales after removing their shoes."
And, whoever wrote the FAQ up is heavily biased:
"Interestingly, many economic libertarians express to us their support for or indifference towards capital punishment; yet the execution of certain citizens is a far stronger assertion of state power than taxation."
Is he (or she) serious?! Executing a human being that kills another human being (a MURDERER) as a way to protect every other human being's right to have their own life is a "far stronger assertion" of state power? I can practically call it self defense! This person can't claim to know how to classify people on a scale of political rhetoric and then turn right around and defend the test with more rhetoric.
Essentially, the FAQ tells me that this person believes that they are scientifically gauging something (relating to their "compass") and I would disagree. This is for more than just fun as far as they are concerned and I find that odd.
Originally posted by: C3PX
Hmm, I missed the part where the site claimed to be able to tell you who you should vote for.
I'm not sure if that was this site actually. But I was pretty sure that I remembered, in the past, this site offering to tell me which political candidates I was best aligned with.