| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| On the sole basis of ISSUES, which candidates do these AR Imms agree most with? |
| Burzuk - Bush; Davairus - Kerry; Eldorian - Undecided |
|
9% |
[ 2 ] |
| Burzuk - Bush; Davairus - Undecided; Eldorian - Kerry |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| Burzuk - Kerry; Davairus - Bush; Eldorian - Undecided |
|
23% |
[ 5 ] |
| Burzuk - Kerry; Davairus - Undecided; Eldorian - Bush |
|
23% |
[ 5 ] |
| Burzuk - Undecided; Davairus - Bush; Eldorian - Kerry |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| Burzuk - Undecided; Davairus - Kerry; Eldorian - Bush |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| I don't want to make a guess. Just show me the results so far. |
|
28% |
[ 6 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 21 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Burzuk
Implementor
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 529
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 11:16 am Post subject: RESULTS: The Official AR American Election Guessing Game. |
|
|
After an interesting discussion with Davairus and Eldorian about the mainstream media's focus on election soundbites rather than issues, the problems inherent in choosing between only two viable candidates, and how self-identification bias in political affiliation affects voting patterns, I've decided to create this poll as a quiz to see if you know who we are as well as well as you think you do. Or as well as we ourselves thought we did, before we took the following quiz:
http://www.presidentmatch.com/Guide.jsp2
Davairus, Eldorian, and I found that we were split completely evenly on the issues among ourselves, with one of us holding similar stances on issues as President Bush, one holding similar stances as Senator Kerry, and one whose stance was almost exactly in between them. Knowing what you know about us (or our reputations), can you correctly match us with our stances on this year's campaign issues?
Note: For the three of us, our stances on the issues do not accurately reflect either our party affiliation or the candidate we support.
This poll will last one week, ending on Election Day for our American players. At that time, if the correct answer has gathered the most votes, I will confirm it as correct and reveal which candidates we each actually support in this upcoming election. (Note: These will not reflect our votes, merely our support--some of us may choose to vote differently for various political reasons, or abstain altogether for other reasons.)
There are plenty of other places to discuss this year's highly contested election, so therefore I ask that you keep this thread reasonably flame-free. You are welcome to post your own results to the quiz, explain why you made your guess in the above poll as you did, or make a prediction about the general outcome of this upcoming election.
For our American players of voting age, I hope this gives you a chance to examine your own stance on the issues at hand before you cast your ballot next Tuesday, rather than being caught up by all the ridiculous partisanship that has been masquerading as an election season this year.
Last edited by Burzuk on Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:53 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Matthais
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 206
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Im an idiot. Misread it and editted my original response.
No Nader amongst you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Louis
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Posts: 823
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| i think its the first option |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Burzuk
Implementor
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Matthais wrote: |
| No Nader amongst you? |
I can't speak for Davairus or Eldorian, but Nader is not, in my mind, a serious presidential candidate.
The extensive case against Nader is spelled out in Nader's Skeleton Closet (which seems to be down right now), detailing his megalomaniacal tendencies, his poor treatment of his staffers, and his utter lack of transparancy in accounting for his finances and his handling of his campaigns. Nevertheless, a quick summary of the facts relevant to the 2004 Nader campaign:
- Nader claims to be attempting to build a viable third party in the U.S., but after running as a Green candidate in '96 and '00, when the Greens chose David Cobb as their candidate in '04, Nader splintered off and ran for presidency anyways, running as either an Independent or a Reform candidate, depending on what will get him on the ballot in the relevant state. The Reform Party nominated the reactionary evangelical candidate Pat Buchanan as their candidate in 2000 with views antithetical to most of Nader's own, so Nader's running partially under the Reform Party banner in 2004 is clearly an attempt to get on the ballot by any means necessarily.
- Incidentally, one of the major reasons the Green Party dropped Nader this year is because he completely failed to support the Green Party at state and local levels and diverted party resources to his own personal presidential campaign instead in previous years, thus hampering the growth of the Green Party and undermining his own self-proclared goal to build a viable third party. Nader's decision to run as Independent/Reformed only confirms this as a sign of betrayal to most Greens.
- Despite Nader's claims to being both anti-Republican and anti-Democrat, he accepted Republican campaign assistance and funding for his personal gains. (Nader is expected to siphon votes from the Republicans in certain states and Democrats in other states, but whether due to inepitude, lack of resources, or other reasons, the Democrats have failed to support Nader efforts in the states where he could divert Republican votes.) It is clear that Nader is less interested in fighting the establishment and more interested and raising his own percentages as high as possible, and the Republicans probably would have been better off spending those Nader funds to attack Kerry and other Democratic candidates directly.
- Despite courting votes from conservatives (the small-government libertarians who believe Nader will reform the government to reduce federal power and influence) and liberals (progressives who support Nader's anti-corporate/pro-enviroment stance) alike, Nader's campaign platform contains a widely contradictory series of stances on issues that makes nobody happy, and is really intended to attempt to court "one issue voters" in certain demographics. Few people actually agree with Nader's entire platform compared to that of Bush or Kerry.
There's been a lot of media coverage from Gore whiners about the Nader issue, but the fact is, depending on which state you're in, voting for Nader can hurt either Bush or Kerry. Even if you don't wind up directly hurting the candidate you actually support, your vote is thrown away in a close race where there popular vote margin will be looked at as a sign the "American will" (as liberals did in seizing upon the half million vote margin Gore won the popular vote by in 2000 to attempt to discredit President Bush). To me, that makes the decision simple: vote Bush or Kerry. Anyone voting for Nader either got suckered in by his one-issue panderings, or is too idealistic to see the pragmatics of how elections really work in this country.
Interestingly enough, in the poll above, most of you have guessed that I stand with Kerry on issues. I wonder why it is that most of you think I'm a bleeding-heart liberal. Hmm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sebryn
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 1185
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Left-Winger Burzuk wrote: |
| I wonder why it is that most of you think I'm a bleeding-heart liberal. |
| Kalist's fake log wrote: |
Burzuk says 'I know how to use a gun...but these arabs are pretty unsophisticated...and these gun are pretty good..hmm...'
Everyone's gun disappears in a flash of light and is replaced with a pointy stick. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eldorian
Implementor
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 93
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Burzuk wrote: |
| Interestingly enough, in the poll above, most of you have guessed that I stand with Kerry on issues. I wonder why it is that most of you think I'm a bleeding-heart liberal. Hmm. |
This is a crisis of intergalactic proportions. You should immediately slay half the players, then say it's because they were cheating, regardless of the evidence. This will show that you have the resolve and leadership to run this mud. Then you should pass a new rule that you will not bust anyone for cheating unless the evidence passes a global test. This will show your cooperative, nuanced nature.
But since I wouldn't want to leave this post with people thinking that you're not in the middle, you should just slay some people randomly, then bust some other people for cheating only if it passes a global test that's randomly administered. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matthais
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 206
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well. lets change my tune to a viable third party. nader was just the embodiment of this so I threw the name out there. Trying for an actualy third party seems the best choice when neither presidential canidate is very good. I rather not have to pick between the lesser of two evils so I will look elsewhere. Looks like I have a little more research to do before I vote. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sebryn
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 1185
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Burzuk
Implementor
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Burzuk says 'I know how to use a gun...but these arabs are pretty unsophisticated...and these gun are pretty good..hmm...'
Everyone's gun disappears in a flash of light and is replaced with a pointy stick. |
Thing is, if everyone had guns, then things would be pretty balanced, wouldn't they?
It's when you start matching up guns vs. fireballs vs. charmies that things really start turning into a complicated mess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Burzuk
Implementor
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's Election Day, and one of the two tied winners in the poll is the correct guess for how this particular sample of Imms matched up to the presidential candidates' overall stances on the issues:
| Quote: |
| Burzuk - Kerry; Davairus - Bush; Eldorian - Undecided |
However, our actual support goes out to:
Burzuk: Kerry
Davairus: Kerry
Eldorian: Bush
The reason for the above discrepency is simple: some issues carry more weight with us than others (i.e. the "wedge issue" or "one issue voter" phenomenon). This caused Davairus to break for Kerry and Eldorian to break for Bush, despite their "overall" stances on the issues.
For our Americans players who have yet to vote today, take a moment to look past the "smirking chimp" and "flip flop" media circus nonsense, and instead consider whether your vote will truly go to the candidate that best supports your own interests when you vote at your polling site. Your vote is the most direct hand you can play in shaping the course of this country.
Happy Election Day, Americans! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in 
