×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Political Compass of the 2012 US Election

damn_registrars (1103043) writes | about a year and a half ago

User Journal 28

Someone else provided this link last week:

US Presidential Election 2012Someone else provided this link last week:

US Presidential Election 2012

So why then will I vote for Obama, knowing that indeed he is barely any less conservative than Romney? Well, in my case a President Romney could be immediately catastrophic for my profession. An extension of President Obama, however, would be bad but not catastrophic. Hence, this vote is simply for self-preservation at this point. Hopefully some other time we will see a third (really, second) party candidate who is viable to win the seat and change something.

It is also interesting that on the libertarian - authoritarian axis there is not a single candidate from the left who scores above zero. Meanwhile most of the candidates on the right are authoritarian or score zero.

28 comments

I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41817613)

That quiz is daft. Rife with strawmen and false dichotomies.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41817935)

Can you provide an example? And for that matter, the dots aren't placed based on a quiz that the candidates took, but rather on their statements and actions.

Any reasonable person who evaluates Obama's actual track record to this point will recognize him as being the most conservative president we've had in many decades. Not a single one of the bills he has signed or executive actions he has taken is one that his predecessor - who was previously hailed as a conservative high-water mark - would not have taken.

Obama has been consistently pro-big-business, pro-war, and pro-regressive-taxation. The chart places him in the top-right quadrant, where he belongs. The real question is what Romney would do to place himself further towards the extreme corner.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41818593)

Um, the quiz? Start at the beginning:

If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.

'Serve humanity' vs. 'interests of trans-national corporations'
The vague emotional goal of 'humanity' against that Wretched. Evil. Capitalist. Boogeyman.
My JE picked up the granola-head angle.
And that's all the more I care to delve into this diaper-bin.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41818863)

Um, the quiz?

You seem to be missing the point. The candidates themselves did not take the quiz. Rather, they were judged on actual statements and actions. Which is exactly why Obama and Romney practically sit on top of each other, as they both have actual actions that they can be judged on.

Start at the beginning:

If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.

If this question is designed to help place people who are taking a test on a continuum, it's not necessarily a bad one. After all, the quiz does have more than just one question...

The vague emotional goal of 'humanity' against that Wretched. Evil. Capitalist. Boogeyman.

It doesn't necessarily imply the corporation to be evil, just that it may have orthogonal or opposing goals to ones that people who are less fortunate may have. Of course, some would argue that the corporations ultimately benefit those people as well.

My JE picked up the granola-head angle.

You can criticize the quiz all you want, but you're barking up the wrong tree if you are trying to argue against Obama and Romney occupying the same space in terms of political philosophy. Of course, it would be easier if Romney would hold one opinion for more than a month or two, but nonetheless he is running against the most conservative president we have had in a very, very, long time.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41820383)

Agreed. The question of whether their philosophy differs substantially is separate from the question of whether this particular quiz sucks.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41821049)

Agreed. The question of whether their philosophy differs substantially is separate from the question of whether this particular quiz sucks.

My journal entry was concerned nearly entirely with the former and not at all with the latter. Care to discuss? I apologize if the purpose of this JE was obtuse.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41821631)

Well, I think that Barack Obama is a:
  • narcissist
  • egomaniac
  • compulsive liar
  • coward
  • statist
  • intellectually average
  • Postmodernist (can't tell true from false)

piece of work.
And Romney, AFAICT is a

  • centrist (assumes political/legislative positions he may not personally support)
  • statist
  • serious businessman

Hard to tell whether Romney is a coward. I'm inclined to think him courageous, given that he debated four different people in October (Obama and three moderators).
I wasn't a huge Romney fan during the primaries, and I still don't buy off on all this statism. But I think that this is in fact where there is some validity to putting Obama and Romney somewhat nearby each other on the spectrum.
Surprisingly, and somewhat alarmingly, the foreign policy debate was Romney's weakest moment. The two candidates were coming at the same, over-extended policy from disparate angles.
In my perfect world, the U.S. would find an operating point about midway between today's vastly over-extended mess, and Ron Pauls non-interventionism. Both ditches are unworkable in the long term, but we favor the over-extension.
How, precisely, to arrive at a consistent policy that speaks more softly, while retaining the big stick, I really don't know.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41824249)

Well, at least you're saying things now, even if you can't provide support for them. Let's take a look at your Obama list:

narcissist egomaniac

Can you provide any reason to suggest that he is more of either of those than any other many who has run for president, ever?

compulsive liar

I would like to know how you arrive at that conclusion.

coward

While I would agree that indeed his conservative actions show that he lacks spine, I would also like to point out that it is rather difficult to be a coward and more of an egomaniac or narcissist than average. Why he didn't make use of the moment in time when the democrats had both houses of congress and get some non-conservative legislation through is beyond me.

statist

Indeed, he has maintained a static conservative position for the US government.

intellectually average

For an Ivy League educated attorney, perhaps.

Postmodernist (can't tell true from false)

People who sling around these kinds of generalizations like dogma but with zero support have a hard time convincing people they can tell the difference between reality and fantasy themselves.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41824649)

This is my completely unscientific assessment, after listening to four years of this peevish fellow. No way to "prove" any of that, without significant education and private access to BHO.
Yet there it is. I think very little of this man. Other than electing a black man, and thus scoring cool points in some broader historical game, this administration has been an expensive adventure in failure.
This failed administration ignobly ends with hanging brave warriors out to dry in Benghazi, then coming up with some cheap lie about a YouTube clip and throwing Nakoula in jail. This is a level so subterranean as to tunnel under Hugo Chavez.
The media blackout [powerlineblog.com] is a national embarrassment [blogspot.com].
I dunno. Maybe some people really want a future blending the worst aspects of Orwell and Huxley.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#41826911)

'Brave warriors'? Or gun runners? Sales are brisk this year. It's business. Just like your Iran/Contra.. with a bit more drama for the upcoming HBO Special.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41827995)

At the point where they saved the embassy staff and took out 60 enemy before. . .somebody. . .let them die, they were 'brave warriors'.
You're welcome to raise the 5w's as questions about the context, but it sure sounds as though when the fertilizer hit the air circulator, a Basically Hair-brained Operator failed in a very big way.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#41828961)

This must be an 'Overton Window' thing, huh? Where anybody can be made into a hero. Was Reagan a 'hair-brained operator' (I saw what you did there) when he let 241 Americans die in Beirut? Or does 'context' dictate otherwise? How about Johnson/Nixon when they let over 50,000 Americans die in Vietnam? I'm gagging on all this 'morality'... I'm sure that can justify this in some kind of 'lesser evil' context.

Ah well, it looks like you found a place to sell your narrative and everybody stays on script, where 'self preservation' trumps any concept of 'morality' OR 'ethics'. It takes quite a stretch to believe that the 'lesser evil' actually leads to less evil. But it keeps the powerful in power while both sides make claim to the same thing.. In a universe seen through a peephole and the proper filtering its success is to be complimented.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41854651)

Ah, yes: sweet, sweet misdirection, playing the Gipper card.
Since you do, I'll note that Ronny owned the failure and got the survivors out.
#OccupyResoluteDesk has truly owned and repented of exactly. . .0 failures.
So at least you can say he's a consistent lout.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#41859599)

"You have the luxury of not knowing what he knows"

Your insistent differentiation of these people is the misdirection.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41874379)

No, I'm fairly clear that Reagan was Reagan, and Obama's punishment is to live with Obama.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41874529)

You do realize that the former raised taxes more than the latter would even dare ask for?

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year and a half ago | (#41829587)

a Basically Hair-brained Operator

OT but I see this all the time. What does "hair-brained" mean? That his brain is covered with hair? I think you want "hare-brained;" rabbits aren't the smartest creatures on the forest </education>

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year and a half ago | (#41829703)

this administration has been an expensive adventure in failure.

Obama's not the best President I've seen, but he's head and shoulders above most I've seen. Look at where the country was when his predecessor took office: we were at peace, the budget was balanced, we were in a boom period, and unemployment was low.

Eight years later we were in two wars, the stock market and housing markets had crashed, we had the biggest defecit in history, seven years after 911 the mastermind was still at large. Bush almost destroyed this country.

Now, four years later, unemployment is lower than it was when Obama took office, Bin Laden is dead, we're out of one war and the other is winding down, housing starts are better than in years, the US Auto industry is back on its feet and making profits and hiring people.

My only complaints about Obama is Gitmo is still open (he failed there) and the TSA still exists, as well as the other loss of liberty.

And who is opposing Obama? A man with exactly the same background and philosophy as the man who almost destroyed the country.

Of course, if you're making over $300,000 per year you would be foolish to vote for Obama. The rest of us would be idiots to vote for Romney.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#41854679)

#OccupyResoluteDesk is a con man. With the help of the media, he has phoned in a four-year disaster.

Re:I wouldn't let mere dots affect your thinking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41819195)

The vague emotional goal of 'humanity' against that Wretched. Evil. Capitalist. Boogeyman.

If you agree then you move n points upperleft, if you disagree you move n points lowerright. In your case it sounds like you Strongly Disagree with the statement, and lo and behold, you can check that option!

While I suppose they could be collecting your information for the coming purge, I doubt it, and the computer probably doesn't care what you think about trans-national corporations.

I'm Gonna Jill-Off (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year and a half ago | (#41820183)

At least can face my partner, in the morning.

Re:I'm Gonna Jill-Off (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41820283)

I want to vote for Jill Stein. However, as I stated, a President Romney (shudder....) would be massively disastrous towards my career. A President Obama has not been particularly helpful, but at least has not be outright disastrous. Hence in my case, Obama is indeed the lesser of the two evils.

Of course, if we were to get the Obama that we thought we voted for in 2008, that would be much, much, better. Instead, we voted for Obama and were given a third GWB administration.

Re:I'm Gonna Jill-Off (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year and a half ago | (#41824137)

D'you live in a state where it's even a contest?

California is the nation's most populous irrelevancy. [270towin.com]

Probability of Reaching 270 Electoral College Votes:
Democrats 77%
Republicans 22%
Neither (Tie) 1%

Re:I'm Gonna Jill-Off (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year and a half ago | (#41825095)

D'you live in a state where it's even a contest?

Likely not. However the "frankenstorm" has impacted my current state in a way that favors one party over another (where's Jerry Falwell declaring this to be "God's will"?). Hence in the name of doing my part to ensure that Romney doesn't get a chance to drive me out of work, I will still vote Obama.

Re:I'm Gonna Jill-Off (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#41826955)

But voting for the assassin and total destruction creates jobs. We can do a total makeover the entire planet in our image.

...because inside every gook there is an American trying to get out. It's a hardball world, son. We've gotta keep our heads until this peace craze blows over.

Electing The Romney... (1)

unitron (5733) | about a year and a half ago | (#41826305)

...would further enable the right-wing nut jobs in Congress more than re-electing Obama.

Said nut jobs will probably work as hard in a second Obama administration to prevent anything getting accomplished as they did in the first one, but that's still better than the kind of stuff they'd accomplish if The Romney was elected.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...