(no subject)

[redbird]

My results on the "presidential candidate selector" that's going around:

1. Green Party Candidate (100%)
2. Kucinich, Cong. Dennis, OH - Democrat (87%)
3. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (75%)
4. Gephardt, Cong. Dick, MO - Democrat (73%)
5. Socialist Candidate (71%)
6. Leahy, Patrick Senator, Vermont - Democrat (69%)
7. Jackson, Cong. Jesse Jr., IL - Democrat (67%)
8. Lieberman Senator Joe CT - Democrat (65%)
9. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (61%)
10. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (61%)
11. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (58%))
12. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol IL - Democrat (58%)
13. Graham, Senator Bob, FL - Democrat (56%)
14. Biden, Senator Joe, DE - Democrat (56%)
15. Feingold, Senator Russ, WI - Democrat (55%)
16. Kaptur, Cong. Marcy, OH - Democrat (53%)
17. Feinstein, Senator Dianne, CA - Democrat (38%)
18. Bradley, Former Senator Bill NJ - Democrat (28%)
19. Libertarian Candidate (18%)
20. McCain, Senator John, AZ- Republican (13%)
21. Hagelin, John - Natural Law (6%)
22. Bush, George W. - US President (2%)
23. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (0%)
24. Vilsack, Governor. Tom IA - Democrat (-2%)
25. Buchanan, Patrick J. – Reform/Republican (-3%)
26. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (-6%)
27. Clark, Retired Army General Wesley K "Wes" Arkansas - Democrat (-6%)

---

At the moment, selectors aside, I'm leaning toward Gov. Dean; I'll note that one of the reasons I think he's a good choice is his support for gay rights, which wasn't mentioned anywhere in the survey. Also, I don't care what he says, I don't trust Lieberman at this point; ditto for Sharpton. I'm also curious about how they come up with a scale that runs from 100% to (at least) −6% rather than stopping at zero.

(This list includes some people I've never heard of, and generic candidates of random parties whose actual positions may be different than guessed. Also, while I think highly of Sen. Leahy, this is the first I've seen suggested that he might be running for president.)

Comments

[ala-too.livejournal.com]

I hadn't seen this before and being politically active I couldn't resist taking it. My current favored candidate wasn't my top choice and one I find unelectable was on top. This might well have had more to do with the exact questions they asked and how they presented them. For example, I do support the ACLU, in general, but not every single thing they do. There was no way to indicate this. The same for the tax issues. I want to say in times of economic distress it's OK to not balance the budget but in good times I expect that to happen. Again, no choice for that. I suspect if I could make those kind of choices my list would be very different and perhaps so would others.

On the candidates, themselves, I've had the opportunity to meet them all and go a more personal round with most of the first and second rung. It's quite an interesting experience and has definitely influenced my choices quite a bit. I do know that the election will get determined by the sound-bite. Some of the better candidates at this may be entirely unelectable. For me that is a very important criteria.