Shopsmith Forums

The only voting advice I've given, and continue to give is: "The best indication of future performance is Past performance."

This thought is stolen from Dr. Phill when talking to addicts. In MHO is applicable here also.

A little tool to help you make up your mind: http://www.isidewith.com/

I find the quiz interesting and mostly accurate. I agreed with the results when I took it. But, I think it puts too much stock in what the candidates say rather than what they actually do. And sometimes (especially in the cases of Obama and Romney), that is a big difference.

charlese wrote:The only voting advice I've given, and continue to give is: "The best indication of future performance is Past performance."

This thought is stolen from Dr. Phill when talking to addicts. In MHO is applicable here also.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, Charlese. What I wonder about, however, is do we agree on the evaluation of Past Performance. You see, I have to wonder because I live in an environment of opposing opinions. She and I are in almost total disagreement on politics.

Actually I worry when people vote. If you ask them why they voted as they did many offer asinine things like, "He is handsome.", "He promised to fix the sidewalk in front of my house for free." "he promised a "free" college education to my kids." "he promised to increase my SS, decrease my taxes, increase my earn income child care payment and pay off the deficit." "I like how he talked to the opponent." and the list goes on.

People nothing in life is free!! If someone is going to give you something it is going to cost you some thing some where else in your life.

I took the test and it says I side with the "Green Candidate" the most compared to the other candidates. I find it funny because I know nothing about the Green candidate, but I guess my answers fall into 83% of what she believes in. Oh well, its just a test online anyway.

woodburner wrote:I took the test and it says I side with the "Green Candidate" the most compared to the other candidates. I find it funny because I know nothing about the Green candidate, but I guess my answers fall into 83% of what she believes in. Oh well, its just a test online anyway.

I think that's part of the purpose of the quiz. To match you with who you actually agree with more, and give you an opportunity to find out about those candidates if they're not the ones with a D or an R next to their names.

The Green Party candidate is Jill Stein. She is just as "viable" of a candidate as Obama or Romney. She has a mathematically possible chance of winning enough electoral votes. Although Dr. Stein and the Green Party are pretty much the opposite of me and my views (I agreed with them 13%, tying for last place with Obama/Democrats), I'd still encourage you to investigate her. Find out who she is, how she differs from the other candidates. Do the same for the others. It's part of being an informed voter.

My result, which didn't surprise me at all, was Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party) at 93%. But I knew I was voting for him before I ever took the quiz.

My anecdotal evidence tells me that more people agree with the Libertarian and Green parties more than they do the Republican and Democrat parties.

heathicus wrote:Republican and Democrat parties.

Replublicrats and Demublicans?

terrydowning wrote:Replublicrats and Demublicans?

You got it.

dusty wrote:I agree with you wholeheartedly, Charlese. What I wonder about, however, is do we agree on the evaluation of Past Performance. You see, I have to wonder because I live in an environment of opposing opinions. She and I are in almost total disagreement on politics.

The real nice thing about the past and future performance thing is - folks have to make up there own mind.

I'm fortunate that my wife and I agree on politics. My daughter disagrees on almost everything political. I can tell her that phrase (timing is important) and hope she gets MY meaning. At least, if she doesn't, she won't get all miffed.

Now that the results of the test has peaked my curiosity, I will be checking out the Green Party's candidate Jill Stein and how her views coincide with mine. I always keep an open mind when it comes to these things, and just because her name isn't plastered everywhere doesn't mean she doesn't make a good candidate. It just means she doesn't have the billions of dollars to waste on TV commercials and the like.

The Dems and Reps push their agendas on the public so much, including only having the Dems and Reps at the debates, that the public sees only these two candidates as their only choices for President. Money has a great deal to do with this. You have to be a billionare to run for a high office in this country and this is very sad indeed. The Dems and Reps literally buy the election with their SuperPacs and loopholes.