Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Vote Match

Earlier today I found this website, Vote Match, which compares your answers to several policy questions with how various politicians have voted. There are lots of political compass-type quizzes out there on the web, but I liked how with this one actually used a position-by-position comparison rather than just telling me where I fell on a map of the political spectrum. The problem with this site, though is that it's way out of date, treating the 2000 election as a current event.

Two questions, then.

1. Does anybody know of any good political comparison sites out there that are more up-to-date, especially ones that compare issue-by-issue?

2. I noticed that even for the politicians whose positions I most closely match, my similarity score is pretty low. Compared with the various California congressmen, for example, my closest match is only a 55%, for Howard Berman. The social/economic splits can be pretty severe, too. I'm a 42% economic match for both Berman and Bob Dornan, but while I get rated a 75% social match with Berman, I'm a 0% (that's right, ZERO --- even though we're both anti-abortion) match with Dornan.

While overall I tend to be a much better match with the Democrats than with the Republicans, I have enough beefs with them that every time I vote, I feel like I'm making a compromise and voting for the lesser of two evils. My question, then, is whether the rest of you are able to find politicians (congressmen, specifically) who are better matches than 55%. Do others who feel more confident supporting their parties find better matches, or is my case not that unusual?


At Thursday, August 24, 2006 at 12:32:00 AM PDT, Blogger Victor said...

It must be how the test is calibrated. I scored hard-core conservative -- quelle surprise -- at 10 percent personal and 79 percent economic.

But I got a 55 percent commonality for Bush and not above 50 for any other 2004 candidate (not even Cheney). And 53 percent for Scalia and not above 50 for any other justice (not even Rehnquist or Thomas). While, at the other end, I got some really low scores -- 8 percent overall for Nader, 5 for Hillary (a 0 Social and 8 Economic).

At Thursday, August 24, 2006 at 8:56:00 AM PDT, Anonymous doafy said...

Here's something weird. The question is "support prayer in public schools", while the way it comes up on the score is "support moral teaching in public schools". Those are two totally different things!

BTW, I'm apparently a "hard-core liberal". I don't think I'd usually describe myself that way.

At Thursday, August 24, 2006 at 9:00:00 AM PDT, Anonymous doafy said...

BTW, I'm 78%/16% They gave me a 65% match with Kerry.

At Thursday, August 24, 2006 at 4:28:00 PM PDT, Blogger Adam Villani said...

It seems to give a non-match for any "no opinion." This explains the zero match with B-1 Bob on social issues, as there weren't any abortion votes in their database for him.

For the presidential race in 2004, I get a 55% for Kerry as my top match, split into 63% social/50% economic. With Nader I was a closer social match but a weaker economic match, which sounds about right.

Despite the test describing me as a "Libertarian-leaning Liberal," (81% personal/42% economic) I was a weaker match with the Libertarian Presidential candidate than Kerry in both the social and economic categories. In my experience the Libertarians have some good ideas but they take them to extremes; I may agree with their ideas as starting principles but I'm also a firm believer in a lot of limitations on those ideas.

It gave me a 30% match for Bush, a 25% match for Cheney, and a 23% match for Peroutka, my lowest match.

For the nationwide House member match, I got a 60% with David Minge from Minnesota. My 75% social match for him is largely because he's a pro-life liberal; it looks like he agrees with me that personal freedom is a good thing to enshrine in law, but that abortion is not a matter that falls into that category.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home