Still don't know who to support in 2008?

[Pilotguy]

Answer these 11 questions and you'll know who you should support.

http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

[lvx35]

1. That's a good test, decently balanced.

It gave me the candidates in exactly the order I already support them: Kucinich, Hillary, Obama in that order, which is where I stand.

edit: Oh, and beware of this question:

Energy: Do you support federal assistance for the production of ethanol and/or biofuel as an alternative to oil?

Its about ethanol and biofuel, not just alternative energy, which lowers the priority for me.

[AdHocSolver]

4. Ethanol use means higher prices for food and no reduction in oil usage or greenhouse gases.

Using corn to produce ethanol means reduced supply of corn for food for people and livestock. It is the reason dairy prices have increased so much in the past few months. The prices for cereal, bread, and every product that uses corn syrup are going to increase significantly, also.

Ethanol usage does NOT save oil as gasoline mileage is reduced when it is put into gasoline. I have proven this to my own satisfaction many times. Ten percent ethanol added to gasoline reduces mileage by at least ten percent, so there is no reduction of oil usage.

The only solution to the energy problem is reduced consumption. That means all-electric and hybrid-electric vehicles, and implementation of more wind and solar power technologies. The current technologies can do it. The reason it isn't done is that the oil companies, and now agribusinesses, make more profit off of ethanol without reducing oil consumption. The problem is not technical, but political. Another solution is increasing mass transit options.

One political solution that could get "immediate" results in energy conservation was used most successfully in the mid-1970s, but abandoned by Reagan and Daddy Bush. This was government mandated vehicle fuel efficiency standards. The auto companies were forced to improve gas mileage, and they did.

However, I would NOT push any Democratic candidate to make a policy statement on this before the election, as the auto companies will lie that they can't do this, and all the gas guzzler lovers will believe them. As someone who has repaired many brands of cars over the years, I know that the gas mileage of even large SUV's could be improved substantially with today's technology. The auto companies, at least the American branded auto companies, refuse to implement the technolgy, as their bean counters haven't produced any spreadsheets to show how it might increase profits.

[lvx35]

6. I basically agree...

That's why I brought it up. At first I thought it was about subsidizing the clean alternatives, wind and so forth, but no. However, there is a certain short term period in which subsidizing bio-fuels created from current waste would be okay, so I'm not intrinsically against it...The question just doesn't give enough info.

[rucky]

10. Corn is the lowest yielding on a long list of possible crops.

Algae, for example, has about 10000 times more yield per acre.

[dorkulon]

5. Balanced? The immigration question

doesn't offer anything like my position. The options range from harsh to hateful.

[lvx35]

7. There was no Dem candidate as "harsh" as me on the question.

Its a rare topic where I side more with Republicans. It has nothing to do with not liking Latinos, and everything to do with the fact that current laws basically allow homeland security to come into my house and give me a colonoscopy, but they don't consider 12 million people illegally wandering across an open border to be a security problem. If we want anything like real security we need to get control over whose crossing the border first, and then talk about letting more Mexican immigrants in after that.

[dorkulon]

9. That's fine, but the point is it isn't a balanced question.

My take, just or instance would involve punishing companies for hiring illegals--I think that alone would largely stem the tide without building any fences. The point is, the options given to the question do not accurately represent the spectrum of opinion on the subject. Just because your remedies are represented that doesn't make it balanced.

[lvx35]

12. Oh, I see what your saying. Your solution wasn't represented.

Its a shame, because I think you're exactly right. The illegal immigration issue has nothing to do with Mexicans and everything to do with greedy corporations and interventionist foreign policy. (We're all to happy to keep an open border so long as it allows us get into Mexico's business and keeps them from being completely sovereign.)

[daninthemoon]

2. I wish we could use something like this for an actual election. Every

voter takes this survey. Every candidate takes this survey. The candidate who matches most voters on most issues wins. No media bias, no charm bias, no race/gender/height bias. And no electoral college or district fixing. No voter intimidation.

[lvx35]

3. That's a good idea. We really should help this sort of thing get out...

surveys like this, or even better, surveys that use the candidates actual words for options.

[bluetrain]

8. I wish so, too. I got Kucinich by a large margin.

[harun]

11. My conclusion to this is I should be running for president

I still disagree with 3 items for my best candidate.

[Debi]

13. Looks like I still have some decision making to do

Kucinich 41
Dodd 41
Biden 40
Edwards 40
Obama 39

:shrug:

[MGKrebs]

14. Dang.

Too bad I can't give Dodd about $50 million.