Which president candidate fits you?

[tmac20]

This is he.

Foghorn Leghorn?

[RJH999]

Foghorn Leghorn?

Yup that's him.

[Chilli Dipper]

I scored a 100% match with Bernie Sanders. It's early, but I don't know who I would support yet. I see myself as a moderate, but that has more to do with temperament than ideology; my political viewpoints are more accurately described as progressive. I agree with Sanders on most of the issues, but I don't believe he stands a good chance of being elected President. Meanwhile, I think Hillary Clinton's moment has passed, but I don't hold anything against her, and I don't see her losing a general election against an establishment Republican. When Clinton was looking like the presumptive Democratic nominee, I figured I'd vote for Sanders in the primary in order to express my support for a populist economic platform. Hillary's looking less like the default candidate these days, and I'm not sure I'd be able to stick to that strategy if the race is a competitive one. As for the GOP, I'm just not interested in what they're selling these days. George Pataki is the only candidate on the Republican side for whom I scored greater than 20 percent. (Unless you want to count Webb and Chafee.)

[RJH999]

I scored a 100% match with Bernie Sanders. It's early, but I don't know who I would support yet. I see myself as a moderate, but that has more to do with temperament than ideology; my political viewpoints are more accurately described as progressive. I agree with Sanders on most of the issues, but I don't believe he stands a good chance of being elected President. Meanwhile, I think Hillary Clinton's moment has passed, but I don't hold anything against her, and I don't see her losing a general election against an establishment Republican. When Clinton was looking like the presumptive Democratic nominee, I figured I'd vote for Sanders in the primary in order to express my support for a populist economic platform. Hillary's looking less like the default candidate these days, and I'm not sure I'd be able to stick to that strategy if the race is a competitive one. As for the GOP, I'm just not interested in what they're selling these days. George Pataki is the only candidate on the Republican side for whom I scored greater than 20 percent. (Unless you want to count Webb and Chafee.)

Good post is good post.

[Golfingdad]

I got Walter Mondale and then Michael Dukakis. Huh.

[DrvFrShow]

I got Bernie.

[ryan772]

i refuse to take the survey cause all the issues are just the goverment spoon fed bull shit to lead us away from the same issues. i mean really do people still have abortion as one of their key issues for picking a president? when will we start asking real questions to our government officials. Why do we spend billions of dollars on the space station while homeless people starve on the streets. Global warming? give me a break do i need to point out the lies about it? How about preventing the destroying of the enviornment from cutting down rainforest and every tree we can find. Until people wake up and stop worrying about the issues we are told to worry about and really take a hard line on the governments actions nothing will change.

[dkolo]

i refuse to take the survey cause all the issues are just the goverment spoon fed bull shit to lead us away from the same issues. i mean really do people still have abortion as one of their key issues for picking a president? when will we start asking real questions to our government officials. Why do we spend billions of dollars on the space station while homeless people starve on the streets. Global warming? give me a break do i need to point out the lies about it? How about preventing the destroying of the enviornment from cutting down rainforest and every tree we can find. Until people wake up and stop worrying about the issues we are told to worry about and really take a hard line on the governments actions nothing will change.

We have the money and resources to promote the advancement of science in space in addition to addressing issues of homelessness. NASA's budget is a fraction of a penny on the tax dollar. Missions to Pluto aren't why people are still homeless or hungry.

As for lies about global warming, I don't know which you're referring to, but climate change is an extremely serious issue that needs our attention.

In any event, the government is a big entity and there's plenty of ways to allocate resources to address different problems.

EDIT: I got George Pataki, which is weird because I bet even Pataki's mother wouldn't have gotten him.

[jbishop15]

I'm pretty far left, so getting Bernie Sanders wasn't a surprise. I'm also a huge fan of his (except on gun control; we differ a bit there). Sanders 2016!

[jsgolfer]

Rick Perry is who came up for me, although I prefer Scott Walker.

[Rick Martin]

Independent voter here. Leaning toward Scott Walker. Other candidates that get my interest Bush, Graham, Jindal. Totally disgusted w/ Trump.

[jsgolfer]

1. As for lies about global warming, I don't know which you're referring to, but climate change is an extremely serious issue that needs our attention.

2. In any event, the government is a big entity and there's plenty of ways to allocate resources to address different problems.

1. As an Engineer, I won't get into the shoddy science behind global warming, but climate change is not as serious an issue as most believe.  It's an issue that we have to deal with whether it's too cold or too hot or anywhere in between.  If Climate change is the top of your agenda, you need to critically think about tree rings and proxies and what you can really deduce from them about the past.  All temperature gauges have an error in them, you add in location and setting and you will get wide swings of data which do not reflect reality.  Then they have to be fit back to what the scientist expects, not what they really are.  The data sets used by the government have been altered so many times, I don't think anyone has any idea what the real numbers are.  So for anyone to really think that they can tell what the planets temperature is or even is supposed to be, eh, much ado about nothing.

The world might (or might not) have warmed by a fraction of a degree. This might (or might not) be all (or in part) due to the activities of mankind. It might (or might not) be all bad.  A warmer world is much more hospitable than a cold world (see the middle ages and the little ice age).  It all depends on the quality of observations and the validity of various hypotheses, which I'm afraid to say, are lacking.

If only there were some natural explanation for falling and rising temperatures.  Such a hypothetical source of warming would have to be massive, however. On the order of magnitude of our Sun.

We should all praise carbon, it is the cycle of life.  The contribution of the gas to the making of a comfortable planet by the so-called greenhouse effect is well understood, modest and self-limiting. It is only turned into a terror by computer models. These are pretty worthless prognosticators; depending as they do on extensive guesswork about the ill-understood mechanisms and interactions involved in climate (not a closed system unfortunately) and involve so many tunable parameters and feedback factors that they could produce any desired result by appropriate tweaking by anyone. No model has been able to accurately predict the current non-warming that has been going on for 15 years.

I could go on and on and on...but that is probably for another blog

2. The government is too huge and needs to be reigned in, not everything demands the attention of the government.  That's the problem, the government is so huge they can't see the forest through the trees.

One of my favorite quotes:

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H. L. Mencken

Back to Golf....Fore!

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkolo

1. As for lies about global warming, I don't know which you're referring to, but climate change is an extremely serious issue that needs our attention.

2. In any event, the government is a big entity and there's plenty of ways to allocate resources to address different problems.

1. As an Engineer, I won't get into the shoddy science behind global warming, but climate change is not as serious an issue as most believe.  It's an issue that we have to deal with whether it's too cold or too hot or anywhere in between.  If Climate change is the top of your agenda, you need to critically think about tree rings and proxies and what you can really deduce from them about the past.  All temperature gauges have an error in them, you add in location and setting and you will get wide swings of data which do not reflect reality.  Then they have to be fit back to what the scientist expects, not what they really are.  The data sets used by the government have been altered so many times, I don't think anyone has any idea what the real numbers are.  So for anyone to really think that they can tell what the planets temperature is or even is supposed to be, eh, much ado about nothing.

The world might (or might not) have warmed by a fraction of a degree. This might (or might not) be all (or in part) due to the activities of mankind. It might (or might not) be all bad.  A warmer world is much more hospitable than a cold world (see the middle ages and the little ice age).  It all depends on the quality of observations and the validity of various hypotheses, which I'm afraid to say, are lacking.

If only there were some natural explanation for falling and rising temperatures.  Such a hypothetical source of warming would have to be massive, however. On the order of magnitude of our Sun.

We should all praise carbon, it is the cycle of life.  The contribution of the gas to the making of a comfortable planet by the so-called greenhouse effect is well understood, modest and self-limiting. It is only turned into a terror by computer models. These are pretty worthless prognosticators; depending as they do on extensive guesswork about the ill-understood mechanisms and interactions involved in climate (not a closed system unfortunately) and involve so many tunable parameters and feedback factors that they could produce any desired result by appropriate tweaking by anyone. No model has been able to accurately predict the current non-warming that has been going on for 15 years.

I could go on and on and on...but that is probably for another blog

2. The government is too huge and needs to be reigned in, not everything demands the attention of the government.  That's the problem, the government is so huge they can't see the forest through the trees.

One of my favorite quotes:

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken

Back to Golf....Fore!

It's really funny how otherwise obscure facts can turn into a global political debate.

[Mr. Desmond]

1. As an Engineer, I won't get into the shoddy science behind global warming, but climate change is not as serious an issue as most believe.  It's an issue that we have to deal with whether it's too cold or too hot or anywhere in between.  If Climate change is the top of your agenda, you need to critically think about tree rings and proxies and what you can really deduce from them about the past.  All temperature gauges have an error in them, you add in location and setting and you will get wide swings of data which do not reflect reality.  Then they have to be fit back to what the scientist expects, not what they really are.  The data sets used by the government have been altered so many times, I don't think anyone has any idea what the real numbers are.  So for anyone to really think that they can tell what the planets temperature is or even is supposed to be, eh, much ado about nothing.

.....

I could go on and on and on...but that is probably for another blog

2. The government is too huge and needs to be reigned in, not everything demands the attention of the government.  That's the problem, the government is so huge they can't see the forest through the trees.

One of my favorite quotes:

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken

Back to Golf....Fore!

So I take it that Al Gore did not get your vote in 2000.

[jsgolfer]

So I take it that Al Gore did not get your vote in 2000.

That would be a 10-4.  The Gorical is an idiot.

[Mr. Desmond]

That would be a 10-4.  The Gorical is an idiot.

Ah, that makes whom we elected a bigger idiot.

Makes perfect sense in our system.

Better watch it ... Bernie is gaining traction...

But the survey seemed geared to social issues and less depth on business and economics.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsgolfer

That would be a 10-4.  The Gorical is an idiot.

Ah, that makes whom we elected a bigger idiot.

Makes perfect sense in our system.

Better watch it ... Bernie is gaining traction...

But the survey seemed geared to social issues and less depth on business and economics.

No, there's just no word for it. . .

[dkolo]

1. As an Engineer, I won't get into the shoddy science behind global warming, but climate change is not as serious an issue as most believe.  It's an issue that we have to deal with whether it's too cold or too hot or anywhere in between.  If Climate change is the top of your agenda, you need to critically think about tree rings and proxies and what you can really deduce from them about the past.  All temperature gauges have an error in them, you add in location and setting and you will get wide swings of data which do not reflect reality.  Then they have to be fit back to what the scientist expects, not what they really are.  The data sets used by the government have been altered so many times, I don't think anyone has any idea what the real numbers are.  So for anyone to really think that they can tell what the planets temperature is or even is supposed to be, eh, much ado about nothing.

The world might (or might not) have warmed by a fraction of a degree. This might (or might not) be all (or in part) due to the activities of mankind. It might (or might not) be all bad.  A warmer world is much more hospitable than a cold world (see the middle ages and the little ice age).  It all depends on the quality of observations and the validity of various hypotheses, which I'm afraid to say, are lacking.

If only there were some natural explanation for falling and rising temperatures.  Such a hypothetical source of warming would have to be massive, however. On the order of magnitude of our Sun.

We should all praise carbon, it is the cycle of life.  The contribution of the gas to the making of a comfortable planet by the so-called greenhouse effect is well understood, modest and self-limiting. It is only turned into a terror by computer models. These are pretty worthless prognosticators; depending as they do on extensive guesswork about the ill-understood mechanisms and interactions involved in climate (not a closed system unfortunately) and involve so many tunable parameters and feedback factors that they could produce any desired result by appropriate tweaking by anyone. No model has been able to accurately predict the current non-warming that has been going on for 15 years.

I could go on and on and on...but that is probably for another blog

2. The government is too huge and needs to be reigned in, not everything demands the attention of the government.  That's the problem, the government is so huge they can't see the forest through the trees.

One of my favorite quotes:

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken

Back to Golf....Fore!

I'm not a scientist and have no advanced scientific background, but I've reviewed as much of the evidence as I can and I'm convinced by the bulk of the scientific community's consensus that it's an observable fact that the fossil fuels we're burning and the carbon we're putting into the atmosphere is causally linked with climate change. I don't find it reasonable when some argue that there's been a universal fudging of the science to demonstrate what isn't there. I say all this having been very willing to buy into alternative explanations of the empirical evidence and projections that argued it wouldn't be serious, but enough of those over the past decade have come and gone that I just feel compelled to accept it as a fact. I don't come at this from any sort of perspective of being an environmentalist (see, eg, my old Drill Baby Drill posters), but just from the practical perspective of wanting to be able for us to be able to sustain the awesome lifestyle we've been able to create for ourselves as humans. Bjorn Lomborg's writings and movies like the Great Global Warming Swindle were canon for me, but I've found their arguments refuted over the years to satisfy my confidence level in the proposition that human activities are causing climate change and that that's a bad thing.

As for point 2, the federal government is big. I don't know if it's too big or not big enough, but it's uniquely-well suited to dealing with a number of larger scale issues like environmental issues and promoting scientific advancements, like climate change and space exploration since those are the two that came up in my original reply to @ryan772