Isidewith (seems pretty good):

85% Gary Johnson (the one that doesn't matter) (foreign+home+economic+social+environmental+healthcare+criminal)
65% Bernie Sanders (foreign+immigrate+healthcare+environmental)
65% Ted Cruz (economic+social+teaching+criminal+electoral)
64% Jill Stein (another one that doesn't matter - even matters less than Johnson) (foreign policy+immigrate+environmental+healthcare)
56% Marco Rubio (social+economic+teaching+criminal+electoral)
51% Donald Trump (teaching+criminal+science+electoral)
51% Hilary Clinton (immigrate)
33% John Kasich (economic+teaching+electoral)

http://imgh.us/polit.png

82% privacy
58% decentralisation
74% "laissez-faire"
8% progressive
14% multiculturalism
84% isolation
40% deregulation (probably greatly cut since I said it would be good to have limited united health care and also some gun regulations)
66% pacifism (don't know why it's kind of low)
48% small government
92% globalisation
32% individualism
28% populism
18% environmentalism
18% capitalism
2% tough

Edited 3/11/2016 00:21:42

You don't side with many people, xpapy

Libertarian, very close to the limit. Also I like Gary Johnson on social issues, better than the Paul's there.

Edited 3/11/2016 00:26:07

^Haha we're just about opposite on that. I like Gary Johnson a lot, except on some of his social issues.

Marijuana is a plant that makes you dumb, no reason to kill people, throw people in jail over it.

Gay Marriage, what's it matter to you? If you think they're being bad then why fuss over it? They'll just be a cricket in the next life and that's the end of it(well not the END end of it, but you get me)

Migrants, there are 11 million+ of them here. Getting rid of them all is unrealistic and undoable without the government going house to house and rounding people up(they do that already but smaller)

Anything else you disagree with?

"94% Cruz, 93% Trump
Wow that's so close!! Who you leaning towards?"

Cruz. He is more constitutionalist, and while I like Trump on big issues, his abortion and eminent domain views are shady at best.

Marijuana is a plant that makes you dumb, no reason to kill people, throw people in jail over it.

No I'm for decriminalizing marijuana so we don't disagree on this.

Gay Marriage, what's it matter to you? If you think they're being bad then why fuss over it?

I said yes to civil unions, but no to changing the definition of marriage.

We probably disagree on 1) abortion and 2) the use of God in the public sphere.

Edited 3/11/2016 01:37:28

Isidewith results:

76% Ted Cruz
76% Bernie Sanders
72% Donald Trump
72% Marco Rubio

Ideology: Centrist slightly leaning Authoritarian

Themes:
-Socialist (66%)
-Assimilation (36%)
-Tough (14%)
-Protectionism (48%)
-Traditional (48%)
-About dead center on Isolation vs. Intervention
-Keynesian (50%)
-Environmentalism (18%)

Nolan chart shows Centrist leaning Statist.

A marriage is a relationship recognized by ritual or law. This is nearly universal across the world, not attached to any particular religion. Don't see why a gay or lesbian relationship is not applicable here.

Nolan's Chart (seems pretty accurate): http://snag.gy/vebIR.jpg
ISideWith- http://snag.gy/kHfcT.jpg
http://snag.gy/wOFo6.jpg

http://snag.gy/xx97E.jpg

http://snag.gy/5Vd2h.jpg

http://snag.gy/zD5Y7.jpg

Edited 3/11/2016 01:50:18

About those 4 topics jay spoke about,

- Drugs: I'm for legalization of all drugs, putting it in the market and tax them heavily. It's a better long term solution to fight addiction, and with better drugs the collateral long-term effects will decrease, while the money earned from it can be used to threat people who have bad problems with it.

- Gay marriage: I'm pro-gay marriage, and also for same rights as heterosexual couples.

- Abortion: I'm all pro-choice. I think a woman avoid as possible to get pregnant and then get an abortion, which is a sad thing, but still preferable to the opposite, when you are forced to raise kids. Those children will often be more succeptive to criminality, drugs abuse and dropouts in school, and their parents will have kids they cannot raise.

- About religion: I'm totally against the use of religion in the public sphere. I believe religion should be a personal/group thing, you shouldn't need to expose it in the public, as it may be offensive to other people. I do however oppose the disappearance of religious signs in monuments, the money or other minor places, as they are a traditional and historic thing, and that it's non-sense to want to destroy everything of our past in the name of secularization.

Edited 3/11/2016 01:52:24

A marriage is a relationship recognized by ritual or law.

No the biological definition of marriage, and the one used by almost all nations, empires, and political entities before the 1970s was a union between a man and a woman.

76% Ted Cruz
76% Bernie Sanders

Woah Eklipse is this for real? That's pretty cool that you're dead split between Cruz and Sanders considering how different they are! I haven't met many people who are both a Traditionalist and a Socialist...at least not in the US that is. From the themes you listed you sound like a Christian Social Democrat...like Angela Merkel. I mean that's my best guess...you're hard to pin down on the ideological spectrum :)

Edited 3/11/2016 01:56:59

- Drugs: I'm for legalization of all drugs, putting it in the market and tax them heavily. It's a better long term solution to fight addiction, and with better drugs the collateral long-term effects will decrease, while the money earned from it can be used to threat people who have bad problems with it.

Of course you want to tax them heavily and redistribute the money, you red.

- Gay marriage: I'm pro-gay marriage, and also for same rights as heterosexual couples.

I agree

- Abortion: I'm all pro-choice. I think a woman avoid as possible to get pregnant and then get an abortion, which is a sad thing, but still preferable to the opposite, when you are forced to raise kids. Those children will often be more succeptive to criminality, drugs abuse and dropouts in school, and their parents will have kids they cannot raise.

I agree, though don't assume so quickly non-aborted children raised by young parents are always bad


- About religion: I'm totally against the use of religion in the public sphere. I believe religion should be a personal/group thing, you shouldn't need to expose it in the public, as it may be offensive to other people. I do however oppose the disappearance of religious signs in monuments, the money or other minor places, as they are a traditional and historic thing, and that it's non-sense to want to destroy everything of our past in the name of secularization.

If you're a Christian politician, no reason not to talk about your religion when it pertains to a subject.

Edited 3/11/2016 02:03:25

Woah Eklipse is this for real? That's pretty cool that you're dead split between Cruz and Sanders considering how different they are! I haven't met many people who are both a Traditionalist and a Socialist...at least not in the US that is. From the themes you listed you sound like a Christian Social Democrat...like Angela Merkel. I mean that's my best guess...you're hard to pin down on the ideological spectrum :)

Yeah, I've accepted that I'm a strange breed when it comes to politics. I've met a few others with a similar combination, but not many. I was raised a hardcore capitalist/social conservative. I've (mostly) kept the social conservative side growing up, but in the past few years I've started to embrace Socialist ideals more and more. I try to stay practical about it though, you can't make a utopia overnight and trying too hard to force it ends up with Soviet style socialism...

The way I see it, socialism is very much in line with the spirit of Christianity and I don't see why socialism and social conservatism can't mesh together in many areas.

The way I see it, socialism is very much in line with the spirit of Christianity and I don't see why socialism and social conservatism can't mesh together in many areas.

Mhmm yeah I've had some Christian Korean friends tell me this too and I can see the parallels between Christianity and Socialism to a great extent.

I had a...I don't know what to call it...I guess a "fling" with socialism in high school, but I still feel its in direct conflict with the economic foundations of this country since FDR's New Deals, and many historians agree that his policies prolonged the Depression.

I disagree with that statement jai. FDR's policies did help the country to get out of the recession.

I had a...I don't know what to call it...I guess a "fling" with socialism in high school, but I still feel its in direct conflict with the economic foundations of this country since FDR's New Deals, and many historians agree that his policies prolonged the Depression.
Umm, you do realize FDR quite literally followed Keynesian policies, and that basically the Great Depression worldwide was more or less stopped by Rearmament, which induced gov't spending, which is Keynesian right?

Basically the only historians backing up your claim would be from the economic right, and even then, not all of them.

Also, something everyone on the right seems to miss, FDR gave people hope, which boosted consumer confidence, which in turn helped the economy. Even if his policies were complete BS(which they weren't), it still would've helped more than 4 more years of Hoover, who couldn't give people that kind of hope.

Basically the only historians backing up your claim would be from the economic right, and even then, not all of them.

Read this^

LOL. Didn't know UCLA were on the "economic right".

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409

Based on a UCLA study by Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian

Here are 3 more reports if you think the UCLA one is biased.

From the Mises Institute - https://mises.org/library/how-fdr-made-depression-worse

From Cato Institute - http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/policy-report/2003/7/powell.pdf

From the Foundation for Economic Education - http://fee.org/articles/fdrs-folly-how-roosevelt-and-his-new-deal-prolonged-the-great-depression/

Edited 3/11/2016 02:55:54

Mises institute: libertarian institute
Cato institute: libertarian institute
Foundation for Economic Education: libertarian foundation

I couldn't find the economic stance of the UCLA, so I won't say anything about it.


About the new deal, I'll just post two graphics:







The only critic about the new deal is the fast government spending cut that happened afterwards, it should have been progressive.

Edited 3/11/2016 03:26:41

In the three years following the implementation of Roosevelt's policies, wages in 11 key industries averaged 25 percent higher than they otherwise would have done, the economists calculate. But unemployment was also 25 percent higher than it should have been, given gains in productivity.

Meanwhile, prices across 19 industries averaged 23 percent above where they should have been, given the state of the economy. With goods and services that much harder for consumers to afford, demand stalled and the gross national product floundered at 27 percent below where it otherwise might have been.

"High wages and high prices in an economic slump run contrary to everything we know about market forces in economic downturns," Ohanian said. "As we've seen in the past several years, salaries and prices fall when unemployment is high. By artificially inflating both, the New Deal policies short-circuited the market's self-correcting forces."

This is all you need to know^

I won't even get into the New Deal's unconstitutionality.