Lessons Learned from Politics.com, FullPolitics.com and JustPlainPolitics.com

I've usually been pretty centrist when it comes to my economic views, besides when I first entered the site and was a socialist, and at the deepist point of my libertarian delusion. But the only way my social views have gone over time is to the left.
 
Watermark said:
You are the numerical inverse but you aren't as far away as possible, unlike me. Everyone else is a goddamn fascist compared to me.
Click to expand...

Well, you'll be in a totally different place on the grid next week, so forgive those who don't put their whole portfolio in your present status.
 
Beefy said:
Well, you'll be in a totally different place on the grid next week, so forgive those who don't put their whole portfolio in your present status.
Click to expand...

I've only ever been in two grids. I suppose I could answer a few questions a bit less enthusiastically and get a 0.25 on the economic score and go over to the libertarian grid again.
 
When I took the test almost a year ago:

pcgraphpng_small.php
 
CanadianKid said:
Who is still around from back in the Politics.com days....

I remember Stirfry, Dano for sure....

I think Threedee and Desh were on there, and maybe Dixie....

Thats about it.... Those were the glory days...

CK
Click to expand...

you are forgetting me. I had one of the lowest id numbers :)
 
stories id was like 40, candiankids was 50, I was 84. Out of everyone 100 and under only us three posted regularly.

Brent was also an old regular. Back then he wasn't bat shit crazy.

I also remember the board rstring describes, but i never posted. But i do remember people like shotgun and homersimpson.

Other names:

Thrawn
Crowsbeast
 
Grind said:
stories id was like 40, candiankids was 50, I was 84. Out of everyone 100 and under only us three posted regularly.

Brent was also an old regular. Back then he wasn't bat shit crazy.

I also remember the board rstring describes, but i never posted. But i do remember people like shotgun and homersimpson.

Other names:

Thrawn
Crowsbeast
Click to expand...
I was 82, I think. I signed on and didn't post anything for months because when I found it I was seeking a different site that had gone defunct where you could put in your zip and get all levels of government, the officials and contact numbers, I think it was "voter.com" I had tried it but couldn't find it and was trying other ones... I had used it to get pot holes filled in our neighborhood where we lived at that time as it seemed to be the only place I could find the road and bridge for the City I lived in...

I didn't realize how addicting message boards could be until a bit later. I wound up getting in an argument with DrWho that pretty much sealed the deal...
 
I visited politics.com for years just to vote in their little poll (as I tried to vote in political polls all over the net). Then one day just got the urge to post something.
 
you were definitely not 82 O_O

I specifically remember that canadiankid stories and me were the three oldest.

you were around 240.

Brent was 300ish.

LOOK HOW AWESOME I AM.
 
Watermark said:
In congress Dano. This site is a more universal scale. It is not amero-centric. All American politics takes place in the right quadrant. There simply aren't any senators that radically to the left. That is a fact. And Obama is no Ralph Nader - it wouldn't make sense at all to put them in the same quadrant.
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with that, did you not notice that people who take the politicalcompass.org test come out more left than they do in other tests? Except for political leaders who are somehow mysteriously on the right because the author of the site (LIKE YOU) decided how they would answer to his questions.

It is biased and I've said that for years since I first saw it. But let me give some examples.

Look at the first question:
"If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations."
Where is the option to say that it can serve both as most Conservatives and Libertarians would agree? It's a false dilemna. If it were not biased, it would have simply asked:
"Is economic globalisation a good thing?"


Next page, it says:
"Because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment, they require regulation."
Again the bias is shown, it ASSUMES that corporations cannot be trusted and then just asks the question about the next step of regulation. It's a CLEARLY loaded question designed to move people to the left.

And on and on.

Anyway I am not going through this again, I posted a very long debunking of it way back on politics.com because the site is written by someone designed to make people come out thinking they are more in a leftwing frame of mind. I urge all to use any other, there's 4 others I've seen and they were all fine.


At the end of the day a typical polltaker on politicalcompass.org would end up thinking that Repubs are all far right and that they are a lot closer to Nader and the far left than they thought they would have been. It's very hard to convince anyone of anything, but let people think that they came to arrive at a spot ideologically on their own by their own input and that is far more effective.

Makes me wonder if I should start my own site and ask questions like:
"Given that taxes destroy economic prosperity, are you in favor of more taxation?"
And gee everyone would end up appearing more rightwing and thinking they are really Conservative.
 
KingCondanomation said:
It's nothing to do with that, did you not notice that people who take the politicalcompass.org test come out more left than they do in other tests? Except for political leaders who are somehow mysteriously on the right because the author of the site (LIKE YOU) decided how they would answer to his questions.
Click to expand...

Well if it makes EVERYONE seem more left wing then they are it wouldn't be much of a problem, because it would all cancel itself out.
 
KingCondanomation said:
Look at the first question:
"If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations."
Where is the option to say that it can serve both as most Conservatives and Libertarians would agree? It's a false dilemna. If it were not biased, it would have simply asked:
"Is economic globalisation a good thing?"


Next page, it says:
"Because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment, they require regulation."
Again the bias is shown, it ASSUMES that corporations cannot be trusted and then just asks the question about the next step of regulation. It's a CLEARLY loaded question designed to move people to the left.
Click to expand...

dano, you are clearly unfamialiar with the reasoning behind the questins. It makes statements, sometimes very biased statements, and you are simply supposed to REACT to that. If you think corporations can be trusted, then by all means, post an all negative reaction.
 
Watermark said:
Well if it makes EVERYONE seem more left wing then they are it wouldn't be much of a problem, because it would all cancel itself out.
Click to expand...

Wha?
Nothing cancels out, most would appear more to the left. The only thing that would cancel that out is if some rightwinger did the same thing.
 
Watermark said:
dano, you are clearly unfamialiar with the reasoning behind the questins. It makes statements, sometimes very biased statements, and you are simply supposed to REACT to that. If you think corporations can be trusted, then by all means, post an all negative reaction.
Click to expand...
Wow they got you and you didn't even notice. Read it again.
Notice I don't EVEN have a chance to respond on corporations trust, my response ONLY pertains to regulations.

If Joe Blow were to look at my response he would say "Ok, even though corporations can't be trusted this guy strongly doesn't think they should be regulated". There's only one vote, I can't debate the first point, only answer for the second.

Ever heard of poisoning the well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top