President/SCOTUS Selectors


I took this test during the primaries before the third party candidates were selected, so I decided to take it again with them involved. My results are interesting:

1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Bush, President George W. - Republican (72%)
3. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (45%)
4. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (43%)
5. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (42%)
6. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO - Democrat (39%)
7. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (37%)
8. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (36%)
9. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (25%)
10. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (24%)
11. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol, IL - Democrat (17%)
12. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (14%)
13. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (13%)
14. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (12%)
15. Cobb, David - Green Party (10%)
16. Nader, Ralph - Independent (10%)
17. Hagelin, Dr. John - Natural Law (8%)
18. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (8%)

This fits with my sense that I agree with Bush far more than any of the others. I did think Lieberman was my favorite of the Dems, and I was just saying that I think Kerry would be far better than Peroutka. Surprises: I would have put Edwards above both Kerry and Gephardt. I think this happened last time I took it too. I would never have guessed I'd agree more with Kerry than Badnarik. I guess this proves I'm not a libertarian. The real head-scratcher is how Kucinich got above Peroutka and Dean and how LaRouche got above Clark. It's also a little surprising that there's so much space between Bush and Lieberman and hardly any between Lieberman and Kerry or even Kerry and Badnarik. It must be that the 40-some percent I agree with each doesn't overlap much with the 40-some percent that I agree with the others.

They also have a Supreme Court justice predictor. I predicted Justice Thomas would be my top match, and I was right. The rest of the list was Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy, O'Connor, Breyer, Souter, Ginsburg, Stevens. The first three are the ones I find myself agreeing with most, but I agree with Rehnquist less on substantive matters, and Scalia relies too much on what he considers wrongly decided precedent for my taste. Precedent schmecedent! If it was wrongly decided, don't let the fact that it was decided affect your judgment. Thomas doesn't seem to care if a wrongly decided precedent happens to be on record. Scalia does. I wouldn't have guessed that factors like that would put Rehnquist above Scalia, but there may well have been some additional more substantive issue on which I disagree with Scalia but not Rehnquist. Beyond the three conservatives, the others fall out pretty much in the order I would have predicted, the two moderates (with the one less friendly to abortion rights first) and then the four liberals (in decreasing order of how independent they are in their thinking as opposed to the party line).


    The Parablemen are: , , and .



Books I'm Reading

Fiction I've Finished Recently

Non-Fiction I've Finished Recently

Books I've Been Referring To

I've Been Listening To

Games I've Been Playing

Other Stuff


    thinking blogger
    thinking blogger

    Dr. Seuss Pro

    Search or read the Bible

    Example: John 1 or love one another (ESV)

  • Link Policy
Powered by Movable Type 5.04