Do you agree or disagree with Senator Obama?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Beric, Sep 28, 2008.

  1. Beric macrumors 68020

    Beric

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #1
    I stumbled across this test on whether or not you agree with Barack Obama on the issues. I was curious on how the members of the forum scored.

    The result page is also interesting in that they pair up the poll choices of the test with the general American public's beliefs.
     
  2. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #2
    its a really stupid and wieghted quiz when the question actually has to ask you whether you agree on his plans (not to mention it gives partial truths before the question):

    4. Some say Barack Obama’s plans to implement sweeping environmental regulations will raise the cost of gas, groceries, heating and air conditioning. Do you favor or oppose Obama’s environmental plans?

    EDIT: jesus christ man. how weighted is this F3$%#$ survey?

    what about this link at the bottom?

    http://www.amazon.com/Audacity-Dece...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217280108&sr=8-1

    the bias you just threw into this was rediculous
     
  3. Beric thread starter macrumors 68020

    Beric

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #3
    In that case, it's a simple case of whether you prefer the environment or the economy.

    But if you approve of his plans, just click "yes" and ignore it. ;)
     
  4. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #4
    Right, Beric. Your right-wing sources will tell us all about Obama. :p
     
  5. Beric thread starter macrumors 68020

    Beric

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #5
    Do your own fact-check on the issues if you like. Most of his positions are well-known.
     
  6. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6
    are you talking about that worthless garbage of a debate that was supposed to be on foreign affairs that for over 30 mins was just about the economy and bail out.

    yeah I turned it off when I heard the same thing for the 5th time in those 30 mins and all it was about the bail out. Not about foreign affairs which quite frankly needs a lot more work bail out that quite frankly those 2 more than likely have very little part in.

    A WORTHLESS debate that told us nothing.
     
  7. Beric thread starter macrumors 68020

    Beric

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #7
    I agree about the debate, but I think this topic was really about Obama's positions. ;)
     
  8. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #8
    "some say"

    "many beleive"

    :rolleyes:

    credible beric, real credible.
     
  9. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
  10. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #10
    what does it matter. It was completely worthless for finding out anything about the debate. and damn it I ment to post this in the debate thread.....
     
  11. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #11
    It's so biased it's not even funny.

    At this point in time, anyone who has a plug from Phil Gramm on his website must be incredibly stupid. Gramm is probably the most incompetent economic flip flopper in US politics.
     
  12. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #12
    Some say Beric’s plans to post new threads will raise the ire of everyone in PRSI. Do you favor or oppose Berics’s future posting plans?
     
  13. powerbuddy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
  14. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #14
    I was going to take the quiz, but I vomited on your avatar. Sorry
     
  15. RacerX macrumors 65832

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    #15
    We should look at one of these questions where some place was referenced... like this one:
    8. According to the Tax Policy Center, Barack Obama’s tax plans would cost the U.S federal government nearly $900 billion in his first term, and increase the national debt by $3.3 trillion over ten years. Do you believe the analysis that Obama’s plans will be too costly for the U.S., or do you think the changes are needed?
    • Obama’s plans are too costly
    • Obama’s plans are needed
    Wow, that sounds really bad, doesn't it?

    So the question tells us that Obama's plan would cost us (the US Government) $900 billion in his first term, and $3.3 trillion over ten years. Well, McCain's tax plan has to be way better than that, right?

    The numbers appear to come from this blog, which stated:
    "Obama, who casts himself as an out-of-the box, post-partisan politician, has put together a fairly conventional Democratic tax plan. Despite McCain’s recent claim that Obama would raise taxes for all, it turns out that middle-class families would do better under Obama (who would cut their taxes by $1000 in 2009) than McCain (who would cut them by only $300). Obama’s generosity comes at a price, however, He’d raise the national debt by a staggering $3.3 trillion over the next decade, and that includes more than $900 billion in promised revenue raisers that TPC could not verify."
    So this seems to be a misstatement of facts in the question.

    ... But what did it say about McCain's plan?
    "McCain, who once opposed President Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cut as a give-away to the rich, but now embraces them, has designed a plan more consistent with the New McCain than the old. It is as Republican a plan as Obama’s is Democratic. The top 20% of taxpayers get a 3% reduction in after-tax income in 2009, while the lowest-earning 60% would get less than 1%."

    "The real contrast, though, is at the very top: In 2009, taxpayers making more than $2.9 million (the top 0.1%) would get a nearly $300,000 tax cut from McCain, but face a whopping $700,000 tax hike from Obama."

    "Keeping to the pattern of Bush-era Republicans, McCain would also go deeper into the red than Obama. Including interest, he’d increase the national debt by $4.5 trillion over a decade. To what I suppose is his credit, McCain only includes about $365 billion in unspecified revenue raisers in his plan compared with Obama’s $900 billion. Let’s just say both have wills far bigger than their wallets."
    Well, so if both of their plans were set out honestly before you and you had to vote strictly on your own self interests, which plan favors you?

    Personally, I earn far below $200,000 a year (and my wife and I earn far below $250,000 a year), so self interest would seem to favor Obama for us.
     
  16. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #16
    Registrant:
    PM CONSULTING CORP.
    2751 Prosperity Avenue
    Fourth Floor
    Fairfax, VA 22031
    US

    Domain Name: BARACKOBAMATEST.COM




    PM Consulting Corp.
    Private Company, Headquarters Location
    7921 Jones Branch Dr., Ste. 445, McLean, VA, United States
    (703)245-0500, (703)245-0501 fax,

    Primary SIC: Services, Not Elsewhere Classified, Primary

    NAICS: Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services

    Description: Services: Nonprofit and political campaign creative and strategic consultants with experience in financial management of Republican senators' and governors' campaigns, fund raising for PACS and other organizations, lobbying and public affairs counseling, telemarketing inbound and outbound, voter registration and turnout programs, and seminar and convention management, and events fundraising.
     
  17. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #17
    Truly disgusting. Here's a wonderful example of the question wording.

    Beric, if you agree with this sort of campaigning you ought to be ashamed. Gutter thinking for gutter politics.
     
  18. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    There should be a rule against posting garbage like this quiz. It's obviously completely biased and misleading, if not completely false. Can we please bring the level of discussion up a bit more, folks?
     
  19. djellison macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Pasadena CA
    #19
    Of course, that's make the monumentally bone-headed assumption that you have to have one or the other.

    Utter crap from start to finish.
     
  20. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #20
    Well said. ;) In America, it has long been a corporate, or simply right-wing ploy, to fight environmental legislation, by saying "X" number of jobs would be lost. The more significant the legislation is, the bigger "X" is. This has been going on, as a standard MO, for over 35 years. It is virtually automatic now. I do believe it continues to be effective with the area and/or industry impacted.

    Example: In my home state of Washington, the wester half was once covered by huge forests, with trees often reaching hundreds of feet tall. A squirrel could travel a hundred miles, going tree to tree. Today, ~97% of those ancient forests have been logged. Today, we have another ~7% of beautiful 'second growth' forests, which also have an occasional 'old timer', which was missed. This is prime wood (in industry terms). The timber industry is constantly trying to clear-cut these forests. They always use the same arguments; we will have to close sawmills, we will have to lax-off "XXXXX" number of workers.

    Indeed, virtually every industry which depends on harvesting natural resources, is under pressure of scarcity. The US fishing industry is nothing compared to what it once was. I think this is a global problem, and is only a small portion of the total environmental problems we face. As you suggest, we must multi-task our problem solving, because we sure as hell do not have time to work them sequentially.
     
  21. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #21
    You DISAGREED with the Barack Obama position on 37 of the 51 test questions. This means you disagree with the Obama position 73% of the time.

    Well, there you have it.
     
  22. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #22
    The irony is that by refusing to acknowledge the environmental realities in the name of the economy, we are only ensuring an even more massive economic catastrophe.
     
  23. 63dot macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #23
    I am pro life. I believe in a right to bear (some) arms. I am a Christian. But I believe in universal health care. I believe, from my Christian beliefs that we are our brother's keeper. I believe in alternate energy sources. I believe the environment is important. I believe the very richest won't miss their money that much if taxed slightly more. I don't believe in putting the tax burden largely on working people. Jesus is God. Our government was desinged not to esstablish a state religion lest we be like the country we broke away from with a state religion, which can lead to a lot of corruption, not in government so much as in God's people.

    I scored barely for Obama, about a 55. If I were not religious, I am sure I would have scored near 70.

    Anyway, I am voting for Obama. I admire McCain in some ways, but Obama is the better person for the job.

    That being said, I don't think Obama can be the quick and effective economic saviour that Clinton was and I don't expect Obama, or McCain for that matter, to solve our current economic crisis. Clinton was one of a kind when it came to the issue of repairing the US economy. He even beat out Reagan's full five years of economic prosperity which was close to an all time record, so I give Clinton major kudos for that. I don't think Obama can do that, OK, but he's a better hope than McCain.

    And finally, that being said, I don't think a McCain presidency can possibly be as economically damaging as the Bush presidency has been. Tonight ABC news confirmed he had the lowest raing in US history, at 18%.
     
  24. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #24
    Yes, but you missed the point. A quiz intending to understand what issues voters consider important should try to eliminate bias questions, otherwise is worthless.

    For instance, your question of the economy versus the environment represents a false dichotomy.

    We could change the bias by asking people to choose between clean air and water or for larger corporate profits.

    What? This test isn't just someone trying to get an accurate representation of voters' opinions with regard to Obama's policies. Color me shocked.

    Good show to rdowns for taking the time to whois a website, more people should do it. Mac users, especially, have no excuse not to use such a valuable tool.
     
  25. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #25
    :D

    Beric's rapidly decreasing level of credibility takes another hit. Why do you do things like this, Beric? The people on this forum are to smart to fall for it.
     

Share This Page