Skip to comments.Candidate Match Game (Did Every One See and/or Take This Test?)
Posted on 12/15/2011 9:56:17 AM PST by Why So Serious
Did you take or see this quiz? I did and my winners were Bachmann, Paul, and Santorum [in that order]. I would say that Newt was on my radar screen, as was Bachmann and Paul. Santorum never even entered my mind. I would have thought I preferred Paul over Bachmann [test says, NO!].
Every person on my desk took it and none of them came up with Romney
Bachman ideologically is in my opinion closest to the typical freeper.
But she’s really bad at obeying the Reagan commandment about not attacking other republicans.
Why do you have people on your desk?.....................
Better on than under ... I am on a seven man trading desk.
What test? Is it invisible?
I like invisible tests.
Hm. I got Ron Paul first, Mitt Romney second, and John Huntsman third. I think that test might be a little “off.” How could Paul and Romney be side-by-side like that?
I think I need a vacation.
#1 Ron Paul, #2 Rick Perry, #3 Newt Gingrich
Amazing quiz. Bachman came out on top for me, but Romney and Obama were in a tie for last place.
lol...Perry, Gingrich, Paul...not bad. Funny thing is that Romney ranked just below Obama for dead last.
One more question: “Which candidate states a conservative view as a self serving vote getter with no “REAL” evidence of having always supporting that view.”
Unexpected results, in my case: Ron Paul #1, Michelle Bachman #2, and Newt Gingrich #3. I'd have to seriously hold my nose to vote for two of these people. And the person I'd actually like to vote for didn't "make the cut" on the basis of this question set: Rick Perry.
Thanks again for the link!
Paul seems to have a screw loose with his off-the-chart radical America-hating attitude about 9/11. If he wasn't so obsessively bizarre about defense and 9/11, I'd probably be for him.
I thought that Perry would be the guy after Sarah took a powder (permanent trip to the power room), but I wish he wouldn't keep gaffing himself to death.
My results were as follows:
1st Paul...I have not even considered voting for him, although, anyone but Obama.
2nd Bachman...My current choice.
3rd Perry...My current next choice after Bachman.
Some of questions did not really fit my thinking, but I picked the closest, so as not to check the Other Box.
I'm not surprised; but Bachmann's and Santorum's chances are about as likely as the Colts making the playoffs (unless they are VP bait).
Curious: what are the substantive, objective (non-inflammatory) differences between Perry and Bachmann?
Problem is what’s the definition of less or more important? I think socsec is important in that I want it shot in the head, people who want to “save” it also think it’s important. Serious flaw there.
Mine were Paul, Perry, and Santorum. The “test” is BS.
Bachman, Paul, Santorum, Perry. Silly thing is, I predicted this.
Same for me. Santorum and Gingrich were 2nd and 3rd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.