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
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/candidate-match-game
For me it was:
1. Perry
2. Bachmann (actually tied with Newt)
3. Gingrich
Santorum looked like a close 4th.
Bachmann, Santorum, and Perry here.
I had basically the same.. Santorum -Bachman-Perry -tom
Perry > Bachmann > Gingrich
We fixed all of that.
USAToday is title/link only.
No text, pictures, etc may be posted from any Gannett source.
See header of this thread for proper way to do this in the future.
Thanks.
“Good answer, I’m gonna keep my eye on you!” -Sam Kinison [Back To School]
Interesting question, PapaNew. IMO, the chief (apparent) difference between them is their respective view of American constitutional government — how they respectively understand it.
It seems to be the view of a substantial majority of the American people that constitutional government resides only in Washington, D.C. (Which of course, leaves out the States and the People, the other parties to our constitutional compact). The view seems to be that Washington writes the marching orders, and the states compelled to supinely carry them out.
It seems to me that Gov. Perry is aware that the Tenth Amendment was originally conceived as a means to "balance the respective powers" of the federal government vis-à-vis the several states. In short, I think he is far more sensitive to constitutionally-guaranteed "state's rights" — which include everything that the federal government has no express constitutional warrant for — and sees their constitutional exercise as the major means of checking the vast, overweening, expanding power of the federal government and the egregiously corrupt, self-dealing political class thereof.
Michelle Bachman's constitutional focus seems to be mainly on the federal government and its operations.
The problem is, the federal government is increasingly operating in areas that historically had fallen to the purview of the several states — e.g., education, marriage, abortion, and so forth. Without strong tenth-amendment push-back by the states, their legitimate powers will increasingly be transferred to elite Washington bureaucrats in a totally stifling and liberty-killing top-down — and largely unconstitutional — Big Brother government by "experts," a Leviathan eating out our substance, and quashing our historic American liberties.
The only other candidate that I've heard say anything about the Tenth Amendment is Newt Gingrich — who mentioned in passing that Perry's interest in the Tenth was well-justified, and that he had sparked his, Gingrich's, interest, too.
Anyhoot, since I believe it's well past time for the American people to make a searching reconsideration of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments (and their indispensable constitutional role), I'm a Perry supporter.
To me, he's the best constitutional conservative in the entire field. And so I hope I will have a chance to vote for him next November. If he can take his Tenth Amendment, balance-of-powers message to the people in a way they can appreciate, maybe I'll have a chance to do just that.
Bachman, Newt, and Perry in a tie.
Hey! How did you manage to steal my results? LOL!
Same order here. What was most funny was that Romney was dead last in my results. Even Obamao came out slightly higher than Romney - next to dead last :).
#1 Bachman, #2 Hunstman, #3 Paul . . . but all around the 50% mark.
Factored into all of the results ought to be a 0-100% credibility factor adjustment - applied at the end - to weight the results. If you think the candidate is a lying or flip-flopping sack of crap that either hides their ideology or sticks their finger in the wind to "decide" on issues, like Obamao or Romney in particular (and to a lesser extent Newt), then their final score would be weighted down because their verbal answers really don't matter.
Perry, Santorum, and Bachman.
I got Perry, Gingrich, and Paul. The quiz needs questions on abortion and gun rights.
Thanks for that Mod, and keep up the good work!
Bachmann - Gingrich - Perry
I was a little surprised at my results. All three were tied with just 54.3%. Newt, Perry and Huntsmen.
I guess I’m just not too pleased with our choices.
I did watch the Newt/Jon debate. Huntsmen is smarter and more conservative than I thought. He should take a lot of votes from Romney in NH.
Yes, I think that's true about Perry and that's one reason why I thought maybe he might be the guy. But his gaffe problems and his terrible performances in these three-ring-circus MSM events mislabeled "debates."
He has sort of come across as a bit of a lightweight IMO. Rather than being a friendly, amicable guy who's serious about the issues, he's come across a bit like a hot head who almost carelessly blurts things out. A hot head is not the kind of person we need running the show.
Maybe there's another, better Perry that the general public hasn't seen. I hope so but he needs to rehabilitate and repair SOON.
Took it...
1. Paul 7/11
2. Bachmann 2/11
3. Gingrich 1/11
A while back, I did wonder what it would be like if Paul and Bachmann teamed up...
Now I’m wondering about the prospect again...
Bet the Republican Party establishment would have a cow and the Democrat Party would be shell shocked.
=8-)
bump for later read
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.