Via Franklin Harris, the Select Smart 2004 Presidential Candidate Selector. My results certainly look odd, which suggests a BCS-like inscrutability in the formula, as well as a lack of exhaustive choices on some questions. Here’s what I got:
1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Libertarian Candidate (90%)
3. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT – Democrat (47%)
4. Sharpton, Reverend Al – Democrat (45%)
5. Bush, President George W. – Republican (42%)
6. Socialist Candidate (39%)
7. Phillips, Howard – Constitution (36%)
8. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. – Democrat (35%)
9. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH – Democrat (35%)
10. Kerry, Senator John, MA – Democrat (28%)
11. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR – Democrat (27%)
12. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol, IL – Democrat (23%)
13. Edwards, Senator John, NC – Democrat (23%)
14. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT – Democrat (17%)
15. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO – Democrat (16%)
Clearly, this blog’s detractors are right, at least about me: I am a Socialist (#6). Oh, and I love George W. Bush (#5). What really amazes me, though, is Howard Dean’s ranking. Granted, the agreement percentages drop dramatically after Libertarian, from 90% to 47%, but I think this highlights how unreliable rhetoric is. If I agree with Dean or Bush nearly half the time, it must be on the basis of vague campaign promises, not anything either has actually done or will do.
