I normally get centre on the left-right scale so this is a nice surprise.

BILL OF RIGHTS, NOT NEEDS

SHALL NIT BE INFRINGED

The problem I have with these kinds of tests is that my support for ideas depend significantly on their implementation

I agree with this. Although the results are what I expected, the questions are too general and I find them difficult to answer. For example, I am highly likely to support civilian conflict resolutions as opposed to military ones depending on the circumstances. I also view government responsibility from both a top-down and bottom-up perspective. In terms of third country engagement, my feelings are even more diverse because I believe immaterial factors are incredibly important to the development of strategic partnerships and foreign policy in general.

Did Mr. Psychologist take the test?

I'll admit, some of those questions I'm really underqualified to answer, so any that I wasn't sure about (Mostly about economics), I just left as neutral and of medium importance. Feel like that's the best way not to skew how it judges me.





Seems about right, though- At least based on other tests I've taken.

My cum

Center-right moderate social libertarian. Say that five times fast.

Right 1.57
Libertarian 2.57

Question 27 doesn't make sense. Why should convicts not be allowed to vote?

Look up felony disenfranchisement.

Quote from: Prime Megaten on December 25, 2015, 12:41:45 PM

Center-right moderate social libertarian. Say that five times fast.

i can't say it once w/o throwing up a little

Probably my economic questions that put me over into right. I'm basically center tbh.

stop calling them questions
they're not questions

Quote from: Desty on December 25, 2015, 01:04:56 PM

Quote from: Prime Megaten on December 25, 2015, 12:49:04 PM

Quote from: Desty on December 25, 2015, 12:44:43 PM

Question 27 doesn't make sense. Why should convicts not be allowed to vote?

Look up felony disenfranchisement.

No, I already know that it's a tradition. I'm asking what sense it makes to worsen the living conditions of people who have committed crimes.

I'm not a fan of punishment, unless it can be done without affecting a person's life.

It's not exactly "tradition", it's a form of voter restriction.

The only thing I can come up with is that people who have spent 10+ years in prison are going to be largely ignorant to the issues of today, thus opening another market for voter manipulation. Even then, that's shaky at best.

I still think it's a tradition
but the fact that you wrote that it's a voter restriction, which is what it literally is, gives me the feeling that you want to convey another message. The logical thing is to assume that you want to emphasize the importance of this rule, but then with your explanation you even remark at how it's "shaky at best". The second thing to assume is that you want clear hard facts, and no in-betweens. Even though I may think that it's classified as a tradition, by definition, it's a voter restriction.

If it's the second thing, then I'll leave it at that, but if there's something you want me to know that I've not understood, then please do explain. The reason for my confusion is because then in the second paragraph, you purposefully give me a shady explanation.

I refuse to believe those results.