Political quiz

[Imran Siddiqui]

George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole are liberal Republicans?

Or you can perhaps admit you don't actually know me at all.

[Dinner]

I side with Democrats on most political issues.

Parties you side with...

85%
Democrats

on social, environmental, healthcare, economic, and domestic policy issues. Click here to see why

81%
Green Party

on environmental, social, foreign policy, healthcare, and domestic policy issues. Click here to see why

44%
Libertarians

on social and foreign policy issues. Click here to see why

30%
Socialist

on environmental and foreign policy issues. Click here to see why

23%
Republicans

on immigration issues. Click here to see why


Map these
Parties you side with by issue...

Most important to me
2014 Ballot Propositions

I side with Green Party on most 2014 ballot issues. Click here to see why

More important to me
the Environment

I side with Green Party on most environmental issues. Click here to see why

More important to me
Healthcare

I side with Democrats on most healthcare issues. Click here to see why

More important to me
the Economy

I side with Democrats on most economic issues. Click here to see why

Somewhat important to me
Social

I side with Democrats on most social issues. Click here to see why

Somewhat important to me
Foreign Policy

I side with Libertarians on most foreign policy issues. Click here to see why

Somewhat important to me
Domestic Policy

I side with Democrats and Green Party on most domestic policy issues. Click here to see why

Somewhat important to me
Education

You do not side with any candidates on education issues. Click here to see why

Somewhat important to me
Immigration

I side with Republicans on most immigration issues. Click here to see why

[kentonio]

Anyways, it may help if you posted your results, ken.

My pleasure. The UK ones are interesting to me given that I've only ever voted conservative. It probably does reflect my recent annoyance with the direction the Tories have been moving a bit, although to be fair some of the questions lack nuance. My Conservative rating was also 67% incidentally, but it got pushed off by that rather random Plaid Cymru result.

[C0ckney]

The DWP couldn't find their ass with both hands. I come from an underprivileged area that was full of perfectly capable people who simply decided it was easier to sit on the dole than it was to work. They would never have flagged as 'fraudulent' because it used to be incredibly easy to blag your way through the bi-weekly job center appointment and to convince a bored adviser (who didn't really care anyway) that you were actively seeking a job. It's been tightened up in recent years, and recently there have been reports of job centers deliberately trying to sanction people (which is despicable) but the idea that fraud was never a real problem is simply wrong.

i prefer statistics to anecdotes. here's another: fewer than 5,000 people have been unemployed (that is claiming unemployment benefits) for more than five years. under any social insurance system, there will be people who take advantage, but their numbers are very small.

but let's look at the wider issue. the value of benefits has gone down in relation to the wages in the last 40 years.



if benefits had kept pace with earnings, JSA today would be worth about £120 per week. so the value of social security benefits has gone down. when i say value, i mean both the money value and the perceived value; so that working people often see the unemployed as lazy and feckless. the reality of course is very different. certain sections of the media and politicians have sought to create this cleavage between the employed and unemployed, and sadly, many have fallen for it.

at the same time, workers' rights and other protections have been eroded. the growth of zero hours contracts, and employed jobs turning into 'self-employed' ones are prime examples of this. the recent changes unfair dismissal legislation and the increased costs for taking employers to employment tribunals make it harder for workers to stand up for their rights. mass unemployement and underemployment and the pressure on wages these create, further weaken the worker's position.

When you're talking about people who don't engage with politics and don't care about politics, it doesn't need to be that convincing an act to work.

that's true. however, i do wonder how many are really taken in by that act, and how many see through it and vote for UKIP anyway. it's hard to know.

Of course the major parties are deeply committed to it, it's hugely beneficial to our trade and way of life. If people actually knew what pulling out of the EU would entail, it'd get less votes than the BNP do.

.....

Yes exactly. When it comes to votes about further integration it's despicably undemocratic, but a vote on actually pulling out is a huge problem for the politicians. They've spent so many years (since Heath in fact) blatantly lying to the public about Europe, and then using Europe as a convenient scapegoat any time it suited, that a straight up vote would definitely now result in a 'Leave' result. Except the politicians know that leaving would result in our economy self destructing, and who the hell wants that to happen on their watch?

rather than address your bald assertions about the effects of EU withdrawal directly, i will look at the political aspects. we both agree that the political class don't want to give the people a say on the EU because the people are likely to vote the 'wrong' way. this has been the general pattern, and not just in the UK but throughout europe. when the EU was a minor issue for most voters, the political class could get away with this. however, since the crisis the EU, and its policies have become far more important to citizens and they are voting increasingly for parties who advocate withdrawal from or fundamental changes to the EU. this is certainly a factor behind the growth of parties on the far-right and far-left, as well as certain alternative movements (the 5 star movement in italy is a good example of this).

You would say that of course. Your version of the type of democracy you want is very different to mine. I'd call yours far less accountable and far more centralised.

well, my ideal world would have no states, no borders and no private property, with direct democratic control of every aspect of our lives; so no centralisation at all and complete accountability. however, i accept that that is very unlikely to happen, and there are many things that could be done within the context of the existing system to make it more democratic. one of the principal ones is proportional representation, so that every vote counts and people vote for the political programme that most closely matches their own views, rather than voting to keep the reds/blues out or not bothering because they know their vote won't count in their area.

Very true. My fear is that it becomes like America, where you only get elected if you have money backing you.

the UK is almost there, and with the decline of organised labour, the increasing insecurity of workers' positions, the apathy and the lack of political awareness and engagement among the working classes, things are unlikely to improve any time soon.

[kentonio]

i prefer statistics to anecdotes. here's another: fewer than 5,000 people have been unemployed (that is claiming unemployment benefits) for more than five years. under any social insurance system, there will be people who take advantage, but their numbers are very small.

I prefer statistics to anecdotes too, but due to the nature of the problem there aren't any accurate statistics. Re those 5000 people you talk about btw, how recent are those figures?

but let's look at the wider issue. the value of benefits has gone down in relation to the wages in the last 40 years.



if benefits had kept pace with earnings, JSA today would be worth about £120 per week. so the value of social security benefits has gone down. when i say value, i mean both the money value and the perceived value; so that working people often see the unemployed as lazy and feckless. the reality of course is very different. certain sections of the media and politicians have sought to create this cleavage between the employed and unemployed, and sadly, many have fallen for it.

True, but that doesn't mean that it was an illusionary problem. Benefits did not just include JSA, you're forgetting about housing benefit. A lot of people (****, I know a bunch of them) decided that it was easier to have their flat paid for and some beer money provided than it was to work. It's a stupid decision that most realized later was idiotic once they'd had a job and seen the difference in earnings, but it certainly happened an alarming amount. You can call it anecdotal all you like, but when I've known probably a dozen people who spent several years unemployed by choice, then either my home town is wildly unrepresentative of the country (possible, it is a **** hole), or the statistics are not telling the whole story.

at the same time, workers' rights and other protections have been eroded. the growth of zero hours contracts, and employed jobs turning into 'self-employed' ones are prime examples of this. the recent changes unfair dismissal legislation and the increased costs for taking employers to employment tribunals make it harder for workers to stand up for their rights. mass unemployement and underemployment and the pressure on wages these create, further weaken the worker's position.

Who's arguing with you? Zero hour contracts in particular are an absolute blight. I was shocked the other day to hear the post office have started using them too.

that's true. however, i do wonder how many are really taken in by that act, and how many see through it and vote for UKIP anyway. it's hard to know.

It's almost impossible to overstate how dim people can be when it comes to politics.

rather than address your bald assertions about the effects of EU withdrawal directly, i will look at the political aspects. we both agree that the political class don't want to give the people a say on the EU because the people are likely to vote the 'wrong' way. this has been the general pattern, and not just in the UK but throughout europe. when the EU was a minor issue for most voters, the political class could get away with this. however, since the crisis the EU, and its policies have become far more important to citizens and they are voting increasingly for parties who advocate withdrawal from or fundamental changes to the EU. this is certainly a factor behind the growth of parties on the far-right and far-left, as well as certain alternative movements (the 5 star movement in italy is a good example of this).

Yes of course, its a Catch 22 situation of their own making. I have no sympathy for the major parties for causing this, but equally I can't see a way out of it that isn't going to take decades of re-educating the public on what EU membership actually means. Of course in the meantime as you rightly say it means a rise in the extremist parties.

well, my ideal world would have no states, no borders and no private property, with direct democratic control of every aspect of our lives; so no centralisation at all and complete accountability. however, i accept that that is very unlikely to happen, and there are many things that could be done within the context of the existing system to make it more democratic. one of the principal ones is proportional representation, so that every vote counts and people vote for the political programme that most closely matches their own views, rather than voting to keep the reds/blues out or not bothering because they know their vote won't count in their area.

Yeah, you want to move away from parliamentary democracy. That's fair enough, I just don't. I'd hate us to end up with a system that entrenches the political parties even more deeply into the process and becomes more presidential.

[Sava]

If Republicans were like Cameron - pro gay marriage, pro environment, pro universal healthcare - I may never have left the party. Well, until I became a Christian and went pretty left. He harkens back to a more sane right winger - like the US used to have.

Didn't he recently give a public speech where he stated Britain needs to start spreading Christianity? ... yeah, he's all "Britain is a Christian country!"

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-27099700

Just like the psychos in this country.

The guy is a fricken looney toon.

[Sava]

Modern Republicans like George H.W. Bush or Bob Dole

/facepalm

Neither of those men are "modern".

Neither of those men are "modern Republicans".

It's been almost 20 years since Dole ran for President. And even then, they needed to cart him around and prop him up for public appearances.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Didn't he recently give a public speech where he stated Britain needs to start spreading Christianity? ... yeah, he's all "Britain is a Christian country!"

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-27099700

You realize the Anglican Church is the official state church of the United Kingdom, right?

Neither of those men are "modern".

Neither of those men are "modern Republicans".

It's been almost 20 years since Dole ran for President. And even then, they needed to cart him around and prop him up for public appearances.

So.... modern is.. what? The last year for you?

[Sava]

post-9-11 = modern... at minimum

[Sava]

You realize the Anglican Church is the official state church of the United Kingdom, right?

Maybe tell Cameron that. Not me.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Maybe tell Cameron that. Not me.

Anglican = Christian... so... nothing PM Cameron said was wrong... what's your point?

[Sava]

Anglican = Christian

False.

The Anglican church is the bastard offspring of Catholicism (which isn't Christianity... and hasn't been since they split from Christianity).

[kentonio]

You realize the Anglican Church is the official state church of the United Kingdom, right?

That doesn't change the fact we're mostly a bunch of godless heathens over here.

[Imran Siddiqui]

False.

The Anglican church is the bastard offspring of Catholicism (which isn't Christianity... and hasn't been since they split from Christianity).

Wrong.

[Imran Siddiqui]

That doesn't change the fact we're mostly a bunch of godless heathens over here.

Which is why I think the speech was important. Why should the UK be ashamed of its Christian past?