Take quiz, post results.
>consider myself a conservative
>every time I take a political test this happens
To be fair, you're siding with the two Democrats on environmental, healthcare and social issues, which, in America, just means you're against sick poor people being burned as fuel for fracking operations.
I don't know what to say about domestic, immigration and electoral though. I mean, for fuck's sake, how can you think someone should be able to vote without properly identifying themselves?
>being able to vote without properly identifying themselves
It's not about people not being able to produce identification, it's mainly that identification can cost an amount which most poor, law-abiding people cannot afford. Furthermore, our voter registration system is fucking retarded.
Despite his father's libertarian views and strong support for individual rights, the novelist Ayn Rand was not the inspiration for his first name. Growing up, he went by "Randy", but his wife shortened it to "Rand."
Just because you want something to be true doesn't mean that it is.
>It's not about people not being able to produce identification, it's mainly that identification can cost an amount which most poor, law-abiding people cannot afford.
That just means identification should cost less, not that you should be able to vote without one.
because conservatives in the US aren't the same thing as conservatives in Western Europe - they wouldn't be taken seriously in any country with somewhat conscious citizens
same thing with Eastern Europe desu, if I were British I'd probably be considered conservative but here I'm le leftist boogeyman for not supporting neither XIXth century capitalism with no regulations nor national socialism
That's generally what most people believe, but more conservative-minded people don't seem to be concerned with it and the Republic Party is actively against reform because the poor usually vote Democrat.
In my state, we've only had two instances of it in over 40 years of voting. It might be "an affront to democracy," but it's not such a large epidemic that legislature should be considered for it.
The only reason that it exists at the moment is because both parties have an active interest in voter suppression.
How are these alternative options counted? Are they just equal to yes/no? Because in that case I'd obviously say no. Companies shouldn't be required to pay for that. In that case no one would hire the risk group. The only option is the government paying for it.
Every country in Europe has paid maternity leave, you plum.
Shilary is the only one worse than Bernie.
>What do I win?
That'd ruin the surprise. I left your prize in the back of your oven.
>>Should the federal government allow states to fly the confederate flag?
I've never understood the argument for being pro on this issue
>It's an important part of my states history
>Muh ancestors fought underneath flag
It was the battle flag of the losing side in a civil war that still remains the most devastating war to American lives. Your ancestors were literally traitors to the country you live in.
You are in the United States, why should flying the Confederate flag be allowed? Especially for flying over Government buildings.
>I've never understood the argument for being pro on this issue
The argument is that states should be able to fly any flag they want, considering it's not called the Subordinated States of America.
Unlike Australia, America isn't a country where the government just bans everything it doesn't like.
I just googled him
>Supports gay rights
>Thinks you need to take action against global warming
>Against nuclear power
>Supports banning guns for people that are on the no-fly list
How the fuck did I get a 88% match with this guy?
>Every country in Europe has paid maternity leave, you plum.
How does that have anything to do with my post, aside from the subject of paid leave?
Same work, but with the exceptions of education, experience and tenure? What a fucking loaded question.
>Companies shouldn't be required to pay for that. In that case no one would hire the risk group. The only option is the government paying for it.
In every country in Europe, companies are forced to pay women who have gotten pregnant for the period of their maternity leave. Most of the women I know still seem to have found jobs, even though they're in the "risk group."
Now please go and suffer from SAD somewhere else.
They're united by a constitution, Amendment 1 of which guarantees freedom of expression, and Amendment 10 of which precludes the federal government from interfering with matters of the states, unless permitted elsewhere. Tell me where in the constitution is says the feds can tell the states which flags they're allowed to fly.
>inb4 you respond with an argument based in emotion, rather than the law
>In every country in Europe, companies are forced to pay women who have gotten pregnant for the period of their maternity leave.
In the Finnish law it's not required for the employer to pay maternity leave. The government pays mothers "mother welfare" in any case.
>>inb4 you respond with an argument based in emotion, rather than the law
Appeal to tradition
Law isn't infallible or eternal
The current Laws protect it but that doesn't mean they should
Daily reminder to throw all leftists out of office and put them on trial for treason.
>Appeal to tradition
It's not an appeal to tradition, it's the law. Your initial comment was that you can't see any argument in favour of states being allowed to fly the flag, and I have offered one, which is that it is the existing law. They literally have every right to.
Agreed. By the way, I was never on the pro-Israel side of the argument, but Muslims' latest shenanigans have convinced me that, so long as Israel continues not respecting Hajji's human rights, I can make my peace with them temporarily. Congratulations.
How do I see the individual candidates answers?
>It's not an appeal to tradition, it's the law.
Is law an objective truth? Is it infallible?
This is literal non-issue by the way my initial post maybe gave the impression that I'm passionate about it
I'm not, but you clearly are
I just don't agree that you should be able to the fly the flag of the enemy or support treason but you clearly do
Who the fug is mike huckabee?
America doesn't have any conservative parties, it has liberal party A and liberal party B
what the fug is this shit, I thought I was a moderate
>Is law an objective truth?
It's an objective fact, at least in this instance.
>I just don't agree that you should be able to the fly the flag of the enemy or support treason but you clearly do
Not necessarily, but I believe in liberty, and if a particular populace wishes to exercise their right to fly a flag, I can't quarrel justly with that.
>fly the flag of the enemy
There are plenty of people in the North of Ireland who do exactly that, and I wholeheartedly support their right and decision to.
>This is literal non-issue by the way my initial post maybe gave the impression that I'm passionate about it
>I'm not, but you clearly are
I get it, cool kid.
Scorpion and the frog, Ruslan.
I am not a commie, I swear, look it says I side with democrat party the most
USA is literally a country founded on an act of treason, if they can fly one rebel flag they should be able to fly another. You don't see Canadians getting butthurt about US flags despite that they are Canada's biggest enemy
I'm still going to pretend I support Trump.
Couldn't give less of a shit about who becomes the next puppet.
I fucked up didn't I?
We aren't fucking stupid, its just culturally the US is very right-wing and the left is constantly trying to shift that away from the right so they can start acting like retarded European leftists.
I think us being this far right is a virtue.
Quiz pretty much says I'm an indecisive, on the fence faggot
I side with Bernie Sanders on most 2016 Presidential Election issues
Candidates you side with...
Bernie Sanders Democratic
on environmental, economic, social, immigration, foreign policy, education, and science issues.
Hillary Clinton Democratic
on economic, environmental, social, healthcare, foreign policy, immigration, and science issues.
Martin O'Malley Democratic
on social, immigration, healthcare, and science issues.
Donald Trump Republican
on economic issues.
Jeb Bush Republican
how dumb you have to be to vote for this guy? DUDE FREE STUFF AND NIGGER LIFE MATTERS
I support massive increases in welfare and killing all non-US Americans we can get our hands on. Is that so hard for politicians to get behind?
in finland we believe in the concept that if you pay off the dangerous undermass of society then they won't commit crime because they're inherently lazy and will do nothing to strive past basic necessities
this doesn't apply to paying off organized crime because crime bosses are greedy way past their needs
What the fuck.
I'm for banning immigration, don't restrict guns just do background checks, for the death penalty etc yet I'm Hillary?
first-past-the-post is shit.
My local MP is the speaker of the house of commons and I voted for him in the general elections because he's a top lad, so my vote didn't count towards the general election.
I hate America but got this. I'm authentically far right
We're not "far right", we're kosher conservative. A mix of neoliberalism, interventionism and christianity
I didn't get more than 77% on anyone (Sanders, Trump and Cruz all ~77%). I chose science healthcare and immigration as most important.
Bernie would be higher but he is too open borders.
>Rand Paul 91%
>Ted Cruz 84%
>Ben Carson 83%
>Mike Huckabee 78%
>Marco Rubio 77%
>Carly Fiorina 75%
>Jeb Bush 73%
>Donald Trump 69%
>Rick Santorum 67%
>John Kasich 65%
>Bernie Sanders 65%
>Chris Christie 62%
>Hillary Clinton 59%
>Jim Webb 44%
>Martin O'Malley 41%
>Moderate centrist libertarian
>Constitution Party 83%
>Green Party 65%
How'd I do lads?
The last time I took it, I matched with some Jim Webb guy.
>all this people not wanting to vote for based Rand
>small government and equality
Mark Zuckemberg FTW
Fuck the Socialists and Multiculturalist cooks