BF2S Forums Test if you are a liberal or conservative

32 baby, rock on conservatives!!

15

22,but im from the UK, be interesting if there was on for Britain.

I scored a 14

I scored a 32.  [Con] for life

zomg i kissed chelsey clinton on the cheek when i was 11!!!!!

WTF, did some 16 years old made that "test"?

"21. As a society, we should spend more money trying to find a cure for AIDS than for cancer and heart disease because AIDS threatens younger people."

edit: got 9

Last edited by Vartan (2006-09-26 12:11:00)

19

Well, as far as I can tell, the test TRIES really hard to find the "breakingpoints" between the liberals and the conservatives, and put these into questions. Ansering one way will give you one point, answering another will not. Everytime you get a "point" you're one step more conservative.

However, as has previously been pointed out, a SHITLOAD of these questions are hitting the conservative EXTREMES, whereas fewer of them are hitting the liberal extremes !

Also a lot of the questions are very poorly chosen. For instance the one about abortion... While not everyone agrees that abortion should be legal, I HIGHLY doubt that anyone at ALL (except perhaps the pennyless young would-be mother) would want abortion to be part of an HMO ?!?!? And the AIDS vs. Cancer/heart problems ? Has anyone ever NOTICED the AMOUNT of people who have AIDS vs. the amount who has cancer or heart disease ? Howabout infant diabetes ? I mean, that's a disease for the "young", after all, you dont get AIDS untill you turn 16, unless you were born with it... So how about more medicine for the people who aren't registered to vote ?

OMFG... This poll is BAAAD... Let me put it gently... Reagan is my favy US president. While I'm not an "extreme" conservative like him, that test STILL put me as close to ultra liberal !
And what were the priorities of each of these questions ? Is it MORE important for you to protect a womans right to choose ? Or is it MORE important to keep the liberal TV evanglists on the air ? Is gun control a bigger issue than walfare ? Is it more important to have a sales tax than an income tax ?

You can't just weigh up each item as "+1", and move on ! I mean that would be like building a wall, and deciding for each brick if you should put it there or not ! You wouldn't even get a wall with holes, you'd get a collapsed pile of bricks !

Last edited by Twist (2006-09-28 04:29:34)

5

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Twist wrote:

...after all, you dont get AIDS untill you turn 16, unless you were born with it...

I'd contest your line of reasoning there, but I do agree that the poll is terrible, even for the time it was written.

Ok I'll admit I was putting HIV and AIDS in the same category. But truth be told, you DONT get HIV or AIDS untill you "adult" life begins (through drugs or sex being the +95% of the causes in western hemisphere), not if you're an educated american at least. When it comes right down to it, HIV is NOT a very virulent disease, you dont get it from sharing a cup of tea, kissing your cousin, or sharing a meal. In fact, it's even not that likely you'll get it from accidentally scrathing your skin against an old needle used by a guy with HIV/AIDS, or even a blood transfusion (ok, it HAPPENS, but it's not very likely to happen, the last 5% has to come from SOMEWHERE, right ?)

Yep, I was probably hasty, but that does NOT invalidate the points that:
1) Old people get AIDS too !
2) Young people get cancer and heart disease too !
3) HIV/AIDS is a "cheaper" disease HMO wise than cancer and heart disease, because there are so many more poeple with cancer than with HIV.
4) Having ONE disease doesn't mean you wont get the other ! And looking at the current mortality rates for heart disease, I'd probably take HIV for a longer, healthier lifespan. Paried up against Cancer... Shit... That's a tossup. I guess the type of cancer would be the deciding factor. A lot of that shit is curable after all.

5) ABOVE ALL ELSE: That poll is SICK... It's so twisted you would get ropes if you printed it on paper !

28
meh...not bad

Twist wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Twist wrote:

...after all, you dont get AIDS untill you turn 16, unless you were born with it...

I'd contest your line of reasoning there, but I do agree that the poll is terrible, even for the time it was written.

Ok I'll admit I was putting HIV and AIDS in the same category. But truth be told, you DONT get HIV or AIDS untill you "adult" life begins (through drugs or sex being the +95% of the causes in western hemisphere), not if you're an educated american at least. When it comes right down to it, HIV is NOT a very virulent disease, you dont get it from sharing a cup of tea, kissing your cousin, or sharing a meal. In fact, it's even not that likely you'll get it from accidentally scrathing your skin against an old needle used by a guy with HIV/AIDS, or even a blood transfusion (ok, it HAPPENS, but it's not very likely to happen, the last 5% has to come from SOMEWHERE, right ?)

Yep, I was probably hasty, but that does NOT invalidate the points that:
1) Old people get AIDS too !
2) Young people get cancer and heart disease too !
3) HIV/AIDS is a "cheaper" disease HMO wise than cancer and heart disease, because there are so many more poeple with cancer than with HIV.
4) Having ONE disease doesn't mean you wont get the other ! And looking at the current mortality rates for heart disease, I'd probably take HIV for a longer, healthier lifespan. Paried up against Cancer... Shit... That's a tossup. I guess the type of cancer would be the deciding factor. A lot of that shit is curable after all.

5) ABOVE ALL ELSE: That poll is SICK... It's so twisted you would get ropes if you printed it on paper !

Unfortunately, people can get AIDS before their "sex life" begins. Therefore, that particular point is still invalid. However, it is fortunate that you did allow for the possibility later in this post, rather than dismissing it outright.