so i went to that site (http://www.barackobamatest.com) and answered 48 questions

my results: I disagreed with Barack Obama 100% of the time

I'm a little surprised it was THAT different (meaning, I didn't think he was THAT bad)

guess I know who I'm voting for (if my vote gets counted...military absentee)

10/7/2008 2:50:49 AM

you're an idiot or you're a mccain supporter

or both

10/7/2008 3:06:54 AM

How did they come up with the percentages here?

13. If you knew you had a step brother who was living in a slum and barely surviving on $300 a year,
would you help them financially? 
 
			All Americans 
 		Yes 	83.8% 
Obama Position - No 	6.5% 

10/7/2008 3:45:26 AM

Because that test wasn't bias at all or anything.

10/7/2008 4:15:22 AM

Nice push poll.

10/7/2008 4:40:22 AM

Quote :

"Because that test wasn't bias at all or anything."

Um, the correct word would be "biased."

10/7/2008 4:55:32 AM

I was pretty curious about the step-brother in a slum question?

10/7/2008 8:48:02 AM

They're referring to the fact that he has largely seperated himself from his half-brother still living in Africa. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/22/bts.obama.brother/

That doesn't legitimize this poll, but that is where the story comes from.

10/7/2008 9:04:16 AM

I love a good push poll.

10/7/2008 9:05:43 AM

This test cracked me up. That was pretty funny.

10/7/2008 9:12:53 AM

Ive never seen a more biased and loaded test instrument in my entire life.

10/7/2008 9:27:16 AM

half brothers are entirely different from step brothers. step implies that they married into your family and you may have spent some time with them, whereas with his half brother he has spent no time with them, and $300 a year is different depending on where you live. question is blatantly biased.

Quote :

"4. Some say Barack Obama’s plans to implement sweeping environmental regulations will raise the cost of gas, groceries, heating and air conditioning. Do you favor or oppose Obama’s environmental plans?"

phrasing questions in the manner they did above is directly deceitful and slanted. no one could take this test seriously

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 9:46 AM. Reason : seriously ]

10/7/2008 9:43:45 AM

http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50193144/50193144se44?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=push+poll&first=1&max_to_show=10&hilite=50193144se44

10/7/2008 9:46:43 AM

The questions were certianly loaded.

I disagreed with Obama on 43 of 48 questions.

10/7/2008 9:51:39 AM

you didn't agree or disagree to anything

10/7/2008 9:52:12 AM

I agreed with obama 54% of the time even with the loaded questions.

this test is completely trig palined

10/7/2008 9:59:17 AM

this test is completely trig palined

10/7/2008 10:01:54 AM

Quote :

"Some say Barack Obama’s plans to implement sweeping environmental regulations will raise the cost of gas, groceries, heating and air conditioning. Do you favor or oppose Obama’s environmental plans?"

Well if you put it that way!

Quote :

"1. Should a doctor give medical care to a fetus that survives an abortion, or should medical care not be given? "

what?

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 10:29 AM. Reason : ,]

10/7/2008 10:23:19 AM

^Born Alive Infant Protection Act

10/7/2008 10:39:17 AM

Quote :

"You DISAGREED with the Barack Obama position on 24 of the 48 test questions. This means you disagree with the Obama position 50% of the time. I hope this will help you make an informed decision on Election Day!"

hahaha

10/7/2008 10:42:03 AM

This poll was more loaded than my favorite potatoe...

38/48

10/7/2008 10:44:28 AM

^^^ It was more of a what like, how often does that happen 0.5% of the time what?

10/7/2008 10:51:49 AM

I honestly felt like many of the questions were loaded in the opposite direction, such as the one defining when something is "human" or "alive," but then gives you only three options or "I don't know." I put "I don't know" because considering the other options given, that was the best fit.

None of them fit my opinion. They were "at conception," "once the baby can survive on it's own" and "once the baby is born." Well, there's a WHOLE HELL OF A LOT OF TIME between when the baby is conceived and when it is able to survive on it's own. Not to mention that time is different for every single baby. I think that once it's got a highly developed brain and it is "conscious" then it can be considered to be something that can't be aborted. Before it's got much of a brain and before it's conscious I don't consider it particularly cruel to euthanize it.

However, I do think that there should be a good reason for killing it. It shouldn't just be "I don't like for my boyfriend to wear condoms so whenever I get pregnant we just have an abortion." The question that the poll posed on this matter didn't offer anywhere near what I would consider to be enough options either.

The question about the step brother was ridiculous because it was so vague. Oh, and it was "loaded" in Obama's favor if you ask me. If the step brother is a crackhead and refuses treatment then NO I'm not going to give him my hard earned money so he can smoke crack with it. I answered "NO" and of course it said that I was an Obama supporter. To me, not giving that guy my money is a conservative view, not a liberal one. What hard working person makes $300 a year? Seriously? Even somebody on welfare makes more money than that, so the question was total bullshit.

Now, the ones on firearms were actually quite realistic. He does support massive price increases on ammunition so that nobody can be able to afford to own much of it. He supports massive restrictions on all handguns and anything that somebody tells him is an "assault weapon." It's clear that he has no understanding of what a real assault weapon is though.


My mother just LOVES that idea too, because she believes that nobody should be allowed to own guns. She truly believes that if no law abiding citizens had guns then the criminals would stop carrying them. It's because she thinks of things as if they were a fairytale land where everyone wants peace and they only use guns because they think other people have them. This is because her mind can't conceive of the fact that criminals have no interest in doing things with the least amount of violence and threat possible. The fact is, they do want to have a gun and at the same time they don't want you to have a gun because then you are pretty much powerless and at their mercy. The way she thinks of it is like this:

"If I were a criminal and I were going to rob somebody that didn't have a gun, then I wouldn't take a gun because I don't want to hurt anybody and I wont need the gun if they don't have a gun."

The error in this logic is incredibly apparent when you consider that criminals are able to do what they do through intimidation and power. She can't grasp the idea that violent criminals don't think like that at all. They want to be heavily armed and they want their victim to be helpless. They don't want to be on a level playing field with their victim, nor do they want to "get things done without having to resort to violence." Violent thugs don't go around thinking about how they could rob somebody without having to use a gun or threaten violence. They want to wield so much firepower or other weaponry that the person must comply with their wishes. Hell, I don't even see how a thug could rob somebody if they didn't bring a gun unless they just came in a massive group. Her logic is beyond ridiculous. But at the same time, if somebody walked up to her and just said "give me all of your money" she'd do it. She always told me to do whatever they wanted. I'd say something jokingly like, "if a robber comes in I'll just...." and she'll interrupt me and say "you'll just give them exactly what they want."

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 11:11 AM. Reason : ]

10/7/2008 10:55:42 AM

ok, so the test questions aren't objectively stated. however, if you agree, you agree, if you don't you don't.

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 11:06 AM. Reason : .]

10/7/2008 11:06:15 AM

Barack Obama eats babies. Do you like eating babies?

10/7/2008 11:08:50 AM

I don't support Obama, but this test reaks of bias anyway. Weasel words all over the place.

"Some say Cary has more crime than Raleigh" is a true statement; there probably are some people who say this. It doesn't give any validity to the statement, though.

10/7/2008 11:09:14 AM

Yep, but it goes both ways. It's simply a shitty test in general, not to mention that a lot of the statistics don't add up at all. Not like in the example that OEP mentioned, where it seems obvious that the lost percentage points simply went to people who made no selection. Some questions gave a percentage to the "no response" response while others questions didn't show it. For whatever reason OEP didn't consider that. It really appeared that the code for the results page was written poorly overall. The questions were worded differently on that page than on the test page and other things were strange too, such as some questions listing the percentage of people who gave "no response" while others didn't list it.

But what I'm talking about when it comes to the statistics are the questions where the percentages for each choice add up to well over 100%.

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 11:18 AM. Reason : ]

10/7/2008 11:13:26 AM

that website was created by PM Consulting Corp which supports the Republican party, it's bias is horribly obvious to anyone who looks at it.

10/7/2008 11:22:52 AM

wawawawa.

"These questions are phrased in ways that make my opinions look bad. I like to phrase my opinions in ways to make them look good."

I don't care how you phrase it. It's the same shit.

10/7/2008 11:26:14 AM

^agreed

Quote :

"ok, so the test questions aren't objectively stated. however, if you agree, you agree, if you don't you don't. "

Yeah I disagreed on 45/48 questions. I don't see changing the "wording" much making a huge difference, lol.

I want a McCain test, dammit!

10/7/2008 11:31:28 AM

Quote :

"1. Should a doctor give medical care to a fetus that survives an abortion, or should medical care not be given? "

how could anyone not support giving medical care

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 11:32 AM. Reason : ]

10/7/2008 11:32:25 AM

^because many people (LIKE OBAMA) have no soul

10/7/2008 11:39:31 AM

Because they aren't alive.

How do you give medical care to something that doesn't have a brain?

10/7/2008 11:54:49 AM

I can't even answer those questions.

That's the trouble with being a radical.

10/7/2008 12:09:12 PM

If lafta is voting for Obama....that should tell you something.

I am voting McCain if he is.

10/7/2008 12:10:00 PM

Ahahaha fucking push polls

10/7/2008 12:11:42 PM

Quote :

"6. In general, what should be more important to Americans in their daily life: Moral values or material concerns? Moral values Material concerns "

If you really were 100% against Obama, then you were obviously picking the wrong answers purposefully.

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 12:24 PM. Reason : this test is stupid]

10/7/2008 12:18:44 PM

Quote :

"6. How much should someone who wins $1 million dollars in the lottery pay in federal income? "

Ahahaha. This question was right after the same question- asked without mention of lottery winnings. I think it's designed to catch people who don't think they'll earn 1+ million/year but think they have a realistic chance to win the lottery. This "test" is hilarious. Thanks for posting.


What's really clever of them is that on questions where people are more likely to agree with Obama on that particular issue, they give enough choices that most people will still "disagree" with him even if they chose an option that's very similar to his position. I can't decide if this is primarily a push poll to sew FUD or a push poll that serves to sell the guy's book. Obviously it's a combination of the two, I'm just not sure if he's in it for book sales first and foremost and politics second or the other way around. Anyways, people should archive stuff like this (from both sides when you find it) since these kinds of tactics are often left out of history books. It's a side to our political system I think people should learn about earlier on so maybe some day we'll have a generation equipped to recognize it more often than not.

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 12:41 PM. Reason : ]

10/7/2008 12:26:32 PM

Quote :

"You DISAGREED with the Barack Obama position on 36 of the 48 test questions. This means you disagree with the Obama position 75% of the time."

10/7/2008 1:04:46 PM

haha holy shit that poll is hideously funny. though it is very sad that a few of you actually take this thing seriously... or at least are acting like you do in an attempt to give it some sort of credit to others.

here's a good one:

george bush kills people. do you like to kill people?

see how that works? would you take the above question seriously? i wouldn't, but the same logic from this push poll applies.

10/7/2008 1:26:32 PM

I got a 60%


Then i looked at the author page.




hahaha

10/7/2008 2:19:06 PM

I got to the 4th question before I vomited all over my keyboard. This "test" was

10/7/2008 4:40:23 PM

13. If you knew Barack Obama had fathered a black baby in wedlock, would you still support him?

All Americans
Yes 83.8%
Obama Position - No 6.5%

10/7/2008 4:55:11 PM

Quote :

"you disagree with the Obama position 73% of the time."

10/7/2008 8:03:42 PM

hilarity. didnt read thread (prob will later), but gotta love...

obama's environmental plan might raise the price of food, gas, all other needs and cause your wife to not fuck you for 10 years. do you support his environmental plans?

it doesnt even tell you what the fuck they are, just a bunch of speculation about their outcomes.

10/7/2008 8:29:16 PM

I disagree with him 90% of the time.*

I can tell that test is a little biased, though I knew I didn't agree with Obama on many issues.


* According to a test on a random website on the internet with as much validity as a quiz on a popular teenage-populated forum.

[Edited on October 7, 2008 at 11:18 PM. Reason : ]

10/7/2008 11:18:13 PM

Quote :

"Now, the ones on firearms were actually quite realistic. He does support massive price increases on ammunition so that nobody can be able to afford to own much of it. He supports massive restrictions on all handguns and anything that somebody tells him is an "assault weapon." It's clear that he has no understanding of what a real assault weapon is though. My mother just LOVES that idea too, because she believes that nobody should be allowed to own guns. She truly believes that if no law abiding citizens had guns then the criminals would stop carrying them. It's because she thinks of things as if they were a fairytale land where everyone wants peace and they only use guns because they think other people have them. This is because her mind can't conceive of the fact that criminals have no interest in doing things with the least amount of violence and threat possible. The fact is, they do want to have a gun and at the same time they don't want you to have a gun because then you are pretty much powerless and at their mercy. The way she thinks of it is like this: "If I were a criminal and I were going to rob somebody that didn't have a gun, then I wouldn't take a gun because I don't want to hurt anybody and I wont need the gun if they don't have a gun." The error in this logic is incredibly apparent when you consider that criminals are able to do what they do through intimidation and power. She can't grasp the idea that violent criminals don't think like that at all. They want to be heavily armed and they want their victim to be helpless. They don't want to be on a level playing field with their victim, nor do they want to "get things done without having to resort to violence." Violent thugs don't go around thinking about how they could rob somebody without having to use a gun or threaten violence. They want to wield so much firepower or other weaponry that the person must comply with their wishes. Hell, I don't even see how a thug could rob somebody if they didn't bring a gun unless they just came in a massive group. Her logic is beyond ridiculous. But at the same time, if somebody walked up to her and just said "give me all of your money" she'd do it. She always told me to do whatever they wanted. I'd say something jokingly like, "if a robber comes in I'll just...." and she'll interrupt me and say "you'll just give them exactly what they want.""

it makes me sad that a lot of people have this view

10/7/2008 11:59:44 PM

this is the most retarded poll ive seen in a while.

i imagine its real popular among trailer park dwellers. where'd you find this beauty, KDAWG(C) ?

Quote :

"Some say Barack Obama’s plans to implement sweeping environmental regulations will raise the cost of gas, groceries, heating and air conditioning. Do you favor or oppose Obama’s environmental plans? Yes No "

LOLOL

10/8/2008 6:21:27 PM

You DISAGREED with the Barack Obama position on 43 of the 48 test questions. This means you disagree with the Obama position 90% of the time.

10/8/2008 7:32:05 PM

I wonder what the questions on http://www.sarahpalintest.com or http://www.johnmccaintest.com would look like...

http://www.johnmccaintest.com
Do you want you, your children, and your children's children to be drafted so they can preemptively strike the world before they come for us?
a) Yes
b) No

Do you like to be forcibly held in cages for 7 years?
a) Yes
b) No

http://www.sarahpalintest.com
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuur?
a) Dur
b) Duur
c) Maverick

It'd be about the same.

10/8/2008 9:21:40 PM