Who are you voting for? Let this quiz help!

<A HREF="http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bljohnkerryquiz.htm" target="_new">Kerry Quiz</A>

Your score is 1 on a scale of 1 to 10. You hate John Kerry with every fiber of your being. He is the embodiment of everything you despise in a politician: a weak, liberal, flip-flopping, elitist, condescending appeaser who threatens all that is good and decent in America. Worst of all, you think he looks French.

<A HREF="http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blgeorgewbushquiz.htm" target="_new">Bush Quiz</A>

Your score is 6 on a scale of 1 to 10. You're not the biggest fan of President Bush, but you think he has done a decent job as president. You may disagree with him on a lot of issues — and some facts you'd just as soon ignore — but you're leaning toward voting for him anyway.



I didn't realize I was so hard on Kerry. ROFL.




</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA

Surprise Surprise

Bush score:
<i>Your score is 1 on a scale of 1 to 10. You hate Bush with a writhing passion. You think he is an idiot, a liar, and a warmonger who has been a miserable failure as president. Nothing would give you greater pleasure than seeing him run out of the White House, except maybe seeing him dragged away in handcuffs.</i>

I disagree with the scoring text because I chose to send Bush back to Texas, not to jail.

Kerry score:
<i>Your score is 8 on a scale of 1 to 10. John Kerry is your man. He may not be perfect in your eyes, but next to the smirking idiot who occupies the White House right now, he looks like Abraham Lincoln.</i>

Personally I could not care less, even if he looks like Bill Clinton. I expected to score 6 to 7 but then again, the options were hilarious but not very well distributed in the opinion spectrum.


Was fun to fill in these quizes. I recommend to fill them in. We could start a poll for tracking the scores?



BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

Damn, Big quit beating around the "Bush" and say what you really think...but it's really a moot point since you can't vote. Can you?...maybe your'e a US citizen and just working in th Netherlands...I don't know. {This is not a flame}

Gort, Klaatu nicto barada...Patricia Neal

It is interesting to see what other nationalities think of us...but I know on a one to one basis we'd probably get along okay. Sometimes elected officials tell voters one thing and do another...no that wouldn't happen...no really...seriously. It always feels to me that no matter what party gets elected, they get the mine and I get the shaft. Is there a two party system over there? How are officials put in office?

Gort, Klaatu nicto barada...Patricia Neal

I find everywhere is better than here...that's why no one tries to get in the states...at a rate of 4 gazillion a minnit...Phonetics should be spelled fohnetically

Gort, Klaatu nicto barada...Patricia Neal

hear hear here here...that's a fair assessment...not that you need my approval...

Gort, Klaatu nicto barada...Patricia Neal

In my case, it is only one vote, and it is my brother's. He chooses to follow my advice or not and he is a US citizen so I wouldn't worry about it too much if I were you. Maybe he has other political advisors I am not aware of

He tells me about how he lives over there so I get some inside information that is not directly available to most europeans although I suppose many US citizens have relatives abroad.

I do not feel in the least bit offended by your post (which addresses valid point) so I hope that is proof I'm not getting you wrong. Unarguably my view is more internationally oriented but it would not hurt US people if they got a bit more interested in international affairs. Living in a small country we are already forced to do so and it tends to get a better perspective on things. Better in the sense that you learn to understand the motivation and desires of other cultures and use this to your advantage. Not just to dominate the other, but to coexist peacefully and to mutual advantage wherever possible.

However useful the concept of nationality can be, for the best personal living circumstances worldwide you have to solve problems/optimize globally, not nationally. Such insight comes more naturally when you live in a smaller society than when you live in a really large one. It is also one of the fundaments of the European union project but then on a regional scale.


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

Problem with that attitude is, that these people who get elected will have direct influence over you, whether you trust them or not and whether <b>you</b> voted or not. Don't you think it's worth a small investment of your time to at least try to get the person elected that you think will be best for your personal situation, or the best person to lead your nation?

The real problem is how to get hold of trustworthy information that will allow you to make an informed decision.

BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

<i>Your score is 0 on a scale of 1 to 10. You hate Bush with a writhing passion. You think he is an idiot, a liar, and a warmonger who has been a miserable failure as president. Nothing would give you greater pleasure than seeing him run out of the White House, except maybe seeing him dragged away in handcuffs.</i>

And I was 100% truthful.

<i>Your score is 7 on a scale of 1 to 10. John Kerry is your man. He may not be perfect in your eyes, but next to the smirking idiot who occupies the White House right now, he looks like Abraham Lincoln.</i>

Yeah, I don't agree with the scoring either. I didn't answer any question that really was positive to John Kerry, just really not as negative as I was towards Bush.

--
"There's more to life than profits."
<font color=red>"Like what?"</font color=red>
"Like, you know, Slurpees and stuff."
<A HREF="http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/video/707/slurpees.mov" target="_new">South Park</A>

This is a problem I see with current presidencies and prime minister terms. We simply aren't seeing as much improvements in our countries anymore. Yes Canada advanced in issues or controversies, like gay marriage and pot legalization, but that does not change the fact we need better laws, a better economy, better tax management, but most of all, tackle the healthcare issue. When you compare or even read history books and look at presidents or prime ministers back in the 50s or around them, you see major changes instated by these people. For example, in Quebec, around the 50s, Maurice Duplessis gave electricity to almost all of Quebec, which made it finally back on the map. Before that, it was just a province with a country feel. He and the later leaders also helped found better education systems like the MEQ, the social and medical insurance were also put into place, and many other things.
The changes made a big difference in our lives, they improved them a lot because we now can get services for "free", and at least benefit from them. But nowadays, because of international issues affecting us locally, we are having people being elected USING local issues as the driving force to get them elected, to be able to deal with INTERNATIONAL issues. Think about it. Do you think Bush or Kerry will want to focus on education, healthcare and tax cuts before Iraq? Nein.
Nor do I believe much about Paul Martin's strategy, except that we're in a better position to benefit from local improvements. How true will that be, depends on the next big improvement that's SUPPOSEDLY gonna happen, a major funding in healthcare for all provinces. Will it hold true? I hope so... and soon. Otherwise we'll lose more and more faith (and create more minority governements like the current Liberal one) in leaders who will improve the whole, like those in the 20th century did.

--
<font color=blue>Ede</font color=blue>