So, I notice Pew hasn't put out a new political typology quiz yet this year, but echelon insights has their own political quiz separating people into political tribes. I am going to take the quiz and record the results here.
Question 1 of 26
For the following, please indicate whether you agree more with Option 1 or Option 2
Option 1
Abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances
Option 2
Abortion should be illegal in all or most circumstances
Strongly agree with option 1.
Option 1
It is more important to control gun ownership
Option 2
It is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns
Somewhat agree with option 2. Yeah, i'm pretty pro guns for a liberal.
Option 1
The government should deal with illegal immigration by making it easier to immigrate to the US legally
Option 2
The government should deal with illegal immigration by increasing border security and enforcement
I mean, it's basically both, isn't it? We should have a path to citizenship while having border security. As for what I care about more, well, slightly lean option 1. I don't see immigrants as a threat to the US, although I am a moderate on the issue.
Option 1
Transgender athletes should be able to play on sports teams that match their current gender identity
Option 2
Transgender athletes should only be allowed to play on sports teams that match their birth gender
I mean, it depends on what the science says. I'm open to them participating where they feel comfortable but only if they dont have a statistical advantage over the gender of their preference. I guess somewhat agree with 1.
Option 1
The government should prevent people from engaging in hate speech against certain groups in public
Option 2
People should be allowed to express unpopular opinions in public, even those that are deeply offensive to other people
Hate speech is free speech, although it really depends on the exact nature of speech. If you're talking about like throwing people in concentration camps like some extreme rightoids are doing, I could see putting more pressure on keeping a lid on THOSE opinions, but at the same time, I'm only likely to budge on the most extreme opinions there, and given how far the left would likely go with those opinions, I'd say somewhat agree with option 2. You have a right to your opinion, it's when it's inciting stuff or actively causing harm that I draw the line.
Option 1
Racism is built into our society, including into its policies and institutions
Option 2
Racism comes from individuals who hold racist views, not from our society and institutions
Again, it's both. But I'd say I strongly agree with option 1 given #2 explicitly excludes the institutional side of things.
Option 1
We need to reallocate funding from police departments to social services
Option 2
We need to fully fund the budget for police departments
I think "defund the police" is one of those things that sounds good but in practice it's just politically untenable. So lean option 2.
Option 1
There are still significant obstacles that make it harder for women to get ahead than men
Option 2
The obstacles that once made it harder for women than men to get ahead are now gone
It's both, but I believe the absolute worst obstacles are gone and what we're debating over are those things that are difficult, if not impossible to solve, like pregnancy and biological factors like that. Much of the glass ceiling, for instance, is due to that. There's also a lot of choices women make career wise that lead to the gender pay gap, but once you account for those being free choices, the gap goes from like 23 cents to like 5 cents.
I mean, I dont' deny obstacles exist, but I'd say I lean toward #2 here.
Option 1
Gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to marry legally
Option 2
Gay and lesbian couples should not be allowed to marry legally
Strongly agree on legalization.
Option 1
Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people
Option 2
Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard
After studying the issue extensively and even attempting to write a book on the subject. Strongly option 1.
Option 1
I would rather have a bigger government providing more services
Option 2
I would rather have a smaller government providing fewer services
Strongly option 1.
Option 1
The fact that some people in the U.S. are rich and others are poor is a problem that needs to be fixed
Option 2
The fact that some people in the U.S. are rich and others are poor is an acceptable part of our economic system
I don't deny that there are some legitimate reasons for having a gap between the richest and poorest citizens. You kinda need that for work incentive. No reward system means no incentives. BUT, we need to have a strong debate on what kinds of gaps are reasonable, and the current gaps just aren't at all. I'd say somewhat agree on option 1. There is nuance there, but yeah. At the very least there shouldnt be poverty or extreme wealth as we have them.
Option 1
Government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest
Option 2
Government regulation of business usually does more harm than good
Strongly agree option 1
Option 1
The federal minimum wage must be increased to $20.00 an hour
Option 2
The federal minimum wage should not be increased to $20.00 an hour
I discussed this with Mamdani recently, I mean, I could get behind $20, but I'd probably prefer a national minimum wage around $18ish instead. $15 is kinda like the bare minimum these days IMO. But yeah, I'd say somewhere between $15-20, with those 2 figures being the lower and upper limits of what I think would be acceptable. I guess Ill go with strongly option #1 then despite having some nuance ($20 is an acceptable number to me).
Option 1
We should raise taxes in order to ensure Social Security and Medicare's long-term future
Option 2
We should curb benefits in order to ensure Social Security and Medicare's long-term future
Strongly #1, tax the rich.
Option 1
It is the responsibility of the federal government to ensure everyone has health care coverage
Option 2
It is not the responsibility of the federal government to ensure everyone has health care coverage
Strongly option 1. Huge plank of my new New Deal ideas. Although I would likely go a public option over medicare for all these days (mainly due to funding concerns).
Option 1
Stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost
Option 2
Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy
Strongly agree with option 1
Option 1
We should raise taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year
Option 2
We should not raise taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year
Bruh, I'd raise taxes on people making more than $80k a year individually and $160k as a couple. Strongly agree.
Option 1
I trust experts and research to inform my opinions
Option 2
I put my faith in the wisdom of ordinary people rather than experts and intellectuals
Strongly agree on 1. Your ignorance isn't as good as an expert's knowledge. This is how we get trash opinions like anti vax crap.
Option 1
It's best for the future of our country to be active in world affairs
Option 2
We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home
In my heart, I lean toward #2, but in practice, #1. I lean toward an Obama-Biden style foreign policy so not like super insanely interventionist, but not isolationist either. Lean #1.
Option 1
Most politicians are honorable public servants trying to do the right thing for the country
Option 2
Most politicians are corrupt or just looking out for their own interests
The OVERWHELMING majority of them are just interested in their own careers and are team players with their party with no spine. I tend to only respect the ones with the most political courage, and that seems rare. So strongly #2.
Option 1
Most journalists are doing important work reporting truthfully on current events
Option 2
Most journalists are pushing their opinions in their reporting
Same with the above. Most work for employers who control their paychecks and cajole them into shaping their coverage around their employer's political preferences. Most news is actually propaganda. That doesn't mean there can't be truth to it, but it's truth from a certain point of view. Strongly #2.
Option 1
Free trade agreements have generally helped the United States
Option 2
Free trade agreements have generally hurt the United States
It's nuanced. In pure economic terms, they've helped, but that doesn't mean they haven't had negative effects on peoples' jobs and economic well being. You could argue that the net economic effect is positive, but there's A LOT of nuance there. Still, I lean #1.
Option 1
Collaborative international institutions are crucial to maintaining a free, safe, and stable world
Option 2
Collaborative international institutions limit the United States' ability to act in its own interests
Those international institutions are literally shaped in our own interests. This is what "America first"ers don't understand. It's like the Rammstein song, "we're all living in Amerika, Amerika ist wunderbar!" We basically are. Like, those institutions primarily serve the interests of wealthy western countries like the US and we have an active interest in maintaining them. Strongly #1.
Question 25 of 26
Suppose the Democratic and Republican Parties were replaced by a new set of political parties. Which of these parties would you be most likely to support?
Unsure
1) That sounds like me. I'd add UBI but basically my thing is basically pro labor, pro safety net, pro government expansion.
That said if I had to rank these, I'd go 1, 2, 4, 3, 5.
Of course i can only choose one of them so #1.
For which candidate did you vote in the 2024 presidential election?
Prefer not to say
I guess with pew not doing political typology it's something. But still, I dont like being called an "electability" democrat since most of those guys are establishment AF and always sell out to the center whereas I consider myself more establishment left. Still, it did focus primarily on the social spectrum with that opinion and I am willing to make some sacrifices on social issues for the sake of electability. The far left might not like it but I'm not going with the 20% on an 20/80 issue, and I actually am fairly moderate and nuanced on social issues due to my former conservatism. I will say i despise the right though mostly these days though, especially as they morph into literal nazis.
As far as what the 8 tribes are, they're all mentioned here: https://echeloninsights.com/tribes/
Hard right- social and economic conservatives who are strongly anti establishment. Older white males. 17% of the population, Trump +94
So...how would I rank these groups in terms of representing my own beliefs?
Although...then I dig into it and apparently only hard left and electability democrats went hard on that issue to the left, so maybe I am electability democrat after all. Young and disillusioned people are weird. Youd think for being disillusioned they would reject the american dream nonsense. Electability democrats also had some anti establishment views on government. So again, I guess I do fit that. I just really hate the label.
Conservatives are more divided. The trumpy faction is winning but the mainstream conservative faction is still strong. Sadly we need the craplibs to offset their coalition, which is why our society is so screwed, those moderates just dictate their views on the rest of us and we're forced to moderate to win them over and then they basically screw us where we cant do anything. But we gotta keep them happy or get the fascists...which is..how we get the fascists winning.
No comments:
Post a Comment