So, I kinda fleshed out my scoring metric a little bit when analyzing the candidates of a certain congressional race, with me adding a more solid scoring rubric. As such, I want to rescore the candidates. This won't be a massive overhaul, but I do want to give a rough indication of where the candidates are given these updated standards.
TLDR: Scorecard
Joe Biden- 64/100
Jill Stein- 52/100 55/100
Cornel West- 52/100
RFK Jr.- 31/100
Donald Trump- 8/100
As such, I am endorsing Joe Biden. For leftists unhappy with Biden, I consider Stein and West to be roughly equal candidates worth considering. RFK I would only consider as an alternative to Trump, if Trump is your forte, and for the love of God, don't vote for Donald Trump himself.
But yeah, to go into the metric and methology:
Metric and Methodology
So, basically, this is metric #1 again. 100 point metric total, divided over various priorities. To analyze in detail.
UBI support- 10 points
UBI is my top issue. I consider myself a Yang style human centered capitalist, with social libertarian leanings. To me, UBI not only ends poverty, it’s about freedom, including the freedom as the power to say no. As such, I make UBI a top issue that I’m willing to purity test specifically on. Scoring will go as follows:
7-10 points- support for UBI as well as a detailed workable plan to get there.
4-6 points- stated support of UBI with no real plan to get there. NIT support may also fall here, or in the above category based on the plan.
1-3 points- support for some mild UBI like policy, such as Biden’s child tax credit or Kamala Harris’s LIFT act
0 points- you’re anti UBI or anything that remotely looks like it.
Medicare for all support- 10 points
Medicare for all is my second most important issue. We need some form of universal healthcare to solve the problems with it, and it should ultimately complement UBI.
9-10 points- support for medicare for all with a detailed plan to get there
4-8 points- support for a public option, pending details, possibly stated support for M4A without a plan
1-3 points- support for some around the edges health reform
0 points- No support for health reform or a regression such as repealing the ACA.
Economic policy- 10 points
This is just a broad category for various other economic policies I support such as a $15 minimum wage, free college, student debt forgiveness, union support, a climate plan, etc.
8-10 points- a progressive and/or leftist economic platform with strong improvements to general quality of life
4-7 points- a more milquetoast, flawed approach to economics.
0-3 points- Doesn’t even meet the basics, or economically regressive.
Social policy- 10 points
Here I focus on other domestic issues like social issues. Given I am progressive on some issues and moderate on others, it’s hard to get a perfect score but generally…
8-10 points- strong agreement on most social issues
4-7 points- moderate agreement with some significant differences
0-3- bruh are you a rightoid?
Foreign policy- 10 points
Unpopular opinion among progressives, but this was a metric designed for presidents. And I would want someone in office who has the chops to do what would need to be done on foreign policy issues. Neocons do bad on my metric, but so do leftists, as they often are too principled to do the job effectively, and this is something that requires making hard decisions. Above all though, I just ask that whatever you do ensures domestic and international stability, and the most important thing is to not F up.
8-10 points- A clear display of skill in achieving the right balance I talked about above. Tough when they need to be, humanitarian where they can, generally gets the balance right.
4-7 points- Doesn’t get the balance right but does an okay job.
0-3 points- this guy’s policies would destroy this country
Ideology/worldview- 20 points
This is where I get into the nitty gritty of how much I agree with candidates. Here I’m not necessarily focused on policy as much, although policy does go into it, I wanna get a handle on your worldview, how you think ideologically. As I said, I consider myself a Yang styled human centered capitalist, but I’m also quite progressive, basically, what I’m looking for here is “Bernie and Yang have a baby.” Of course I will focus on domestic and foreign policy issues too.
17-20- Generally very high agreement
13-16- Moderately high agreement, but some divergence
8-12- Moderate agreement at best
4-8- An extremely flawed candidate I don’t really like at all
0-4 basically a republican
Commitment to progressive goals/policy platform- 10 points
Anyone can get up on stage and say they support idea, but I wanna know, are you committed? Can I trust you to get the job done? Or are you gonna get in office, table the ideas I care about, and never do anything to achieve them? I want candidates who are committed to their goals, and, well, my goals. It’s not enough just to have a stated position, I gotta know you’re gonna actually go for it.
8-10- points- high levels of trust
4-7- points- moderate levels of trust
0-3- low levels of trust
Experience/competence- 10 points
I want to know the candidate is actually qualified for the job. I want someone who is gonna get into office and know what they’re doing. To know policy, to have experience in other positions.
8-10 points- high levels of competence/experience
4-7 points- moderate levels
0-3 points- fell asleep during schoolhouse rock
Running as a Democrat- 10 pointsBasically don't be a spoiler, don't enable Donald Trump. You're either a 0 or 10 here, although exceptions can be made for special cases.
Total- 100 points
And yeah, that's my metric. Now to analyze candidates. I will just take previous analyses I've done, and adjust scores accordingly.
Donald Trump
Basic income support- 1/10
Medicare for all support- 0/10
Economic issues- 2/10
Social issues- 0/10
Foreign policy- 1/10
Ideology/worldview- 2/20
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 0/10
Experience- 3/10
Running as a democrat- 0/10
Total- 8/100
So yeah, I was a bit harsher this time. My previous commentary still stands but I kinda feel like I got even less in common with him than i did. Still a few broken clock moments, but that's all.
Joe Biden
Basic Income Support- 2/10
Medicare for all support- 2/10
Economic policies- 7/10
Social policy- 9/10
Foreign policy- 9/10
Worldview/ideology- 10/20
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 5/10
Experience/competence- 10/10
Running as a democrat- 10/10
Total- 64/100
I had to be a bit harsher on him due to things like him not being THAT progressive on economics (but still the max score for the milquetoast category), and I took another point off because I don't like how he's still enabling Israel at this point as much, but still, I can't complain other than that. Still roughly the same score.
RFK Jr.
Original Analysis (Stein and West included as well)
Basic Income Support- 2/10
Medicare for all support- 3/10
Economic policies- 5/10
Social policies- 6/10
Foreign policy- 0/10
Worldview/ideology- 7/20
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 5/10
Experience/competence- 3/10
Running as a democrat- 0/10
Total- 31/100
Yeah I was a bit harsher this time. Brain worms had something to do with it, and I also just look at the guy again and I think even less of him now. I don't see why progressives like him. Dude isn't progressive. Dude is a centrist with populist vibes.
Jill Stein
Basic Income support- 5/10
Medicare for all support- 10/10
Economic policies- 10/10
Social policies- 8/10
Foreign policy- 0/10
Ideology/worldview- 13/20
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 3/10 6/10
Experience/competence- 3/10
Running as a democrat- 0/10
Total- 52/100 55/100
I mean, i do tend to gravitate toward leftists on domestic policy somewhat over someone like, say, Biden. But, I also view them as worse on foreign policy and on competence. Stein herself struggled most because of the dedication to progressive values thing. The low score is because of that Cornel West interview that gave me the impression maybe the greens really are kinda being funded by Russia. So...yeah. No hard proof, but yeah it does lower her score compared to what it would be otherwise.
EDIT: I have found no evidence of stein being funded by russia. However, they do give her free media coverage and she might not want to compromise that relationship. Still, I do think that I went overkill and will be raising her rating up to a 6 on that particular metric as a compromise between my original position and what I'd give her if this wasnt a potential issue.
Otherwise I did gain some appreciation for her relative to my previous analysis. And yes, I included her 2016 UBI position here for anyone wondering about that.
Cornel West
Basic income support- 3/10
Medicare for all support- 10/10
Economic policies- 10/10
Social policies- 7/10
Foreign policy- 0/10
Ideology/Worldview- 12/20
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 9/10
Experience/competence- 1/10
Doesn't act as a spoiler- 0/10
Total- 52/100
What do you know? The same score as Stein (before I changed it). There are some differences, West's more extreme positions make him seem cringey, but I trust him LESS on UBI. Greens have a position in their platform of being nominally for it, and I believe Stein when she is nominally for it. West, he just had commissions. At the same time, West is largely unimpeachable in terms of character and I trust him over stein in some ways. Either way, both are solid candidates and I gotta shift on something. Rather than being pro West over Stein, I'll just endorse them equally behind Biden.
I AM still going Biden though. If we weren't facing the existential threats to the left and democracy that we are, it is more debatable. Taking away Biden's 10 point democratic advantage, he scores about equal with these guys, being better on experience and foreign policy, but worse on economics. You can debate things either way, but this time, I AM supporting the democrat, so Biden it is. I have little against Stein or West though, relative to Biden. They're roughly equally caliber candidates with different inherent flaws.
Anyway, I'll include a quick scorecard at the top of this analysis. for a TLDR.
No comments:
Post a Comment