« What a wonderful Reception! | HomePage | Huckalerts! »

Thursday, February 14, 20081203020400

John McCain: The 80% tdaxp candidate

Following a link from Half Sigma, I took Glassboth's Election 2008 comparison test. Top candidates for me were

John MccCain... 80%
Mike Huckabee... 71%
Ron Paul... 60%
Barack Obama... 50%
Hillary Clinton... 43%
Mike Gravel... 43%

Regarding John McCain, the tdaxp Candidate, my results by topic were:

Taxes and Budget... very similar
Iraq and Foreign Policy... very similar
Trade and Economics... very similar
Immigration... very similar
Health Care... similar
Abortion and Birth Control... similar
Medical Marijuna and Drug Policy... very different

Vote McCain!

Comments

Well, I couldn't find the test on the link you posted, but I decided to do one at selectsmart.com.

1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%)
2. Barack Obama (91%) Information link
3. Hillary Clinton (88%) Information link
4. Dennis Kucinich (withdrawn) (87%) Information link
5. Alan Augustson (campaign suspended) (86%) Information link
6. Christopher Dodd (withdrawn) (85%) Information link
7. Joseph Biden (withdrawn) (83%) Information link
8. Michael Bloomberg (says he will not run) (80%) Information link
9. John Edwards (withdrawn) (76%) Information link
10. Mike Gravel (74%) Information link
11. Wesley Clark (not running, endorsed Clinton) (73%) Information link
12. Bill Richardson (withdrawn) (69%) Information link
13. Al Gore (not announced) (66%) Information link
14. Ron Paul (52%) Information link
15. Kent McManigal (campaign suspended) (43%) Information link
16. Wayne Allyn Root (40%) Information link
17. Elaine Brown (40%) Information link
18. John McCain (39%) Information link
19. Tommy Thompson (withdrawn, endorsed Giuliani) (33%) Information link
20. Mike Huckabee (33%) Information link
21. Rudolph Giuliani (withdrawn, endorsed McCain) (31%) Information link
22. Alan Keyes (26%) Information link
23. Chuck Hagel (not running) (24%) Information link
24. Newt Gingrich (says he will not run) (22%) Information link
25. Mitt Romney (withdrawn, endorsed McCain) (20%) Information link
26. Sam Brownback (withdrawn, endorsed McCain) (20%) Information link
27. Tom Tancredo (withdrawn, endorsed Romney) (17%) Information link
28. Duncan Hunter (withdrawn, endorsed Huckabee) (13%) Information link
29. Fred Thompson (withdrawn) (13%) Information link
30. Jim Gilmore (withdrawn) (10%) Information link
31. Stephen Colbert (campaign halted) (6%) Information link


------------------------------

Sorry if the copy/paste is a little messy. I suppose Stephen Colbert's 6% must be for his position on Doritos.

Posted by: Jeffrey James | Thursday, February 14, 2008

I updated the original link, but here it is as well:

http://glassbooth.org/

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Thursday, February 14, 2008

Obama 73%
McCain 68%
Huckabee 66%
Gravel 65%
The top two weren't surprising, the bottom two were!

With Obama:
Very Similar: Health Care, Immigration, Environment/Energy, Education
Different: Gay Rights, Iraq/Foreign Policy
Simlar: everything else

Posted by: Michael | Thursday, February 14, 2008

glassbooth.org seems to tell a different story though...

Mike Gravel 84%
Hillary Clinton 81%
Barack Obama 80%

Taxes and Budget very similar find out why
Iraq and Foreign Policy very similar find out why
Civil Liberties and Domestic Security very similar find out why
Health Care very similar find out why
Trade and Economics very similar find out why
Education similar find out why
Environment and Energy similar find out why

Posted by: Jeffrey James | Thursday, February 14, 2008

Ron Paul 74%

While I do like Paul the best, I realize he can't win. So instead, I support Obama. Once an African American has been elected President in this country, there will no longer be any argument for Affirmative action, racial quotas, minority set asides, and the rhetorical terrorism of the so called "civil rights" crowd. NO, none if this is needed anymore and should all be viewed as discrimination against European Americans. After Obama is elected, Americans should be able to rent and sell property to who they wish. Hire and fire who they wish, and build communities with who they wish.

Hooray for Obama 2008.

Posted by: Seerov | Thursday, February 14, 2008

Michael and Jeffrey,

Interesting to see!

seerov,

"Once an African American has been elected President in this country, there will no longer be any argument for Affirmative action, racial quotas, minority set asides, and the rhetorical terrorism of the so called "civil rights" crowd."

I am less optimistic than you.

Obama's a half-white son of an East African immigrant... the generic African-American population is a fifth-white, many generations back, and comes from unwilling West African stock.

Recall that (partially for those reasons -- also that Obama is a descendant of slave-owners, not of slaves) many African Americans did not consider Obama to be black -- until Clinton's racially polarizing campaign got kicked into gear, at least.

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Thursday, February 14, 2008

First off, I got Mike Gravel. Weird. He was at 71% with Obama at 58% and Hill at %51.
Apparently I'm a Democrat now.

Also, In Audacity of Hope, Obama very clearly supports affirmative action and for reasons I had never even considered before.
What it boils down to is that in situations where there are two equal candidates of different races, the white one is invariably chosen. Not just by whites but by everyone.
And when it comes down to it, which demographic needs to have positive role models more? Blacks need all of the positive male role models that society can provide.

I'm still not entirely behind the concept myself. As a recruiter, I once had to tell someone that he wasn't even being considered for a certain job because he was a white male and the company was insistent on a 'diversity candidate'. Didn't feel good.

Posted by: biz | Thursday, February 14, 2008

Some of those questions are scored wrong. My wacky liberal fiancee supports gay marriage, but it has her views as very different than Hillary. Hillary supports gay marriage.
The statement:
I strongly oppose the extension of the 2006 Patriot Act:
Strongly Oppose Strongly Support

is a little off.

Posted by: biz | Thursday, February 14, 2008

Regarding Obama's justification for affirmative action, why should such a welfare policy be paid for by those non-blacks least able to afford it?

That is, it' seems in a fluid job environment, those non-blacks least able to otherwise obtain employment are the ones who suffer the loss of jobs.

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Thursday, February 14, 2008

His explanation was much more articulate than mine.

Posted by: biz | Thursday, February 14, 2008

"What it boils down to is that in situations where there are two equal candidates of different races, the white one is invariably chosen. Not just by whites but by everyone."

How does he justify such a statement? How can this be proven? Judging by the H1B visa law, I would say the exact opposite is true.

"And when it comes down to it, which demographic needs to have positive role models more? Blacks need all of the positive male role models that society can provide."

What kind of of role model is this? A person who was given the job because of their geo-genetic cluster?

Another thing, why are immigrants given these benefits? I guess I can see the case for blacks who are descendants of slaves, but for people like Obama? This issue is a perfect opportunity for an alliance between blacks and middle and working class whites. They both could push for slave descendant black only AA and both would be better off. It would never happen because of the current anti-white alliance in place. All non-whites see it as their duty to oppose the white power structure, making any agreement with whites "selling out to the man" no matter how much better off they'd be.

The racial selection laws hurt the people their supposed to help too. When I was in high school, I wanted to play professional basketball. Since there is an obvious shortage of white men in the NBA, it would only be fair to let me in. If this happens though, I would be the worst player in the league. Instead of finding something I'm good at, I would have to settle for being the worst player in the NBA. When it came to renewing my contract, I would never get more then the league minimum. When this happens, I would hire a lawyer to sue the NBA for "discrimination." After all, I've been in the NBA for 10 years and am still making the league minimum. Meanwhile, the black rookie is making more than me. THIS MUST BE DISCRIMINATION!!! RIGHT!!!! This law not only stops me from finding something I'm good at, but makes my team worse off by having to pay me more in fear of a lawsuit.

Posted by: Seerov | Thursday, February 14, 2008

I got 89% similar with Gravel:

Immigration very similar
Health Care very similar
Iraq and Foreign Policy very similar
Environment and Energy very similar
Medical Marijuana and Drug Policy very similar
Civil Liberties and Domestic Security very similar
Taxes and Budget similar
Abortion and Birth Control similar
Trade and Economics very different

Too bad I don't want a cranky old man for President. Got 81% for both Obama and Clinton.

Posted by: Adrian | Thursday, February 14, 2008

Ron Paul - 81% - Huckabee - 68% - McCain 62%

Medical Marijuana and Drug Policy very similar
Trade and Economics very similar
Taxes and Budget very similar
Gun Control very similar
Civil Liberties and Domestic Security similar
Iraq and Foreign Policy very different

Posted by: Steve French | Friday, February 15, 2008

Adrian & Steve,

Thanks for contributing!

Seerov,

"How does he justify such a statement? How can this be proven? Judging by the H1B visa law, I would say the exact opposite is true."

Agreed -- indeed, there are formal attempts to use the H1B visa law to get out of using an American -- which would typicalyl mean white -- employee [1].

"All non-whites see it as their duty to oppose the white power structure, making any agreement with whites "selling out to the man" no matter how much better off they'd be."

All? Really?

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Friday, February 15, 2008

You see, you lose me when you start talking about the H1B visa law. Because I see it on the front lines of what it is used for. I am an IT headhunter, my job is to find highly skilled tech people for companies that need someone with a specific skill set. And often times the only reason that a company will hire someone with an H1B visa is when they have no other choice.
Most companies would LOVE to hire someone that is an American for their specialized position. There tends to be less culture issues and they are easier employees to manage.
But the more specialized you get, the less likely that there are American candidates with a particular technology skill set.
Try finding an American SAP MM/PP Functional Analyst that wants a new job. You won't. But you'll find loads of H1B candidates just dying for someone to sponsor their visa. And they'll move anywhere

Posted by: biz | Friday, February 15, 2008

Biz,

Agreed. Lady of tdaxp's run into the same thing, as you know (there's all sorts you need to jump through to hire H1Bs).

On the other side, an H1B is more motivated to keep his current job than a typical citizen, hence (I think) Seerov's concern.

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Friday, February 15, 2008

73% Obama
71% Huckabee
66% McCain
64% Clinton

Posted by: Sean Meade | Friday, February 15, 2008

Um, I agreed 100% with everyone. I think their site is broken.

Posted by: Aaron | Friday, February 15, 2008

"All? Really?


OK you're right not ALL.

Posted by: seerov | Friday, February 15, 2008

What?! I'm not the most liberal regular on this site? There goes my self-image. . . *melodramatic sigh*

Biz's comment on H1Bs suggests a good topic, though. Why do so few Americans get that kind of specialized training? Is it just a reflection of the low numbers entering high-tech as a whole, or is there something more to it?

Posted by: Michael | Friday, February 15, 2008

I think it's a culture thing. At least in the IT industry. A willingness to put in the time and effort to make as much money as possible. A wife that stays at home (so no sacrifices have to be made for her career), no family that you can't move away from if something opens up in another state, these things make a very mobile employee. In todays workforce a mobile employee is generally a very highly skilled employee.
Most Americans are very tied to their companies, their towns and their extended families.
By the time that they reach the point in their careers where they have the choice to keep rising or to settle down, most have reached the point in their lives where settling down isn't a choice, it's a necessity.

H1B Pros: Highly skilled, cheaper labor, work their asses off
H1B Cons: Little loyalty(as long as new sponsorship can be obtained), company culture issues

it's a mixed bag.

Posted by: biz | Friday, February 15, 2008

Aaron,

That's more than you've agreed with anyone, ever! :-)

Seerov,

So what did you mean by your comment, if not what it said?

Michael & Biz,

Excellent comments!

American public schools are designed to create Americans, not educate students. Therefore, for a long time, we've had to import high-skill workers that we need. H1B is the latest manifestation of that old trend.

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Saturday, February 16, 2008

So an American SAP MM/PP Functional Analyst would have reached that point by developing the needed skills at work, reaching a point where he wants to settle down in the process; am I understanding you correctly?

If so, then where does his Indian counterpart get his skills? Do Indian Universities teach more specialized skills than ours do? Or did he learn them on the job at an Indian company?

Posted by: Michael | Saturday, February 16, 2008

Michael,
As I'm sure my friend Aaron can attest, a university degree in Computer Science in no way prepares a person for working in the IT industry. Everyone learns their skills through work.

The Indian counterpart learns through the same ways that Americans do. But the increased flexibility in their family life and their willingness to be paid less to do more work exposes them to opportunities to advance faster than most American workers. Americans have the same opportunities, but pursue them less.
Many companies have difficulties finding a specific skillset in their area, and will only find resumes for people living hours away that are unwilling to move for the job.
Every H1B resume I've seen says WILL RELOCATE ANYWHERE.
That's tough to beat.

In addition, due to culture differences, a management path is not always available, leaving a technical career growth path as the only option, making it easier to focus on.

Posted by: biz | Saturday, February 16, 2008

Additionally, a very high fraction of foreign graduate students in the United States transition their F1 (Student) Visa into an F1-OPT (1 year optional practical training) visa, allowing them to work in the United States, and then attempt to find an employer willing to sponsor them for an H1B.

Further, many of the males have either wives or arranged marriages waiting when they find a job. Not being attached to any portion of their country, their primary concern is supporting their family (both the significant other they bring over, as well as their extended family back home through remittances) rather than work-life balance, etc.

Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Saturday, February 16, 2008

Post a comment