Honestly, I don't think it's that useful to eliminate candidates after one disagreeing stance. While ideal, there will never be a candidate with who I fully agree with. It would be much more useful to ask multiple questions and report back with which candidate's views align most closely with mine.
Hey bcohen, understand your comment completely and I agree that a matching system based on partial matches is also a good way to do it.
There are 2 reasons I eliminate candidates after disagreeing stance.
1) It was easier to code and I just wanted to get this site up. :)
2) You can always press the "skip" button to ignore the question.
I think it's an interesting dynamic and really engages you when some candidates are eliminated, then you realize that issue might not be very important to you, click the "go back a question" button and "skip" that question.
What you end up with is a personal list of important issues for you and you can say "I'm voting for this candidate for these specific reasons".
Thank you for the feedback and trying the app out bcohen.
This seems to be structured around single-issue voting. Well there are certainly plenty of people voting that way, they are probably least likely to benefit from this sort of tool.
(Of course, only having a few questions might make it work this way too.)
Hey golergka, thanks for trying it out and thank you for the feedback. (To answer your question, right now I only have 4 candidates with info inputted into the dataset). Of those 4 candidates, 3 of them favor increased taxes on the wealthy.
I'm still populating the dataset with candidate stances to give you better data.
I'm also going to provide the reference material used so that you can see right away why a candidate was eliminated.
Feedback: this is Not good. I'm pro choice and don't believe we need stronger gun control... Which candidate you say I should vote for depends on the order the questions are asked but it currently is.
Your data seems off as well as trump has (historically at least) been ambivalent about abortion and sanders has been ambivalent about gun control.
Thank you for trying the app out. I'll keep working on it until it's "Good." :)
With regards to the data being off, I'll be providing references when candidates are eliminated so you can see where the data is coming from. (usually I read through the www.ontheissues.org page and come up with an answer).
I just visited the page for the first time and am presented with the following (on the lower half of the page):
Candidates that agree with your opinions:
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders
Donald Trump
Rand Paul
Your opinions so far:
I will vote for someone who is not running for president. (Disagree) Remove
I have not yet answered any questions. Is this the intended behavior?
That is the intended behavior but I understand the confusion. I was using "I will vote for someone who is not running for president" for debugging (with myself as a candidate who would match on that question). I'll remove that debugging info.
The "initial state" of the page needs some enhancement to make it more clear exactly what's going on.
I've been looking for this for a long time. I found a website recently that does this, but it isn't an app / interactive you have to find what you are looking for. Will definitely recommend this to my non-political friends who care about the country but don't have time to research.
19 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 46.8 ms ] threadOtherwise four candidates from two parties that aren't that different in reality is really not much to choose from.
I was also surprised with trump not being eliminated by "taxes on wealthy should be increased." I'm getting my info from http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Donald_Trump_Tax_Reform.htm
(Also regarding there "not being much to choose from" - I agree.)
- disagree with Candidate A on issue 1, but agree on issues 2-10, and
- agree with Candidate B on issue 1, but disagree on issues 2-10,
you'll be matched with Candidate B purely because Candidate A (a 90% match) was eliminated for a single disagreement.
I applaud the idea, but this needs a bit more work before it can come anywhere close to www.isidewith.com.
There are 2 reasons I eliminate candidates after disagreeing stance.
1) It was easier to code and I just wanted to get this site up. :)
2) You can always press the "skip" button to ignore the question.
I think it's an interesting dynamic and really engages you when some candidates are eliminated, then you realize that issue might not be very important to you, click the "go back a question" button and "skip" that question.
What you end up with is a personal list of important issues for you and you can say "I'm voting for this candidate for these specific reasons".
Thank you for the feedback and trying the app out bcohen.
(Of course, only having a few questions might make it work this way too.)
Neat project regardless.
AS there are thousands of topics most candidates do not express a preference for things. Each preference they do have also eliminates voters.
"Taxes for wealthy people" [important] [not important]
"War with Iran" [important] [not important]
"Militart spending" [important] [not important]
etc
Rand Paul is the _only_ candidate who disagrees with the notion that taxes on the wealthy should be increased?
I don't know much about american politics, but this seems to be a little bit strange. Are you sure your question/candidate database is correct?
There seem to be some issues with the data.
I'm still populating the dataset with candidate stances to give you better data.
I'm also going to provide the reference material used so that you can see right away why a candidate was eliminated.
Thank you again for trying it out.
Your data seems off as well as trump has (historically at least) been ambivalent about abortion and sanders has been ambivalent about gun control.
Thank you for trying the app out. I'll keep working on it until it's "Good." :)
With regards to the data being off, I'll be providing references when candidates are eliminated so you can see where the data is coming from. (usually I read through the www.ontheissues.org page and come up with an answer).
Thanks for trying out the app.
That is the intended behavior but I understand the confusion. I was using "I will vote for someone who is not running for president" for debugging (with myself as a candidate who would match on that question). I'll remove that debugging info.
The "initial state" of the page needs some enhancement to make it more clear exactly what's going on.
Thanks again and Cheers.