Just like 4 years ago, I'm doing a 4 week evening series on the presidential candidates and the issues. This week we covered 'moral issues.' In the session I just present the information, but here are my personal grades.
11 points: Ron Paul
9 points: Mitt Romney
6 points: Rick Santorum
6 points: Newt Gingrich
-1 point: Barack Obama
In the background/faith column, Gingrich actually lost a point, Obama broke even, Santorum got a point, while Paul & Romney both got 2 points.
In the abortion/marriage column, Obama lost 2 points, Santorum gained 3, Romney & Gingrich picked up 4, and Paul got 6.
In the miscellaneous column, Obama gained 1, Santorum 2, while the other 3 each got 3.
My system is simple
+2 when I agree big time
+1 when I agree
0 when I am generally indifferent (or can see pros and cons)
-1 when I disagree
2 comments:
What sort of things are included in each of those categories? they seem pretty broad! what takes precedence in terms of gaining your support?
I built my evaluation handout directly from the campaign websites. In other words, if the candidates make mention of it, we evaluate what they said.
For abortion this included statements about when life began, what should be done with Roe V. Wade, and the governments role in funding organizations that do abortions.
For marriage this included the candidates position on DOMA and the proposed federal marriage amendment.
In the miscellaneous category I listed 3 value issues that the candidate seemed to write/speak about the most. These ranged from gun control to helping the disabled to the war on drugs to stem cell research.
I feel more strongly about some things (abortion) than others. It was pretty easy to decide whether I really liked, liked, was indifferent about, or disliked each position.
Post a Comment