[Mount Athos]

Bachman ideologically is in my opinion closest to the typical freeper.

But she’s really bad at obeying the Reagan commandment about not attacking other republicans.

[Red Badger]

Why do you have people on your desk?.....................

[humblegunner]

What test? Is it invisible?

I like invisible tests.

[A_perfect_lady]

Hm. I got Ron Paul first, Mitt Romney second, and John Huntsman third. I think that test might be a little “off.” How could Paul and Romney be side-by-side like that?

[Not A Snowbird]

I think I need a vacation.

#1 Ron Paul, #2 Rick Perry, #3 Newt Gingrich

Wow.

[mmichaels1970]

lol...Perry, Gingrich, Paul...not bad. Funny thing is that Romney ranked just below Obama for dead last.

[Sacajaweau]

One more question: “Which candidate states a conservative view as a self serving vote getter with no “REAL” evidence of having always supporting that view.”

[betty boop]

Very interesting "test," Why So Serious! Thanks for the link.

Unexpected results, in my case: Ron Paul #1, Michelle Bachman #2, and Newt Gingrich #3. I'd have to seriously hold my nose to vote for two of these people. And the person I'd actually like to vote for didn't "make the cut" on the basis of this question set: Rick Perry.

Thanks again for the link!

[PapaNew]

For me it was

1) Perry

2) Paul

3) Huntsman

Paul seems to have a screw loose with his off-the-chart radical America-hating attitude about 9/11. If he wasn't so obsessively bizarre about defense and 9/11, I'd probably be for him.

I thought that Perry would be the guy after Sarah took a powder (permanent trip to the power room), but I wish he wouldn't keep gaffing himself to death.

[PoloSec]

My results were as follows:

1st Paul...I have not even considered voting for him, although, anyone but Obama.

2nd Bachman...My current choice.

3rd Perry...My current next choice after Bachman.

Some of questions did not really fit my thinking, but I picked the closest, so as not to check the Other Box.

[Sans-Culotte]

In order, my candidates (according to the test) are:

1.) Bachmann

2.) Santorum

3.) Gingrich

I'm not surprised; but Bachmann's and Santorum's chances are about as likely as the Colts making the playoffs (unless they are VP bait).

[discostu]

Problem is what’s the definition of less or more important? I think socsec is important in that I want it shot in the head, people who want to “save” it also think it’s important. Serious flaw there.

[aruanan]

Mine were Paul, Perry, and Santorum. The “test” is BS.

[Red_Devil 232]

Bachmann - Santorum - Gingrich

Click-able for test:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/candidate-match-game

[RobertClark]

Mine came up:

1) Paul
2) Perry
3) Bachmann

[Logic n' Reason]

For me, it was a virtual tie between my postman, my hampster skippy, and chelsea clintoon

NOW who do I "vote" for next November?

[chris_bdba]

1 Newt,2 Paul and, 3 Bachman

[murron]

Mine was Perry, Santorum, and Bachman. I’m surprised at how many results came in for Gingrich and Paul on this site.

[NELSON111]

I got Paul at 89%...then Bachman and Perry tied at 43%.

Too bad Paul has a very bad foreign policy stance regarding Israel and terrorism.

This quiz would be MUCH better too if they threw a few more questions in there about that issue...and abortion/right to life...etc.

[commish]

Gingrich, Perry, Santorum in a virtual tie - same number of issues agreed but to a varying degree. Bachmann slightly behind, followed by Huntsman and Paul. Romney and Obama sucking hind tit.