Well...I'm not actually American, but I'm economically and socially left of Obama. Right in the top left corner of the chart.

Socialist Pig! (Just Joking)

Being Canadian will do that to a man.

as far to the bottom right as its possible to be...

27% left of and 5% more progressive than Obama... European

A a few points more traditional/conservative than Obama but pretty much dead-on him, 78% total agreement with him and 76% with Hillary Clinton, but 50% with McCain.

So liberal and progressive, a tad closer to center philosophically and economically than the big-name liberals of Obama and Clinton, but pretty much in line with them, the one place differing from the liberals being national security, where its 67% in line with Obama and 92% in line with McCain.

Which fits, I'm pretty liberal and progressive and really support Obama and Hillary strongly and their programs (ie health care)...

But I've still got that Nietzsche/Hobbes "Be the strong, not the weak, be the predator, not the prey" mentality in terms of defense (except for Iraq, there I totally differed from McCain because I'm in favor of pulling out- if you must fight a war, fight it with Iran... AFTER we fix OUR problems, namely, the economy.)

I'm bumping this.

How do they set the origin of this chart? Do they just grab 1000 random Americans and average them out?

The origin would be an average of neutral on each question.

Lol. I like the "trust" part. The questions themselves are a tad bit outdated but I do indeed like the trust ratings.

Hilary and Bush flunked, slightly negative view of McCain, and slightly positive of Obama. Neato

I'm closest to McCain. I'm a little bit more economically left, and not quite as traditional, but I'm pretty close.

This says I'm more liberal and lefty than McCain, which isn't true. There are some pretty odd questions in there, too.

It was interesting that even with Bill Richardson I had a 42% agreement with, and 53% for Obama. By that logic I could have voted for Barry.

Meh. This is worthless in the US. We only have 2 parties. What a ripoff. We need MOAR CHOICES.

Yeah, that's all we need is for Congress to have a go at coalition governments. You think nothing gets done now, imagine if there were Libertarian and Communist and Green and Constitution Party and Black Nationalist and any other two-bit political party Congressmen in the mix.

Rand Paul Kentucky 2010 FTW!!!

Invictus +1
@rudekker: We don't have 2 parties; we have 100. Dem/Rep in each of 50 states.

"You think nothing gets done now, imagine if there were Libertarian and Communist and Green and Constitution Party and Black Nationalist and any other two-bit political party Congressmen in the mix. "

Yeah, horror of horrors - the Bankster Bailouts may not have passed, the PATRIOT act may've actually been read before congress voted on it, the Iraq War may never've happened, the health care "reform" would've been something other than just forcing everyone to buy insurance... sounds like a disaster to me!

The two major parties are essentially two wings of the same bird. In spite of all the hysteria on TV and talk radio, they are in complete agreement on 90+% of the major issues of our day. Their ideological differences are over whether the top tax bracket should be 35% or 38%, or whether Iran should be bombed or blockaded. This country is broken, and the same old gang of corrupt Demopublicans and Republicrats that broke it aren't going to fix it. The "two party system" in California (plus the gerrymandered districts both parties agreed to after the last census) has created a state legislature with a 9% approval rating but a 100% incumbent re-election rate. I'm sure California is not alone. This country needs real changes, new ideas, and fresh blood - particularly now - not more of the same old political duopoly.

See, this version of the compass is hard for me to fill in, because it's so American. For example, the first question is "People should have a background check and obtain a license before they can buy a gun."

Now, technically I would want to "Completely Disagree" because I do not think that people should be allowed to buy guns AT ALL. But practically I would assume that in the context of the test, answering "Completely Disagree" actually implies that people SHOULD be allowed to buy guns WITHOUT a background check or license.

So bearing in mind such difficulties, my highly-skewed result was that I am about as socially liberal as Obama, but 14% to the left of him, economically.

The same thing here. for the question as to if employers should provide health care I answered completely disagree, because I feel that it is the proper role of government. I came really close to the center, but I think that is because I (partially as a Canadian who is interested in US politics) gave answers that are hard to characterize.

Is there a UK version anyone is aware of?

"The two major parties are essentially two wings of the same bird." Are you insane? do you know ANYTHING about politics? Sure, the democrats and Republicans are all Americans, and therefore most likely share some similar values, but to suggest that they are essentially the same displays your complete and utter ignorance of American politics. Tax policy, social welfare policy, military spending and military use are just a few examples where the policies are vastly different. That is just populist nonsense spoken by the "moderates" in our country that like to say everyone sucks so they can have an excuse to not really learn about the issues and the candidates. If anyone thinks Obama and Bush or McCain were flip sides of the same coin, I WANT some of what you are smoking.

OK...they collectively f8ed up and went for the bank bail-out...because they were all completely ignorant of the system and bought into the global catastrophe horror stories....but that hardly equates the parties. get real.

If you are concerned about the 9 % approval rating in California, or the equally apalling approval rating for the Feds, then VOTE INTELLIGENTLY. Don't be the typical dumbass American that says everyone must go...oh...except MY guy, because he brings home the pork to my district.

If you don't like it, join a campaign! Educate your friends and family on critical issues. vote in the PRIMARIES where your vote has more weight. Most people just bitch and complain, and then go pull the "D" or "R" level like a lemming. the problem is not with the parties...the problem is with a lazy, stupid (NOT ignorant, because their ignorance is WILLFUL - thus stupid) electorate that is more likely to get their news/political information from comedy Central and Saturday Night Live than from actual news sources and research.

@Jamie: http://www.politicalcompass.org/

That's not specifically UK-centred but is broad enough to give a very good result. I think I've moved slightly to the left economically since I last tried it.

Economic Left/Right: -9.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.85

Yeah it isn't specific to us, but the issues are pretty general as you say and the analysis includes our political parties. I'm gonna have to go back and try it again now- did it only the other week but can't remember my numbers :-)

@Jamiet - you and I seem to be of a similar mind (-9.25 -5.74).

Wonder what that says about why I'm now living in France and not the UK.....

Krellin, I've worked on political campaigns for over ten years, used to regularly attend city council and county supervisors' meetings, read the local newspaper every day, ran the local Ron Paul meetup group in 2007/8 (we had about 30 active members), and a whole bunch of other stuff. If I'm a lazy ignorant dumbass, what more must I do to educate myself? Watch more TV?

Your prescription ("VOTE INTELLIGENTLY") shows precisely how naive and/or ignorant a lot of 'true believers' are. All districts in California are gerrymandered to guarantee the district not just for one party or another, but even to guarantee the election of particular politicians. It really makes no difference how intelligently I vote. More than half the time, the opposition party where I live doesn't even bother to put up a candidate anyway for state legislative races - the voter registration demographics are so overwhelmingly in favor of the incumbents, it's simply a waste of time and money to challenge them. You make a good point about a vote in the primaries being more important than a general election vote, but that doesn't do me any good since I can't vote in other parties' primaries.

As for the differences between the parties you allege:
Tax policy - Republicans believe the top income tax rate should be 35%. Democrats believe it should be 39%. You may call that a big difference. I do not.
social welfare policy - During the 6 years recently when Republicans had control of the Congress and the presidency, their only change to social welfare policy was to provide free drugs to seniors. Where is the party I can vote for that will actually reduce welfare spending and eliminate social welfare programs?
military spending - I'm still waiting for that huge downsizing of the military Obama was alleged to be gearing up for.
military use - Obama hasn't ended any of Bush's wars (and is in fact dramatically expanding the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan), and the saber-rattling against Iran has not let up. No change there.

Tell me something. If I want a government with substantially lower taxes and is constantly searching the globe for monsters to destroy with the most expensive military on the planet, am I supposed to vote for Republicans or Democrats?