Cornucopia of election websites. Recommend me one. (Not a political debate thread)

There was a great post on the SDMB a few months back, in the multitude of political threads, that listed a handful of seemingly independent Election websites. These sites gave an apparently neutral view of candidates, their issues, their responses, their backgrounds, etc.

For the life of me, I cannot find that thread or post. Thus, I ask your help: Would you post a link to a site you’d recommend to me?

Sure, I have a clear perspective of the issues on the media’s mind, however, I don’t give a darn about a potential VP’s pick of underwear for her brother’s daughter’s babymama who might be pregnant with a Soviet spy’s unborn child. The media is obviously biased, and I don’t trust CNN, Fox, CBS, NBC, etc.

I prefer to choose a candidate based on their past track records–well, to be fair, I’d like to choose based on the Cabinet the incumbent would assemble, but they haven’t invented the perfect crystal ball yet–and have seen a few sites that summarize candidate’s stances on past issues.

Can y’all help me out?

Tripler
Now that the conventions are over, I can start studying up.

http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ (Has links to lots and lots of stuff)

Forgot one I was just looking at earlier today:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

And how can you forget, from the man who literally wrote the book on computer operating systems, the one, the only…

And don’t forget Project Vote Smart.

Absolutely biased sites, but absolutely useful as well, if for nothing else than the facts they bring with their analysis:

talkingpointsmemo.com

Of particular interest to you, I’d expect, will be the daily House/Senate roundup posts at Daily Kos. Here’s the most recent: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/5/144833/7976/813/588048

Holy cow. Did you see this page?

It’s showing congressional ratings for “Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.” If you click on “rating” things get very ugly for Republicans. Is anyone familiar with this group? (I know I should ask on a new thread.)

Similar and created by a sabremetrician, http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Paul Rieckhoff, their founder, is a semi-regular guest on Olberman. He’s been highly critical of the President’s treatment of soldiers and veterans.

Thanks for the information. Is his disdain a chicken or egg? (Meaning, is he highly critical because of the treatment or is he critical of the treatment because he already didn’t like the Bushies?)

Oh man, I’m glad I asked. This is good stuff. Please, keep 'em coming!

Tripler
Too bad I can’t vote for Pat Paulsen anymore. . .

Slacktivist is often political and very readable; it’s written by a very liberal Evangelical Christian, which provides an interesting viewpoint.

The impression I get is that it’s the treatment of soldiers and veterans that has caused him to become highly critical of the Bush administration. He also doesn’t think much of the policy decisions that took us into Iraq at the expense of Afghanistan.

Boy, what’re the odds, eh?:wink:

(I love KO, but identifying a regular on his show as “someone who’s been highly critical of Bush” on anything is right up there with “a human who has breathed many times.”)

The Council on Foreign Relations has a Campaign 2008 page that compiles lots of information, including candidate positions on foreign relations matters.

There’s also this WBUR site that gives you the opportunity to identify stands you agree with and then reveals which candidate you agree with the most. If you don’t want to take the quiz, just hit start quiz and you’ll see an “Election Issues” link among the links directly under the banner. It still lists the positions of all of the Democratic and Republican candidates who were originally vying for the nominations. This site was put together a while back. I think it would be interesting to compare the quoted statements to statements being made by the candidates today.