Non-fiscal: 2
Fiscal: 10
I believe that makes me the second most liberal overall, the first being Cheddarsnax. Yay!
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (36).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (20).
I assumed as much.
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (48).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Conservative (64).
People who are getting these ultra-liberal scores (20? 10!? 2!!!)…
You are obviously picking mostly the “liberal” answers to the questions. However, I’m curious, did you also pick high priority for all of these questions? I’m wondering if giving something a higher priority just weighs it more than the others, or if it can actually push your score more in a direction.
Basically, if two posters took the test and answered the same choices to all of the questions, but poster A picks “high” priority for every choice, while poster b leaves the priority at “medium”. Would they get the same score?
I only chose a few highs and lows myself, medium was my priority for most things. Short of having the source code, the only way to test the effect of priorities would be to experiment.
Ran it twice
The first time I got:
Non-Fiscal: Strong Liberal (17)
Fiscal: Centrist (I forget)
The second time, changing my answer for those questions for which there were two competitor, I got:
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (21).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (36).
I think possibly the binary format of the political compass might have advantages - it is easier to pick between two incorrect answers than between four (assuming one doesn’t take the cop out) 
Choosing the first answer to all questions and setting priority at low gives (45,32), medium gives (45,32), and high gives (45,32). So it would seem that if priority is changed equally for all questions there is no effect on score.
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (19).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (34).
Probably be more toward center if it weren’t for the S&L Fiasco, Iran/Contra, David Paul, Carl Icahn, and James Watt.
Good test, Doors.
No surprises there.
The only question I had issues with was the one about health care / health insurance. I think I ended up checking “no opinion” just because all of the other answers were so thoroughly not reflective of mine. I don’t want to see my tax money supporting the overinflated drug prices and medical costs, I don’t want to see things “continue” as they are (which is all the worst aspects of free market with few of the advantages), etc.
I’d say so too (although I think most of our “solid right-wingers” are farther to the extreme of the right than the “far left-wingers” are towards the left. I didn’t take the test myself, but judging from what I know of the positions of other posters who’ve reported their scores, I’m sure I’d rate as a moderate-to-strong liberal in both categories.)
But if that’s so, then I wonder why some conservative posters frequently complain about this board being “so liberal”. If there are only a few more hardcore liberals than hardcore conservatives, then the imbalance is really pretty small, right? Do a bunch of slightly left-leaning centrists really make you feel so outnumbered?
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (55).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Conservative (60)
Interesting test. Pretty much what I though I was. As with SM’s thread series test there were some awkward questions that I really didn’t have an answer for…or I should say, I couldn’t answer without qualifiers. Of course the test doesn’t let you make qualifiers.
-XT
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (20).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Conservative (80).
You just answered your own question. When you sittiing way out on either wing, even the centrists look like they’re far away from you. You have some strong leftish views, especially in the economic arena, and so you think the right wingers are WAY out there.
Non-fiscal: Strong Liberal (16)
Fiscal: Centrist (44)
I also found that I often didn’t like the options given. It wasn’t that I didn’t have an opinion, these were often areas where I have a fairly strong opinion. For example, on Social Security, I don’t mind privatisation, but I also would like to see the Republicans stop depleting the funds that are already there.
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (15).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (32).
'Bout right. And I seem to be getting more liberal with age.
Now I don’t feel so all alone. 
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (6).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (29).
My non-fiscal score is slightly south of my Political Compass score, but I’ll believe it; I just wonder what puts me above 0 non-fiscally.
The fiscal side is almost identical to my Political Compas score, so I guess I’ll believe it. I think I’m further right in practice than in theory, though (ie, I’d like things to be that far left fiscally, but don’t think going that far left works). I think. I took this a week or two ago, and didn’t re-read the questions just now, so I can’t remember specifics.
Here in Austin I feel like a moderate, but that could be because there are people thrown to the left here to rebel against the conservativeness of the rest of Texas.
Hmm, I tried to retake it, thinking more about practical implications, and came up with this:
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (7).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (28).
I guess that’s about where I really fall on that test, then, since I went up 1 point in non-fiscal and down 1 point in fiscal.
Nope. I think the reason I got a 3 and not a 1 on non-fiscal issues is that I don’t want to ban all guns.
quelquechose, you forgot someone :mad:
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (9).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (5).
Puts me in the same corner as the Political Compass did. I’m guess I’m just going to have accept that I’m an anarcho-syndicalist.