2012 Political Party Platforms and Endorsements

Charts are from Illinois Family Action  http://www.illinoisfamilyaction.org/?p=1002 Printable Version of these two charts

The main message today is VOTE!! It is a right we are fortunate to have and like any right, we should exercise it regularly. As they say in the fitness world, "Use it or lose it". A lot of great information out there to help decide. If you're still "undecided" at this point, perhaps you are just confused. 
I think we all feel like this young girl by now:

Tired of Bronco Bamma and Mitt Romney

  She's bi-partisan which is refreshing.

Party Platforms Presented as a public service from Advocates for Self-Government. 

2012 POLITICAL PARTY PLATFORMS VoteMatch - REPUBLICAN PLATFORM Candidate's Political Philosophy The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions.  It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt! Personal Questions:  Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers. Economic Questions:  Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.   Candidate's Score The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:
Personal Score	15%
Economic Score	88%

Where the Candidate Fits In Where the candidate's Personal score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy.  Based on the above score, the candidate is a Hard-Core Conservative.
Personal Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars. A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles. A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.  Economic Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.  A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program. This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  How We Score Candidates How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question: We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table. We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example. We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2. If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor. If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor. If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral. If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose. If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose. When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage. To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations. The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other). The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below. Examples The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy.  The candidate's answers are on the left. A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention. A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Personal Issues	The candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
Abortion Is A  Woman's Right
Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law
Organized Prayer In Public Schools
Death Penalty
Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws
Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It
Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services
Link Human Rights To Trade With China
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Economic Issues	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
Require Companies To Hire More Women/Minorities
More Federal Funding For Health Coverage
Privatize Social Security
Spend Resources To Stop Global Warming
Make Income Tax Flatter And Lower
Immigration Helps Our Economy - Encourage It
Support and Expand Free Trade
Continue Foreign Aid to Russia, Israel, Others
	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Issues Not Counted In Philosophy	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
Absolute Right To Gun Ownership
Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers
More Spending On Armed Forces Personnel
Reduce Spending on Missile Defense ("Star Wars")
	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Final Notes To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions. There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics. Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales. Political Map and some content from Advocates for Self-Government.

VoteMatch - TEA PARTY Candidate's Political Philosophy The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions.  It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt! Personal Questions:  Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers. Economic Questions:  Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.   Candidate's Score The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:
Personal Score	50%
Economic Score	65%

Where the Candidate Fits In Where the candidate's Personal score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy.  Based on the above score, the candidate is a Moderate Libertarian Conservative.
Personal Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars. A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles. A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.  Economic Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.  A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program. This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  How We Score Candidates How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question: We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table. We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example. We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2. If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor. If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor. If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral. If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose. If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose. When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage. To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations. The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other). The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below. Examples The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy.  The candidate's answers are on the left. A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention. A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Personal Issues	The candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
Abortion Is A  Woman's Right
Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law
Organized Prayer In Public Schools
Death Penalty
Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws
Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It
Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services
Link Human Rights To Trade With China
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Economic Issues	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
Require Companies To Hire More Women/Minorities
More Federal Funding For Health Coverage
Privatize Social Security
Spend Resources To Stop Global Warming
Make Income Tax Flatter And Lower
Immigration Helps Our Economy - Encourage It
Support and Expand Free Trade
Continue Foreign Aid to Russia, Israel, Others
	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Issues Not Counted In Philosophy	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
Absolute Right To Gun Ownership
Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers
More Spending On Armed Forces Personnel
Reduce Spending on Missile Defense ("Star Wars")
	The Candidate	Hard-core Liberal	Hard-core Libertarian	Hard-Core Conservative	Hard-Core Authoritarian
= Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose
Final Notes To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions. There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics. Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales. Political Map and some content from Advocates for Self-Government. VoteMatch - LIBERTARIAN PARTY Candidate's Political Philosophy The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions.  It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt! Personal Questions:  Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers. Economic Questions:  Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.   Candidate's Score The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:   Personal Score 83% Economic Score 95% Where the Candidate Fits In Where the candidate's Personal score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy.  Based on the above score, the candidate is a Hard-Core Libertarian.   Personal Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars. A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles. A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.  Economic Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.  A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program. This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  How We Score Candidates How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question: We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table. We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example. We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2. If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor. If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor. If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral. If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose. If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose. When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage. To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations. The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other). The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below. Examples The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy.  The candidate's answers are on the left. A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention. A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.  = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose   Personal Issues The candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian Abortion Is A  Woman's Right   Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law   Organized Prayer In Public Schools   Death Penalty    Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws   Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It   Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services   Link Human Rights To Trade With China    = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose Economic Issues The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian Require Companies To Hire More Women/Minorities   More Federal Funding For Health Coverage   Privatize Social Security   Spend Resources To Stop Global Warming   Make Income Tax Flatter And Lower   Immigration Helps Our Economy - Encourage It   Support and Expand Free Trade    Continue Foreign Aid to Russia, Israel, Others   The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian  = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose Issues Not Counted In Philosophy The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian Absolute Right To Gun Ownership   Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers   More Spending On Armed Forces Personnel   Reduce Spending on Missile Defense ("Star Wars")   The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian  = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose Final Notes To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions. There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics. Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales. Political Map and some content from Advocates for Self-Government. VoteMatch - DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM Candidate's Political Philosophy The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions.  It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt! Personal Questions:  Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers. Economic Questions:  Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.   Candidate's Score The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:   Personal Score 60% Economic Score 15% Where the Candidate Fits In Where the candidate's Personal score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy.  Based on the above score, the candidate is a Populist-Leaning Liberal.   Personal Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars. A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles. A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.  Economic Score This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.  A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program. This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.  How We Score Candidates How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question: We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table. We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example. We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2. If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor. If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor. If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral. If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose. If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose. When you do a VoteMatch quiz, your answers are compared to each candidates' overall answer to come up with a matching percentage. To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations. The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other). The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description. A more detailed explanation appears below. Examples The chart below indicates how four "hard-core" political philosophers would answer the questions. From this example, you can see how the candidate fits in with each philosophy.  The candidate's answers are on the left. A "hard-core liberal" would answer personal questions to minimize government involvement, but would answer economic questions to include government intervention. A "hard-core libertarian" would answer both personal and economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core conservative" would answer personal questions to include government intervention, but would answer economic questions to minimize government involvement. A "hard-core authoritarian" would answer both personal and economic questions with proposals that include government intervention.  = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose   Personal Issues The candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian Abortion Is A  Woman's Right   Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law   Organized Prayer In Public Schools   Death Penalty    Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws   Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It   Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services   Link Human Rights To Trade With China    = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose Economic Issues The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian Require Companies To Hire More Women/Minorities   More Federal Funding For Health Coverage   Privatize Social Security   Spend Resources To Stop Global Warming   Make Income Tax Flatter And Lower   Immigration Helps Our Economy - Encourage It   Support and Expand Free Trade    Continue Foreign Aid to Russia, Israel, Others   The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian  = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose Issues Not Counted In Philosophy The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian Absolute Right To Gun Ownership   Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers   More Spending On Armed Forces Personnel   Reduce Spending on Missile Defense ("Star Wars")   The Candidate Hard-core Liberal Hard-core Libertarian Hard-Core Conservative Hard-Core Authoritarian  = Strongly Support     = Support     = No Opinion     = Oppose     = Strongly Oppose Final Notes To ensure balance among political viewpoints, we arranged the wording of the questions so that half the time, the answer involving more government is answered by "support", and half the time by "oppose." Hence, each of the "hard core" philosophers would choose "support" for 3 or 4 of the Personal questions and for 3 or 4 of the Economic questions. There are four questions which are not counted in the candidate's political philosophy. Those questions do not fit this theory -- for example, Democrats typically oppose unrestricted gun ownership, while a 'hard core liberal' would support it on grounds of the government not intervening in a personal issue. These omissions ensure that the theoretical definitions match with current-day politics. Many of these statements cross over the line between personal issues and economic issues. And many people might answer what we call a "Personal" issue based on economic reasoning. But we have tried to arrange a series of questions which separates the way candidates think about government activities in these two broad scales. Political Map and some content from Advocates for Self-Government. VoteMatch - GREEN PARTY Candidate's Political Philosophy The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "personal" and "economic" questions.  It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt! Personal Questions:  Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers. Economic Questions:  Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictions answers.   Candidate's Score The candidate scored the following on the VoteMatch questions:   Personal Score 98% Economic Score 0% from the American Presidency Project: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/2012_newspaper_endorsements.php 2012 General Election Editorial Endorsements by Major Newspapers   Top 100 Newspapers Based on Daily Circulation    Click on Link to Read Each Editorial   -   Changed Party Endorsements Indicated in Bold Italics   Last Updated on November 5 @ 22:15 GMT (Final Update) Scorecard SPLIT or "undecided" NO ENDORSEMENT Total Endorsements 41 1 35 23 Total Circulation 10,014,980 78,819 6,475,815 7,028,874 Endorsed Obama in 2008 39 1 12 11 Endorsed McCain in 2008 1 0 22 3 Did not endorse in 2008 1 0 0 8 SPLIT in 2008 0 0 1 1 view 2008 editorial endorsements page Newspaper Circulation Endorsee Published 2008 Endorsee The Wall Street Journal 2,118,315 Generally does not endorse candidates USA Today 1,817,446 Does not endorse candidates The New York Times 1,586,757 Obama October 27 Obama Los Angeles Times 616,575 Obama October 21 Obama The Daily News (New York) 579,636 Romney November 4 Obama San Jose Mercury News 575,786 Obama October 27 Obama New York Post 555,327 Romney October 25 McCain The Washington Post 507,615 Obama October 25 Obama Chicago Sun-Times 422,335 No longer endorses (1) Obama Chicago Tribune 414,590 Obama October 26 Obama The Dallas Morning News 405,349 Romney September 28 McCain The Denver Post 401,120 Obama October 21 Obama Newsday (Long Island, NY) 397,973 Romney November 3 Obama Houston Chronicle 384,007 Romney October 21 Obama The Philadelphia Inquirer 325,291 Obama October 14 Obama The Arizona Republic (Phoenix) 321,600 Romney October 21 McCain Star Tribune (Minneapolis-St. Paul) 300,330 Obama October 27 Obama Tampa Bay Times (Formerly St. Petersburg Times) 299,497 Obama October 21 Obama The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH) 286,405 Obama October 20 Obama The Orange County Register (CA) 280,812 Did not endorse (10) none The Star-Ledger (Newark, NJ) 278,940 Obama October 21 Obama The Oregonian (Portland) 247,833 NONE August 14 Obama The Seattle Times 236,929 Obama September 28 Obama Detroit Free Press 232,696 Obama October 28 Obama The San Diego Union-Tribune 230,742 Romney November 3 McCain San Francisco Chronicle 229,176 Obama October 26 Obama The Boston Globe 225,482 Obama October 29 Obama Las Vegas Review-Journal 220,619 Romney October 7 McCain Honolulu Star-Advertiser 209,915 Obama November 4 none Pioneer Press (St. Paul, MN) 205,171 Does not endorse candidates (2) Kansas City Star 200,365 Obama October 27 Obama The Sacramento Bee 196,667 Obama October 14 Obama Star-Telegram (Fort Worth, TX) 195,455 Romney October 20 Obama Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 188,545 Obama October 28 Obama Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 188,405 Romney October 20 McCain St. Louis Post-Dispatch 187,992 Obama October 7 Obama Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel 185,710 No longer endorses (3) Obama The Baltimore Sun 179,574 Obama November 2 Obama Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock) 179,258 Romney October 23 McCain The Atlanta Journal-Constitution 174,251 No longer endorses (4) Obama Orlando Sentinel 173,576 Romney October 19 Obama Sun-Sentinel (Ft. Lauderdale, FL) 165,974 Romney October 26 Obama The Indianapolis Star 164,640 NONE August 19 SPLIT The Miami Herald 160,988 Obama October 26 Obama Investor’s Business Daily (Los Angeles) 156,269 Romney November 2 McCain The Record (Hackensack, NJ) 155,236 Obama November 4 Obama The Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY) 154,033 Obama November 4 Obama The Buffalo News 147,085 Obama October 27 Obama Charlotte Observer 146,511 Obama October 21 Obama The Tampa Tribune 144,510 Romney October 21 McCain The Cincinnati Enquirer 144,165 Romney October 27 McCain The Virginian Pilot 142,476 Does not endorse candidates (5) San Antonio Express-News 139,099 Obama October 19 McCain The Columbus (OH) Dispatch 136,023 Romney October 21 McCain Omaha World-Herald 135,223 Romney October 8 McCain The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, LA) 133,557 NONE October 14 Obama The Detroit News 133,508 Romney October 25 McCain The Hartford Courant 132,006 Obama October 26 Obama The Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA) 131,872 Romney October 28 McCain The Oklahoman (Oklahoma City, OK) 130,177 Romney October 28 McCain News & Observer (Raleigh, NC) 129,698 Obama October 28 Obama Austin American-Statesman 125,305 NONE November 3 Obama The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN) 118,978 NONE November 4 Obama The Tennessean (Nashville) 118,589 Romney October 18 Obama Grand Rapids Press 114,571 Romney October 24 McCain Democrat and Chronicle (Rochester, NY) 114,502 Obama November 3 Obama The Providence (RI) Journal 114,013 Obama October 28 Obama The Salt Lake Tribune 110,546 Obama October 20 Obama The Palm Beach Post 110,373 NONE October 29 Obama Richmond Times-Dispatch 108,559 Romney October 27 McCain Boston Herald 108,548 Romney October 23 McCain The Fresno Bee 107,501 Obama October 31 Obama The Birmingham News 103,729 NONE November 1 McCain The Des Moines Register 101,915 Romney October 27 Obama The Morning Call (Allentown, PA) 100,196 Did not endorse (10) none Daily Herald (Arlington Heights, IL) 99,670 Romney October 28 Obama The Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville, FL) 98,580 Romney October 26 SPLIT Asbury Park Press 98,032 Obama October 26 Obama Tulsa World 97,725 Romney November 4 McCain Arizona Daily Star (Tucson, AZ) 96,682 Obama October 21 Obama La Opinión 95,148 Obama October 23 Obama The Blade (Toledo, OH) 94,215 Obama October 28 Obama Daily News (Los Angeles) 94,016 Romney October 26 Obama Dayton Daily News 93,425 Does not endorse candidates (6) Obama Lexington (KY) Herald Leader 89,735 Obama October 28 Obama The Akron Beacon Journal 88,040 Obama October 20 Obama The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC) 87,817 Romney November 4 McCain Northwest Indiana Times 85,692 Romney November 4 McCain Albuquerque Journal 84,826 Romney November 4 McCain Deseret News (Salt Lake City, UT) 83,719 Does not endorse candidates The News Journal (New Castle County, DE) 83,210 Obama November 3 Obama Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) 83,083 Romney November 4 Obama Press-Telegram (Los Angeles County, CA) 82,556 Romney October 26 Obama Press-Register (Mobile, AL) 82,088 NONE November 1 McCain Knoxville News Sentinel 81,391 No longer endorses (7) McCain Sarasota Herald-Tribune 79,845 No longer endorses (8) Obama Intelligencer Journal  |  Lancaster New Era 78,819 SPLIT (9) November 2 Obama The Roanoke Times (Roanoke, VA) 78,663 NONE October 21 none The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY) 78,616 "NEITHER" November 2 Obama The News Tribune (Tacoma, WA) 78,453 Obama October 24 Obama Citation: Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, "2012 General Election Editorial Endorsements by Major Newspapers." The American Presidency Project. Ed. John T. Woolley and Gerhard Peters. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California. 1999-2012. Available from the World Wide Web: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/2012_newspaper_endorsements.php. Data compiled by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley after reviewing original editorials of the listed newspapers. (1) On January 22, 2012, The Chicago Sun-Times announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See:http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/10174893-474/editorial-why-we-will-no-longer-endorse-in-elections.html (2) The Pioneer Press (St. Paul, MN) does not endorse candidates. See: http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_21928764/regarding-our-editorial-minnesotas-proposed-marriage-amendment (3) On October 26, 2012, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See: http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/why-we-wont-make-endorsements-1b7bd30-175955471.html (4) On October 10, 2009, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See: http://www.ajc.com/news/news/opinion/to-our-readers-ajc-takes-new-approach-on-election/nQYCp/ (5) In October 2007, The Virginian Pilot announced that it would no longer endorse political candidates. (6) On October 31, 2012, The Dayton Daily News announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/local-govt-politics/why-were-not-endorsing/nSspX/ (7) On October 14, 2012, The Knoxville News Sentinel announced that it would no longer endorse candidates. See: http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/oct/14/jack-mcelroy-news-sentinel-ends-long-tradition/ (8) On October 26, 2012, The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reiterated that it would no longer endorse candidates. See: http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20121026/OPINION/310269996/2198/OPINION?Title=Election-recommendations (9) The Intelligencer Journal/Lancaster New Era has two editorial boards. The Intelligencer Journal endorsed Barack Obama and theLancaster New Era endorsed Mitt Romney in separate editorials on November 2, 2012. (10) As of 22:00 GMT November 5, 2012, neither the Orange County Register nor the Morning Call (Lehigh, PA) endorsed a candidate. This is consistent with each paper's decision not to endorse in 2008.  It is standard policy that USA Today does not endorse political candidates • The Deseret News does not endorse as a matter of policy • Top 100 Newspapers determined by circulation data available from BurrellesLuce athttp://www.burrellesluce.com/sites/default/files/TopMedia_updatedMay2012.pdf