Reference no: EM133303320

Assignment: It was an interesting test but I was concerned about if it would be fair. The questions seemed steered in my opinions with one extreme to the other with not much middle ground. After reading what my results mean I kinda felt understood. I usually shy away or avoid anything to do with politics, even going so far as to not vote. My family called me a right winged liberal for a lot of my life but now even dad my dad was like that sounds more like it. Ambivalent right in a nutshell means Young and politically cross-pressured: Conservative on economics and issues of race and gender, less so on immigration, and social issues. I definitely agree with some of the major key points like legal abortion and legalizing the recreational and medical use of marijuana. going on to issues ranging from the size of the federal government to views about business, gender, and race, Ambivalent rights hold many views that are largely consistent with core conservative values. Yet they also hold more moderate stances on several social issues and differ from some other segments of the GOP coalition in taking a more internationalist view of foreign policy and a less restrictive position on immigration. I was very pleasantly surprised with the results and finally included in a political ideology. that was a worries waste of time turned pleasantly informed and educated that makes me feel like I can get a relative grasp on how I see things politically. Knowing your typology is like a sigh of relief after being nervously skeptical. 1. What you think about this discussion? Explain The typology definitely represents my own political beliefs, as it located me in the stressed sideliner category, and the expansion on this category serves to describe my feelings on politics well. I take the ideas from either political side as it applies to my values, I do not participate much in politics beyond occasionally reading about it and doing some research on candidates before voting, and my ballot is often full of several different political parties. The results did not surprise me at all as I often describe myself as a moderate, so it makes sense that this survey landed me in the middle of the spectrum. The survey does a great job of representing the vast majority of political beliefs as it breaks down each side in to groups based on their attitudes towards specific issues which serves to further define the parties so that there is a clear separation between the extremes of each side and the more moderate and slightly leaning groups. This would create accurate categories that do a great job of defining the individuals within them, but there are still limitations, as some of the issues could change over time, which would affect where the lines within political parties land. Also, another limitation is on the moderate category as it seems to generalize a lot about the people that land there, there could be a more in depth analysis of the individuals in the middle, maybe they feel like the parties do not adequately represent their attitudes and therefore decide to not associate with either side. The typology does prove to be useful in comparing several sectors of each party and how demographics fits into those groups, specifically how young people will often take ideas from both sides but lean slightly more to one side or the other.

Question: What is your opinion about this discussion? Tell me what is your thought?