Do the results from this non-political test reflect your political leanings?

I got 76% liberal and 24% conservative.

49% liberal which is very inaccurate, I am much further to the left.

73% liberal

ha! 79%

79% what?

71% lib, but how does our level of disgust for anything correlate with politics?

Are conservatives just easily disgusted? Intolerant therefore?

80% liberal. Yep, that’s about right.

@olivier5 I remember seeing a study that correlated political leanings with how strongly the test subjects reacted to disturbing images, with conservatives being more easily disturbed.

Who the hell rather eats a piece of paper than a piece of fruit?

Do “conservative” (34%) and “liberal” (66%) mean “Republican” and “Democrat”, respectively, considering how the conclusion is “Your brain is a Democrat”? I would expect me to be far to the left of the Democrats, considering how I’m left-leaning relative to Dutch politics.

81% liberal. Sounds about right.

52% Liberal.

I got 57% liberal, 43% conservative: “Your brain is a Democrat.”

To answer the question, I think it was pretty accurate.

Many of the questions were about my level of disgust, and I’m not squeamish about a lot of things (smell of urine in a tunnel, drinking from someone’s glass, touching dead bodies – usually at a wake I try to touch the body).

Crazy test. I got 51% conservative and 49% liberal. I think I’m more liberal than conservative. I would rate myself 70% liberal.

I’m not very squeamish about seeing blood and that sort of thing, but I am a bit of a germaphobe, and fairly phobic about throwing up. That test means nothing related to politics.

@JLeslie: I agree. I didn’t see what much of it had to do with politics and I didn’t see the logic of a question like “would you rather eat paper or a piece of fruit.” I’d say 99.99% of people would rather eat fruit than paper.

@jca I wonder if they weight each question equally?

how does our level of disgust for anything correlate with politics?

If you click on “how does this work?” it says:

A 2014 study concluded that people who were more prone to disgust are more conservative and tend to align with the republican party.

The study measured participants’ brain response to “disgusting” imagery using an MRI. The study could predict party affiliation with up to 98% confidence. The questionaire on chartsme.com uses Jonathan Haidt’s disgust scale in lieu of MRI and imagery, so results are likely far less accurate. Watch TED Talk to learn more or read ‘Yuck!: The Nature and Moral Significance of Disgust’.

^^Does it predict religiousity?

Check the second square in this article from The Daily Dispatch Daily Dispatch for an explanation of where some of the political candidates and historical figures are located. It is called a Johari window and shows two spectra and there interaction.

I’m located in the green zone.

@Call_Me_Jay: What would be the significance of the “would you rather eat paper than fruit” question?

73% Liberal.

It was interesting to read about the relationship between the yuck/ick factor and politics. It makes sense to me. My less liberal friends tend to be much more delicate about a lot of things.

Disgust is actually a useful evolutionary trait. Avoiding “icky” things kept you alive.

@hornet It’s hard to avoid the yuck factor if you have humans or pets to care for.

It seemed like the questions purposely reflected situations that posed no actual threat to you (as the subject of the test), so it seems to be looking for how good your mind is at overruling your visceral reactions with the higher cognitive functions that tell you that there’s no real threat.

That does seem to track with some typical Republican vs Democrat divides. Republicans, for instance, are far more likely to overate the threat to them personally of terrorism or violent crime or government takeover, and also to think that voter fraud is an actual problem. Democrats are more likely to perceive these threats in proportion to their actual statistical risk.

I got 71% liberal, but I see myself as much more centered.

It told me my “brain is a Democrat” and rated me 32% conservative, 68% liberal.

The thing that upset and disgusted me the most was being told farcical political labels from the USA apply to me, especially after seeing the Democrats do their disgusting act and assert that if you’re a good person you need to support their atrociously corrupt party and corporate candidate.

My brain wants them to self-destruct.

Ahem.

Even discarding that for a moment, and accepting their repulsive premise that there is only one dimension to politics, I think their measure is way, way off for me, except, interestingly enough, as it applies to the kinds of questions they pose.

Politically, I’m pretty close to Sanders or Stein, except when I’m angry, and then I’m an arch Green take-your-industry-and-die militant pro-wildlife anti-establishment revolutionary.

My score is 100% liberal. I consider myself moderate conservative.

It didn’t ask how disgusted I feel when I see pictures of Trump in front of the American flag.

I came 69% liberal. I don’t see that as possible.

80% Liberal
20% Conservative

I’d say that’s pretty accurate.

Liberal 63%
Conservative 37%

I am quite hard to disgust, but not changing your underwear for a week, maggots on trash and someone vomiting near me, yep, total disgust.
However, I am a science/medical type and have a high tolerance for gore, seeing someones intestines outside of their body or a human hand in formaldehyde does not disgust me, a road kill cat or dog does. haha
Same with seeing a rat run across my path. I love rats, infact I used to feed the rats in a local park.

They came running to me for their nightly goody bag of peanuts, bread, grapes and sunflower seeds. Yeah, I was not popular with the park goers so I took them their treats at dusk when nobody was around. lol

@Coloma The way I see it, someone not changing their underwear for a week is their problem not mine (I just feel sorry for the person). Maggots are baby flies that do a great service to the environment (their the babies, gotta love’m). Vomiting is a natural process of an ill person (also a kind of a call for help).

79% liberal. Seems about right. I’m a bit phobic about mould so expected to be more easily disgusted but, as has been mentioned, none of the scenarios were affecting me directly.

@Despite the notions you express here, I fear that what passes for ACTUAL conservatism these days has evolved beyond YOUR definition of the religion. And I’m not making this up. The very fact that you bother with mounting a logical argument here marks you indelibly as one of those “left behind.” If ever you come to appreciate such curiosities as the fact that Clinton or Obsma are left of Ted Cruz , does not mark them true liberals. As a fiscal conservative, you are pretty much condemned to a twisted and lingering hell, because you are increasingly called to defend hairbrained people and ideas which are openly onbtheir face batshit crazy. Good luck with that!

52% liberal, 48% conservative. Hum, was it accurate? I suppose as accurate as a small sample study that uses weak correlations with no actual basis in science to place me percentage-wise into a false dichotomy can be.

Liberals and conservatives do think differently…but not like this silliness.

The above was for @Jaxk. I hate trying to operate with this phone.

@gondwanalon Fair enough but you you can keep the week old underwear, the maggots and the vomit and I’ll stick to the severed hands, eviscerated guts and the rats in my path. No accounting for the gross out factor and personal ideas of such. haha
I’d find it much easier to stuff someones intestines back in their body cavity and put pressure on the wound than I would touching maggots, week old underwear with olympic sized skid marks and cleaning up human vomit, short of my own child and pets. haha

@stanleybmanly – Being a Republican doesn’t make you conservative, just like being a Democrat doesn’t make you liberal. Unfortunately we are stuck with candidates that are both searching for a populous message that will get them elected. Neither is what they appear to be nor is either particularly appealing. That’s why most of the debate is centered on making the other one look bad (or worse). The election going forward is likely to be the most negative campaigning we’ve ever seen. Ridicule if you like but there’s nothing good happening on your side either.

I prefer paper to fruit, a nice, crisp, sheet of matte copy dipped in Sriracha sauce. JK

This test isn’t the least bit accurate. I do cover public toilet seats, prefer not to touch corpses, and wouldn’t want a cold-stricken chef sneezing all over my food; none of these things makes me a Republican. I’m about as far from a Republican as anyone can be. I’m an uber-liberal with a high standard of acceptable v. “eww!”

This test isn’t the least bit accurate.

For you. There is no claim of 100% accuracy.

The MRI study was 98% accurate. The 2% fail rate does not make it less accurate.

Why would seeing someone eat an apple with a knife and fork be disgusting at all?

27% Conservative. I’m a Democrat.

Now I’m going to take it again and be super disgusted with everything and see what comes up.

Done. With those responses I came back 96% Republican.

I got 64% liberal and 36% conservative. However, because of the kind of OCD I have, I feel that this test is flawed for people like me.

Wow. So, basically republicans are unhappier and more disgusted and more wound up.

Well, @JLeslie you also have to realize that the makers of the test called the results anyway they wanted. If they hated Dems, they could have said being super disgusted meant you were a Democrat.
On the other hand…from the Republicans I know, they DO seem more disgusted and intolerant to me than others.

That is my experience with the republicans I know as well. Many are downright paranoid.
I do think being uber conservative lends itself to a lot of neurotic weirdness. haha

If they hated Dems, they could have said being super disgusted meant you were a Democrat

No. That isn’t a valid statement. They aren’t hating anybody.

People who report disgust skew conservative and Republican. It isn’t an opinion. It is an observation.

@Call_Me_Jay are you saying the test is a valid reflection of political leaning? (I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, just needing clarification.)

@Dutchess_III It works for most people who take the test. Not everybody, but most people. That’s it. That is all. It’s an observation.

OK. Thanks.

So, this site is primarily self-congratulatory liberals? :)

Yay me!

I’m thinking my answers make me slightly neurotic left leaning.

It reminds me of that quiz someone once posted about sexuality and I kind of fell between the cracks as part of the percentage that didn’t fit well.

Yes, @hornet. Pancakes for you!

@Coloma touching maggots and filthy underwear and cleaning up vomit wasn’t part of the deal. Get real.

Also when I was in college I went into a vacant laboratory to study invertebrate specimens. People started entering the lab and were doing their own thing. I happened to look over at what the guy next to me was working on. It was a half of a human head sliced right down the middle so you could see much of the internal structure. I remember that the student was tediously dissecting out the nerves in and around the ear. After I got a closeup look at what he was doing I just went back to studying my worms and bugs.

What part of the “deal” are you refering to @gondwanalon?

@Dutchess_III LOL

@gondwanalon Here’s the get real deal, underwear with week old skid marks, will draw maggot making flies which would make me vomit on said soiled underwear and maggots. The tri-fuckta of disgusting.
Talk about killing 1 bird with 3 stones. I’m that bird. haha

@Coloma Your deal isn’t very real. There isn’t enough of a food source on week old underwear for fly eggs to hatch and grow into larvae. Nice try.

Sorry about your delicate stomach.

@Dutchess_III It wasn’t part of the deal, deal. What part of that deal can’t you deal with?

Just how close are you getting to dirty underwear worn by others, @Coloma? Lol

78% Liberal, 22 % Conservative. Still don’t consider myself a Dem however.

PS, I agree with @Jaxk nothing good happening on either side. On the Republican side the party bosses were beaten, on the Democratic side the people were.

@gondwanalon Deal, shake on it?

@jonsblond Gah…none, only my own and they are not dirty, tasnk you very much. haha

85% liberal, no surprise.

@Jaxk Being a Republican doesn’t make you conservative, just like being a Democrat doesn’t make you liberal

It used to be that way. but sadly the political system has become extremely polarized with the rise of the neo-con movement and the Tea Party over the past few election cycles. This has caused political pendulum to swing to the right so that many who would otherwise be called “moderate Democrats” start to look extremely liberal or progressive. By the same token, a Barry Goldwater and George Will might be called moderately conservative by today’s standards.

17% Con 83% Liberal

I have done the earthworm thing.

“A friend offers you a piece of chocolate shaped like dogdoo.” Dogdoo?! Did a toddler make this question? haha

When we were growing up we lived next to a family who had a 3 year old boy. My sisters were younger than me, but older than “Timmy” by 2 or 3 years. They used to play with him. One day Mom made fudge. The girls got a handful of fudge and shaped it into the shape of a couple of dog poops. Then they put them on the ground next to real dog poop. Then they went and got Timmy and sat on the ground. My sisters were eating the fudge dog poop, and trying to get Timmy to eat the real dog poop! My gawd! Terrible sisters!”

By the way, for any one interested in correlations between prefences and political leaning: https://www.okcupid.com/deep-end/politics

I have a FB friend who, apparently, went to the same high school, but I don’t recall him. I think he’s a few years older, or younger. We tend to debate and sometimes I think he’s an ass but then he’ll do something funny, or smart…there is just something there that has me keep him on my friend’s list.
I posted this “Non political test” on my FB page, and this is the response I got from him:

“And I came back as a Democrat. That’s the only disgusting part of this exercise. I’d have to call B.S. on the survey. The brief description of the methodology said it was 98% accurate. That’s an incredible claim, especially when it’s based on self reports. In the very small population represented here it was right only 33%. In order to get to 98% it would have to be right for the next 97 participants.”

I said, *“You came back as a Dem! Well, that explains why you are still my friend!
I wondered about it, too. In fact, on another website I suggested that the test was created by a Democrat as a way to discredit Republicans.
Someone Else [here on Fluther…no names] (A Dem) said, “No. That isn’t a valid statement.
People who report disgust skew conservative and Republican. It isn’t an opinion. It is an observation.

I said, “are you saying the test is a valid reflection of political leaning? (I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, just needing clarification.)”

Someone Else said, “It works for most people who take the test. Not everybody, but most people. That’s it. That is all. It’s an observation.”

That kind of put it in a different light. I mean, think about it, Randy. Which party, overall, shows the least amount of empathy, and the most amount of judgemental disgust?

Deport 11 million people (ripping families apart in the process.)

Make it so that poor people have to take drug tests (because everyone knows poor people are just lazy losers or they wouldn’t be poor.)

Make it so poor people can’t buy certain foods

Overturn Roe Vs Wade.

Don’t allow war refugees into the US, even if they’re just children.

Deport Muslims.

How they howled when gay marriage became legal.

It goes on and on. I’m willing to listen if you have any such claims against humanity that Democrats have made that is comparable to these.

@Dutchess_III – You define empathy so that it coincides with your own beliefs. The story changes if you look at who you’re empathizing with.

Deprort illegal immigrants – I tend to empathize with the American citizen that is being short changed due to lack of school funding, crowded schools and shortened curriculum. Not to mention it’s the law.

Drug testing – It’s not testing poor people it’s testing those that take public money. If you’re taking public funds to feed your kids, who do you empathize with, the kids or the parents. I would like to see the money go to support the kids not the parents drug habit. There are many jobs that require a drug test and if you can pass it the job market is considerably bigger. Seems like expanding the job market for low or no wage earners is pretty empathetic to me.

Can’t buy certain foods – spending a months food stamps on Steak and lobster or at the strip bar is not something I would empathize with. Food stamps are provided for specific purposes. There’s nothing wrong with insuring they go for that purpose. Most food kids would want are neither expensive nor prohibited. Insuring the kids get food is very empathetic.

Roe v Wade – Try empathizing with the unborn child and see how it looks.

Try empathsizing with Americans for a while and see if the equation changes.

Oh, I understand the arguments @Jaxk. Your first one boils down to the belief that the lives of American infants, children and women are more important than the lives of non American infants and children. It’s usually a Christian making that statement. I disagree with assigning the importance of individual humans in that way.

Drug testing for the poor is a flat out insult, nothing more. It’s another way of assigning value to a human life, using $$$ as the judge.
Plus it’s been proven to be a total waste of taxpayer’s money as the number of drug users among the poor is far less than the national average over all.
Why don’t they drug test politicians before they’re allowed to take office? They’re living off of tax payer money too.

If they give you enough in food stamps to buy steak and lobster (and in my experience, they did) why not spend it on that? Why not? The kids and I ate better when I had food stamps than at any other time, including today.
It’s disgusting that some say that poor people should only be allowed to eat cheap hot dogs, chips, and sow belly. That’s all they deserve….right?

Roe V Wade…well, I had an abortion in 1979. I was 4 weeks along. The embryo had no more awareness than a chicken embryo at that same age. If it’s not a decision you’ll ever have to face, it’s none of your business. There are worse things than dying. I am against abortion after the first trimester, and I’m pretty sure that’s the general law.

I empathize with Americans. I empathize with all humanity.

Fuck politics, fuck tests & fuck labels, of that i’m 100% certain

It was an interesting test and had nothing to do with politics, only psychology.

…fuck psychology :D

LOL! I can certainly understand why you wouldn’t like them @ucme! :D

@Dutchess_III Well said!

Bridget & Frigid have spoken…:D

@Jaxk mean spirited laws and requirements that just happen to devastate the poor and defenseless are deliberately designed with this in mind and therefore despicable. ALL of us take public money, and all sectors of the society have their share of maladjusted people, but it is the poor EXCLUSIVELY that are required to demonstrate that they are drug free. Do you imagine that such requirements would EVER be tolerated when it comes to social security benefits? And regarding the children of the poor, and those aborted babies. If the state is going to deprive the parents of benefits stipulated necessary to support those children, does the state assume the obligation of feeding the kids?

Ah. There it is again, @Coloma. What a jerk.

@stanleybmanly: At my job (and many jobs now), there’s a clause in the contract that states that I may be required to submit to a drug test at any time. My point is that it’s not just the “poor EXCLUSIVELY that are required to demonstrate that they are drug free.”

No one suggested the poor exclusively had to demonstrate that they are drug free. That’s not the point. It’s the reasoning behind drug testing the poor that is so insulting.

I submitted to drug tests too, for employment. There are logical reasons for this. Factory work can be dangerous, and it’s an extreme legal liability if an employee has an accident, kills himself or someone else, because he was impaired.
I worked in the customer service department for Rubbermaid. Of course 90% of Rubbermaid is factory work. However, the customer service people were subject to the same rules as the factory workers.

I think, but I don’t really remember, that I had to take a drug test prior to employment in education and with Edward Jones, but there were no random tests after that.

My husband has to go get drug tested once a year, and so do I, because I’m his wife. Although he is in sales, the company itself is production based.

Now what would be comparable is if a company said, “Only black people will be required to submit to random drug testing (because you know how those people are.)” That is what I object to….the assumption that if you’re poor you’re probably on drugs.

@jca I know a lot of jobs now require submission to random testing. And while I view the requirement as onerous, Dutchess beautifully explains the difference above.

Drug testing to receive public money?

You mean like Medicare and Social Security?
Bankers taking bailouts?
VA benefits?
Home mortgage interest deductions?
Welfare subsidies for upper-class college students?
Marriage counselors

When will we start weeding out these welfare queens who are buying drugs with MY MONEY?

Thank you @Call_Me_Jay. Not to mention politicians. Of course, those people aren’t a blight on our society like the poor are.

@Dutchess_III Yes and of course, god forbid, if you get food assistsence and GASP buy your kids a carton of ice cream, or a box of Captain Crunch or a bag of chips because, you know, you should only be purchasing rice, oatmeal, beans, and top ramen to stretch your food dollar you are taking advantage of the system.
Poor people are not allowed a treat of any kind because that means they are misappropriating their meager government help. Let them eat cake!

The thing is, in my own experience, they gave me probably 3 or 4 times in food stamps than I could ever possibly use in a month (and I can’t help but wonder if this is contributing to the obesity problem in America.) I mean, if the government is giving so much excess, based on their own formula, how is it wrong to spend it on high dollar food? You can’t save them. If you don’t use them by the end of the month you lose them.

I was still pretty picky about what I fed my kids. No sugar cereal, except I’d wrap a box of their favorite up at Christmas so they could have at least that much under whatever passed for a Christmas tree that year. (I depended on Gramma and Grampa to fill it out a little more.) Same with birthdays.

It blows my mind that everyone focuses on the food. Why don’t they focus on the hygienic needs of the poor? The poor haters would be happy to know that I could barely buy toilet paper and toothpaste. Tampons were a nightmare. I never bought trash bags, only used the plastic sacks from the store, hooked over the back of a chair in the kitchen. I never bought foil, or zip lock bags.

But…you know, we poor people don’t deserve decent food, and we certainly don’t deserve be be clean like normal people.

We are just scum. Drug-using scum.

@Dutchess_III I got food aide and it was only $26.00 a week for a single person with the income I had which was only a little over $600.00 a month. It was a joke. It helped yes, but I guess having kids they must give quite a bit more. Right, food help does not buy anything but food, no personal products, TP, shampoo, toothpaste, soap, laundry soap etc.

All of those items are costly especially for a family.

I had 4 kids, income of about…$175 to $250 a week, and I got $500 to $700 in stamps. It makes a huge difference when you have kids. In Kansas I don’t think you even qualify for them if you don’t have kids and you’re under 65 and not disabled.

@Call_Me_Jay “It works for most people who take the test. Not everybody, but most people.”

Where are you getting that? Have you seen any scientific sampling of the people who have taken this test, empirical evidence that its results are accurate for most people?

@Love_my_doggie Feel free to follow the links at the site. You might also try Google. Enjoy.