Ya' Wanna' Know What I Think?

Probably not. But I won't let that stop me.

There's no end of polls. You can't open up a newspaper without seeing the results of the latest survey of our opinion. They're often color-coded – blue for the Democrats and red for the Republicans – so you don't even have to read them to know what we're thinking. You don't even have to know how to read. And the more I hear of American public opinion, as conveyed by these polls, the more convinced I am that many of our voters don't know how to read. I know I became convinced long ago that most of them don't know how to think.

The presumptive candidates for the Presidency from the major parties are, apparently, both disliked and feared by the majority of voters, but that doesn't stop the electorate from expressing a preference when asked. Both candidates reflect the views of many of our citizens: one says whatever comes to mind. He doesn't waste his valuable time thinking about what he's saying or contemplating the implications. He has no interest in promoting the views of his supporters – only in expressing his own prejudices. “Damn the torpedoes. Full speed ahead.” Fortunately for him there are a lot of people who think the same as he, and will fight for their unconsidered views. So he is, strangely, representative of much American opinion.

The other candidate is focused on the wishes of a large number of voting blocs and, does her best to vocally support them all – after finding out what they want. Not surprisingly, then, she, too, speaks for a significant number of citizens – since she is leading them. From behind. “Look before you leap.” In the past she has made many errors of her own, but strives to ignore them and show how she supports everyone else. And her position has been (adversely in my view) affected by the stands of an opponent in the primaries with a large number of outspoken and opinionated supporters who place “intellectual opinions” above intellect – who also don't consider the implications of their positions, though they are ready to fight to defend them.

Of course no one has bothered to ask me what I think. I'm not sure, however, whether that pleases or disappoints me. As I look at the published polls – and they must be right or they wouldn't be in print (“Well, all I know is what I read in the papers.”) – the pollsters choose not only the questions they ask, but the acceptable answers. So participants are forced to decide between the alternatives they're offered. I guess that's necessary for the pollsters, but it really doesn't give the people whom they question the opportunity to say what they actually think. Instead they are faced with Yes/No questions (most of the choices are binary) or ones determining the degree of agreement or disagreement an individual has with a specific statement. I guess I'd be flattered to be asked my view, but frustrated at the limitations in being able to offer it.

I must admit, therefore, that I was delighted when I came across IStandWith (https://www.isidewith.com/) on line. I suspect that there are many other sites like it to help inform the voter of available choices, but they would be difficult to summarize for the media, so they're not the ones that make the news. Perhaps that's the reason that published polls are sometimes in error.

In any event, this poll not only offered the polarized choices, but both a variety of more nuanced views ("other stances") and the opportunity to state one's own thoughts ("add your own stance") on a very wide variety of issues (and their questions change from time-to-time). At the end the computer will compare your views with those expressed by the candidates of all parties, allowing you to determine how your ideas compare with theirs. It also lets you designate the level of importance of the various issues and breaks down opinions on those matters separately.

I'm not sure that I'm always happy with where my own views lead me, but it's a better start on informing myself than seeing the latest pol poll in the papers. I can't be sure the site doesn't have its own biases, and an algorithm that is designed to convince me that I favor some particular candidate, but it's a good start and spells out some of the candidates' views as well. Now if I make a bad choice, I'll be better able to defend it.