ABOUT AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The NORMIEMETER (v1.0.2) is an OnlyToThinking
project by Brayden Johnson, a public administration student, and implemented by Nico
(who would like to remain mostly anonymous). It was inspired by
"Deciding to Win", a political strategy study
written by Simon Bazelon, Lauren Harper Pope, and Liam Kerr and commissioned by Welcome.
Without
their research, this quiz would have been impossible.
This quiz is purely intended as a tool to facilitate reflection on the ways in which one's
views differ from those of their compatriots. We are using
GoatCounter to collect basic analytics data.
The information collected is not personally identifiable.
If you encounter any issues or would like to leave feedback, please contact
bwj@onlytothinking.com.
METHODOLOGY
The NORMIEMETER is a composite index that aims to approximate proximity to the median
American voter across a range of political issues. it's not a measure of political ideology,
strength of political belief, or political knowledge. It's a measure of the extent to which
one's opinions align with those of a theoretical aggregate of median voter. This
theoretical voter holds the most popular position on every possible issue. Typically, this
means someone who is economically distributionist and socially conservative will
score rather high: most Americans like money and dislike immigration.
The equation is simple, but functional. Each answer to each question is assigned a score
based on the popularity of the position. The user's answers are measured against those of
the median voter.
To put a finer point on it, imagine a hypothetical proposition has a 60% approval rating and
a 40% disapproval rating. This would give the proposition a 20% net approval rating. If the
user agrees with the proposal, they recieve 20 points. If they disagree, they lose 20 points. At
the end of the quiz, scores are tallied up and normalized relative to a hypothetical maxmimum
and a hypothetical minimum score, which yields a 0-100 scale where 0 is completely deviant
and 100 is completely median. It's that easy!
TYPOLOGIES (SPOILERS)
THE MEDIAN VOTER
Twitter can’t stand you. You are the aggregate of what every neighbor in America
thinks across every issue. You pretty much align with the popular consensus on every
conceivable issue, and in those few areas where you don’t agree with the majority, the
public is pretty evenly split. The wonks and ideologues hate you and your idiosyncratic
views. Let them. You are more likely than practically anyone else to be the one who decides
any election you vote in.
Examples: Joe Manchin, Tom Hanks, Hank Hill
“In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.”
MR. POPULAR-IST
Admit it: you work in consulting, right? You like your token hot takes, but you
like electability more. Or maybe, you’re not even cynical and you just genuinely hold
normal opinions that are generally popular with the American public. At any rate, it
frankly makes you something of an oddity among your increasingly ideological peers.
You probably hate what’s happened to political discourse in your own party or America
at-large in recent years, or you’ve become politically homeless on account of your
eccentricities.
Examples: Matthew Yglesias, Tony Blair, Arnold Schwarzenegger
“You campaign in poetry. You govern in prose.”
THE AVERAGE JOE
In American politics, the median voter is a pretty eccentric character.
Most Americans hold a heterogeneous mix of popular and unpopular views,
and you are no exception. Odds are that your political party is a strong predictor
of which unpopular views you hold. There’s really not much to say about you. While
someone who holds political views closer to the median may be more normal on an
issue-by-issue basis, you are probably the most common type of voter.
Examples: Oprah Winfrey, Mitt Romney, Amy Klobuchar
“In America, anyone can be President. That’s one of the risks you take.”
THE CONTRARIAN
You're not confused; you're just an asshole. That's not a bad thing. Your political
dispostion is probably structured less by a coherent ideology than by a general sense
of irritation. If an idea becomes fashionable, you see the stains. If an idea is
ancient, you see who it serves. Whether this makes you profound or nihilistic is up
for interpretation, but it certainly doesn't win you many friends. For every election
your preferred candidates lose, you can console yourself with the times history has
vindicated you and your type. Abolitionists, liberals, democrats, and nationalists were
all once decisive ideological minorities, and not too long ago. Today, they are hegemonic.
The same, however, can also be said for eugenicists, revolutionary socialists, fascists,
and isolationists, groups towards which history has been less kind.
Examples: Thomas Paine, Christopher Hitchens, Peter Thiel
“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
THE DEVIANT
Saying that you are outside the mainstream would imply that you have some relation
to it. This could scarcely be further from the truth. Your views probably do not
cluster in existing coalitions, and attempts to place you somewhere between left
and right are more likely to send the tester up and down walls. Most people probably
find your political views, and I mean most if not all of them, kinda gross– Not that
you care all that much. You may share your takes or you may not, depending on whether
you can be bothered to wage the inevitable conflict that would follow. You’re unlikely
to be elected, but hey, at least you’re pretty likely to be screenshotted!
Examples: Nick Land, Lyndon LaRouche, Travis Bickle
“Sanity is not statistical.”