The quiz is very broad so it's good at measuring that. But it's framing is troublesome for a leftist for sure. There is also no distinction between socdem and socialist. I guess liberal is the democrat mainstay. Plus I hate when centrists pretend they are in the middle and the most reasons people. Enlightened centrists are annoying. There can be extreme centre positions as well such as refusing to take any action on many matters of importance.

You are making a lot of assumptions. First of all, how do you know where the good ideas are? Pretending they are always in the middle is stupid. They can be slightly right or more right or they can even be extreme left. And your example ignores that there can be extremist centrist positions as well. Being militantly centrist is only stoking your own ego. It also assumes you are smarter than the right and left wing person and can be the judge on what is right or wrong. And if someone has the best position which is on the left or the right, all you end up doing is diluting things and making them worse by trying to meet in the middle. Centrism would only truly work in a world where the system was mostly perfect but rough around the edges. That is not our world. We need fundamental changes to how things are run today. 

You don't dilute anything. You just look at what makes sense, regardless of its right or left position, and apply it. That's it. Which, oddly enough, would be exactly what you're calling for: fundamental change. Because when was the last time we had a leader who didn't adhere to his/her party's policies? It's always one or the other. One or the other. You may get the occasional leader or politician who is slightly more moderate, but you never get one who is completely outside the reach of the two, overreaching, fundamental power structures. So if you cherry picked from both, took what worked and threw out the BS, you'd have your change. Hell, you'd have a revolution, actually.

Sorry but that is nonsense. First of all, people take positions either because there believe they are the right thing to do or they do it because there is some personal benefit to be had, like money making. People who believe in their values are already taking what they think makes the most sense. You think people on the left and right deliberately take bad positions? And if you say they do it because their team leader supports it, that's a bias that all people can fall prey to, even centrists. The enlightened centrist position still doesn't work. Being "moderate" doesn't mean you are out of reach from either side either. You are again assuming the centrist is above it all and smarter and better than other people, which is just not a good look. Your assumption ignores that the right positions could all be on the same side as well and it ignores all the bias the centrist has.

It also ignored the fact that people on the left and right take positions that work for them according to what their aim is. I am not American and I grew up in a very conservative place. A place where essentially no prominent left wing party exists. I also for a while bought into the bs of Jordan Peterson and Steven Crowder. I cringe at that now. But my point is I got to hold my left wing positions because of believe they are the best for humanity. You wouldn't bet someone like me would end up where I am, but gérée we are.  You are pretending like left and right wing people are born with a bias and don't go through any  journey to improve their positions. People are also paid off to change their positions. So either you are calling me and others like me stupider than centrists or a grifter. I know you didn't say that but those are the only logical conclusions you come to when you run this through to the end. 

You also ignore paid "moderates: like Joe Manchin and Sinema. What you are describing is a child;a understanding of things. And by that I mean I literally used to think as a child why can't you just take the best positions from everyone and create a hybrid system.

Centrism is just another political position you have. It's not different from righties or leftists. It has it's own biases and it's own set of rules and prescriptions for the world. It's not an above it all super intelligent position that only the most neutral and smartest individuals would take.

I'm not a centrist, nor do I think I'm super intelligent. Where are you getting this from?

While you are making a simple statement that you can see good and bad things on the left and the right they are just trying to put you in another box and label.

"This is what a centrist is".

Guess what, we are individuals and our beliefs should be a spectrum. Not "left", "right" or "centrist". We don't have to follow any "rules".

Stop trying to force someone into a box and projecting what their ideologies are.

Conservatism means trying to preserve things as they have been. Nowadays, extreme leftism has gone so far out, that things like freedom of speech and opinion, belief in science, merit based advancement and such have become old things to preserve.

As a non-American, I got “Outside Left”, whatever that means. I thought the result would be more like “oh you’re a liberal or social democrat” instead of putting you into a vague category.

Some questions were kind of weird too. “Big government” only seems to be used by conservatives in a negative sense as an excuse why social services shouldn’t be expanded upon. I do not think I’ve heard anyone say that “oh yes I want a bigger government!” when they want to expand social security.

The question about if people are too easily offended now a days seems like it is just asking if people are too PC nowadays, and if I agreed with it then it would influence my score towards conservatism. If I didn’t think this question was biased, then I would agree. Other than people being PC in general, you have conservatives and other groups that base their entire careers about being constantly outraged about something.

I think it would be better if they asked questions with a more neutral stance and included a question asking how you perceive your own beliefs, and then create the groups based around that.

And no questions about climate change, healthcare, housing, education? Are those topics just not important enough? ? I think the only reason the question about trans people was there is because it’s a culture war topic.

Yeah, besides the fact that a lot of public services are not exactly run by the government  - take universities here in brazil for example (even though bolsonaro has been meddling with them), they have much more worker autonomy than any private university, it's not even close.

So is that "big government", when really it's just "big" (I wish) public funding for work done with relative autonomy? In a sense I'd like more public services with less government.

In Brazil there's the term "centrão" (a colloquial version of "the big center"), which refers to parties and politicians who don't really have much of an agenda. Besides cling to power by negotiating their support to whomever is in charge, their biggest concern seems to be corruption - but they are rarely singled out.