You can whip through the questions surprisingly quickly.
I thought some of them were pretty ambiguous though, such as "My religious views should be spread as widely as possible". I'm not religious and think the world would be better off if more people thought the same way (no more ISIS, for example), but that's probably not what the question means. "Gun ownership should be restricted to those with a valid reason" is another one. What's a "valid reason"? For me, a "valid reason" is pretty much anything other than "murdering people", but others, such my government, have a very different view...
EDIT: Actually, I found several questions were loaded like that. Saying 'disagree' to the gun ownership question, for example, is almost implying that people should have them even if they have invalid, i.e. malicious or evil, reasons. The same goes for the one about "excessive government intervention in the economy". An "excessive" amount is bad by definition, so who would agree to it? I don't think the writers are to pull a fast one here, just that they need to refine this a little more.
Yeah some of the questions were loaded or too narrow. Like the gun regulations or questions about immigration or military being a waste of money. They need more nuanced questions since my views are more balanced on those issues. But I ended up with "Libertarian Communist" which I didn't even know is a thing. haha. I would call myself a "Democratic Socialist" since I support the views of Bernie Sanders and was pissed Hillary's team rigged the primary election in the Democratic party against him (U.S.).