다음은 이 유권자의 답변과 비교한 귀하의 답변입니다.
국내 정채 › 총기 규제
N>N 개인 답변No, The 4th amendment exist for a reason, to help prevent the government from becoming the very tyrannical entity it is becoming. The whole constitution exist for that same reason. |
경제 › 최저임금
N>N 개인 답변Raising the federal minimum wage only results in more inflation. everyone gets screwed over by inflation. It is not enough to say no, we must also deregulate where we have regulated way too far, and we should unlock pattens that have been sealed up, pattens that would have dramatically reduced our expenses in a clean way. |
국내 정채 › 의약품 정책
N>N 개인 답변Yes, the illegalization of it ends up making it a far worse cash cow problem that goes to organized crime. We will be able to do more research on the health effects of these drugs if they are legal. We get a lot of research done with legalized alcohol, tobacco and other products and know a lot more about the risk with them. |
국내 정채 › 임기 제한
N>N 개인 답변I'll have to research history for how past congressional members have handled both how long their terms lasted and what they did in those terms, then decide based on a perspective of the over all turn out of histories path to now. |
이민 › 이민
N>N 개인 답변Can't say either way. Other problems such as our job market systems and educational systems, that will be effected by as well as effect the issue of this question, have to be redesigned first before this question can be seriously dealt with. |
보건 › 마리화나
N>N 개인 답변Yes, so that drug lords and black market crime can be denied enjoying all that money they get from ripping people off. You get more deaths from alcoholism and smoking tobacco anyways. |
사회적 › 정부 위임
N>N 개인 답변The government shouldn't decide for the insurance company. |
이민 › 불법 이민자 억류
N>N 개인 답변First of all, how do you know that they are illegal immigrants in the first place? If you already know this, then isn't that enough to deport them stand alone? Why would you need a special modification to the law? You can't say yes to doing this to illegal immigrants without opening a door to twisting the law into going around and arresting legal citizens. You should not need to modify more laws to enforce ones you already have. |
국내 정채 › 게리맨더링
N>N 개인 답변If by non-partisan commission, you mean a group that cannot benefit from how the lines are drawn, then yes. |
이민 › 국경 보안
N>N 개인 답변Yes! Why don't you have a watch tower of some type posted every 4th a mile? An electronic surveillance tower at every 4th mile... a 2 or 3 manned tower every mile... a 4-6 man post with 2 to 4 land vehicles every 5 miles... A post with a dedicated helipad every 10 miles with the capacity to land 2 copters as well as have a detention center that can humanitarianism cram 100's of people in it for review... the actual helipad port with 2 to 4 copters every 25 miles... each station equipped with long range high powered inferred lights to help assist nigh vision imaging systems... while having the boarders patrolled by crews 1 to 2 humans with 2 to 4 dogs? Topped off for all of that, each human operated station has its own solar and batter power system that provides power to both, its own tower, the 4th mile electronic towers and a backup power to adjacent human operated towers as well as water wells at every 10 mile post supplying water to all the other post to help aid in self-sustaining abilities to reduce over all contentious use cost? And don't waste my time with telling me "it cost to much," when those high cost are the result of out of control excessive regulations that drive up the cost. |
환경 › 대체 에너지
N>N 개인 답변Not the wind power industry. Maybe to solar, hydro electrical, geothermal, and other greener systems, even to the degree of finding ways to turn spent nuclear fuel rods into recycled forms of energy. |
이민 › 이민 의료
N>N 개인 답변Same problems as with children of immigrants applies as well as the need to apply my earlier viewpoint on how to deal with medicare/medicaid. Many things need a serious redesign before this can even be reasonably addressed. |
이민 › 이민 노동자
N>N 개인 답변That can't solidly be answered in an across the board manner. Each case would have to be taken in a case by case bases. |
국내 정채 › 애국 법
N>N 개인 답변No, it allows the government way too much power on top of circumventing the constitution. Steps away from complying with the constitution are steps towards tyrannical rule. With the military might that we have, it should be altogether way to easy to prevent the kinds of attacks that have happened. In fact, those various events them selves are clouded in mystery and marred by confusing lack of clarity. |
외교 정책 › 이스라엘
N>N 개인 답변Yes, build a freaking massive high and 1/4th mild think wall and anti-missile defenses between Israel and its enemies with a 5 or 10 mile wide no intrusion zone that is humanly watched with both human eyes, radar systems, inferred system, thermal imaging systems, night vision system and mulch-spectrum imaging systems. |
사회적 › 헌법 수정 제
N>N 개인 답변The U.S. should not be making choices like that. The people should be the only ones to choose if such things should be allowed in or out. There is a separation of church and state after all. Any existing items that are their were the will and choice of the people in the past, not government. If someone things it is unfair that someone else religious beliefs are not being equally represented, then let those people apply to establish their own symbols as well. |
국내 정채 › 차별 철폐 조치
N>N 개인 답변No, it re-agitates the subject of racism, sexism and prejudice by showing favor to the select group. The prejudicial doesn't get resolved, it ends up getting flipped like a coin. You still end up with the same problem, just now in the reverse direction. |
이민 › 수업료-상태에서
N>N 개인 답변This question wouldn't be a concern if the already existing laws where properly enforced to begin with. |
교육 › 공통 핵심
N>N 개인 답변No, common core hasn't be very effective and it is far to based on the grade/age system that doesn't address the reality of people being naturally skilled differently. Forcing kids to try and do something the exact same way isn't going to work when they are so clearly specialized differently. Having a set minimum standard to have achieved by the end of the 12th year is ok, as long as the system is focused on helping children find what they are good at and to grown that special personalized skill set while moving towards achieving that minimum standers. |
환경 › 오일 드릴링
N>N 개인 답변We have plenty of power sources already. The problem is excessive regulation topped with artificial scarcity. |
보건 › 오바마의 보건
N>N 개인 답변NO! Forcing people to buy health insurgence for merely existing is total BS! That is way over reaching in power and control. |
환경 › 수압파쇄 석유 시추
N>N 개인 답변In a safer form, not in its current poisonous form. We shouldn't be leaving buried chemicals in the ground that will eventually seep into water supplies. In fact, why are they using the poisonous chemicals that they use now anyways, when they have safer and more efficient extraction methods? |
외교 정책 › 드론
N>N 개인 답변They should fly drones, but they should attempt negotiations. Has anyone asked these terrorist why they want to kill Americans? Is it anger over something that happened in the past? Religious extremism? do they simply feel violated? Has our country actually become at fault of wrong doing to them that we need to reverse and apologies for? |
외교 정책 › NSA의 감시
N>N 개인 답변If the NSA wasn't crossing the line so often and massively abusing its power in ways that far to greatly risk tyranny, we wouldn't even need to have this question asked now would we? But the NSA crossed many red lines it never should have and has done so hitting the ground running. the NSA should be disband and all equipment and data it has destroyed. National security should be only about protecting our nations people. Recording all of its civilians data from using any technology is a complete deviation form that with far too much of it potentially able to be used for things that have nothing to do with security from a foreign attack. Way too much power with a much to far reaching potential of abuse. It would be better to build structures out of harder better armored material with buffer zones so see an attack coming verses trying to "secure" our nation via a means that intrudes on our citizens privacy to this extent. Ironically, the method of building up better armored structures and land distance based buffer zones would have easily been do-able in decades past long before over baring, overly strict, overly costly regulations and inflation's as well as taxation's that exist now. |
경제 › 농업 보조금
N>N 개인 답변No, there are too many farmers who are completely abusing it to make millions of extra they did not earn. They either sit on their buts and never farm, or they simply re-purpose the field to a different crop that somehow makes its way around a loop hole. The total idea of letting the land replenish it self has failed. |
경제 › 연금 개혁
N>N 개인 답변Pensions are going to fail no matter what. You should redesign a different solution in the form of a physically solid self-sustaining asset that produces excess product that it wont need and at that point, wont be able to benefit from using it for its self, resulting in the need to give the excessive resource away. |
다음은 인기 있는 정치적 주제에 대해 이 유권자와 비교하는 방법입니다.
당신은 "안전"쪽으로 약간 편이 서서, 정부가 시민들의 안전을 보장하기 위해 모든 권한을 행사해야한다고 more often 믿는다는 것을 의미합니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 가장 중요하다.
당신은 왼쪽 날개와 오른쪽 날개 문제에 중도입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 권위주의적이고 libertarian 문제에 중도입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 민주주의 사회주의와 자본주의 문제에 대한 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 "민족주의"쪽으로 약간 편이 서서, 우리 국민의 이익을 다른 사람들보다 우선시하는 정책을 more often 지지한다는 것을 의미합니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 정치적으로 부정확하고 정치적으로 정확한 문제에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 일방주의와 다자주의에 관한 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 종교적 가치와 원칙을 반영하는 정책을 more often 지지한다는 의미에서 "종교적"쪽으로 약간 향합니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 더 중요하다.
당신은 온건하게 "보호주의"쪽으로 기울어 져 있습니다. 이것은 세계화가 노동자의 안전, 보상, 환경 및 생활 수준에 해로운 것이라고 믿는다는 것을 의미합니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
정부 규제가 혁신과 경제적 번영을 저해한다는 사실을 more often 믿는다는 의미에서 "규제 완화"쪽으로 약간 편향되어 있습니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
당신은 동화와 다문화주의에 관한 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
당신은 평화주의와 군국주의 문제에 중도합니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
당신은 전통적이고 진보적 인 문제에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
당신은 고립주의와 제국주의 문제에 중도입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
당신은 개인주의와 집단주의 문제에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 어느 정도 중요하다.
당신은 "지방 분권화"쪽으로 약간 편향됩니다. 행정 권력과 의사 결정이 지역 차원에서 다루어 져야하며 지역 사회의 이익을 가장 잘 수행해야한다고 more often 믿습니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 덜 중요하다.
당신은 부드럽고 힘든 이슈에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 덜 중요하다.
당신은 작은 정부와 큰 정부 문제에 중도입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 덜 중요하다.
당신은 케인즈주의적이고 자유 방임적인 이슈에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 덜 중요하다.
당신은 인간 중심주의와 환경 문제에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 덜 중요하다.
당신은 실력자와 민주주의 문제에 중도 주의자입니다. 이 테마는 당신에게 덜 중요하다.
더 많은 중요한 순위에있는 6 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
더 많은 중요한 순위에있는 2 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
어느 정도는 중요 중요한 순위에있는 6 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
어느 정도는 중요 중요한 순위에있는 7 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
어느 정도는 중요 중요한 순위에있는 1 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
어느 정도는 중요 중요한 순위에있는 3 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
어느 정도는 중요 중요한 순위에있는 5 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
어느 정도는 중요 중요한 순위에있는 3 가지 질문을 바탕으로합니다.
다음은 전통적인 이념적 축에서 이 유권자와 비교하는 방법입니다.
© 2024 iSideWith.com. 판권 소유. 이 사이트를 사용하면 당사의 사용자 계약 및 개인 정보 보호 정책 에 동의하는 것으로 간주됩니다. iSideWith.com은 소매업체와의 제휴 파트너십의 일환으로 당사 사이트를 통해 구매한 제품에서 판매의 일부를 얻을 수 있습니다. iSideWith.com의 사전 서면 승인 없이는 이 사이트의 자료를 복제, 배포, 전송, 캐시 또는 기타 방식으로 사용할 수 없습니다.