Try the political quiz

Candidates  ›  Policies

Republican2022 Secretary of Agriculture2018 Secretary of AgricultureIowa

Mike Naig

American politician.

Overview Policies Discuss Ratings Themes Ideology

Mike Naig’s policies on foreign policy issues

These issues below are sorted in descending order based on how important the average American voter ranked them on the quiz.

Filters

Topics

Foreign Policy  ›  Mandatory Military Service

Should every 18 year old citizen be required to provide at least one year of military service?

  Mike Naig voterbaseNo, service should be a choice instead of an obligation

Foreign Policy  ›  Iran

Should the U.S. go to war with Iran?

  Party’s support baseNo, the U.S. should encourage Iran to disarm through diplomatic channels

Foreign Policy  ›  NATO

Should the U.S. remain in NATO?

  Party’s support baseYes, but NATO should focus more on counter-terrorism strategies

Foreign Policy  ›  Israeli Palestinian Conflict

Which side of the Israeli Palestinian conflict do you sympathize with more?

  Party’s support baseIsrael

Foreign Policy  ›  Israel Boycott

Should it be illegal to join a boycott of Israel?

  Party’s support baseNo, this is a violation of free speech

Foreign Policy  ›  Soleimani

Do you support the killing of Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Ukrainian Defense Funding

Should the United States provide military supplies and funding to Ukraine?

  Party’s support baseNo

Foreign Policy  ›  Foreign Elections

Should the government attempt to influence foreign elections?

  Party’s support baseNo, and we should not try to influence any other country’s elections or policy

Foreign Policy  ›  Israel

Should the U.S. continue to support Israel?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Weapon Sales Ethics

Should there be restrictions on government arms sales to countries accused of committing human rights violations?

  Party’s support baseYes, but I would prefer a ban on all military aid to any foreign countries

Foreign Policy  ›  Foreign Aid

Should the US increase or decrease foreign aid spending?

  Mike Naig voterbaseDecrease

Foreign Policy  ›  United Nations

Should the U.S. remain in the United Nations?

  Mike Naig voterbaseYes, but scale back our current involvement

Foreign Policy  ›  Torture

Should the military be allowed to use enhanced interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding, to gain information from suspected terrorists?

  Mike Naig voterbaseYes, but only as a last resort

Foreign Policy  ›  Yemen

Should the U.S. provide military aid to Saudi Arabia during its conflict with Yemen?

  Party’s support baseNo, Saudi Arabia has more than enough money to fund their own wars

Foreign Policy  ›  Taliban Financial Aid

Should the World Bank and International Monetary Fund provide financial aid to the Taliban government in Afghanistan?

  Mike Naig voterbaseNo

Foreign Policy  ›  ISIS Ground Troops

Should the U.S. send ground troops into Syria to fight ISIS?

  Party’s support baseNo, conduct targeted airstrikes instead

Foreign Policy  ›  Hong Kong Fugitive Extradition

Should the Chinese government be able to extradite fugitives from Hong Kong?

  Party’s support baseNo

Foreign Policy  ›  Drones

Should the military fly drones over foreign countries to gain intelligence and kill suspected terrorists?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Netanyahu Leadership

Should the government continue to support Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership of the Israeli government?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Ukraine and Nato

Should Ukraine join NATO?

  Party’s support baseNo

Foreign Policy  ›  North Korea Military Strikes

Should the U.S. conduct military strikes against North Korea in order to destroy their long-range missile and nuclear weapons capabilities?

  Party’s support baseNo, and I am not convinced that North Korea has or is capable of developing a long-range nuclear missile

Foreign Policy  ›  Terrorism

Should foreign terrorism suspects be given constitutional rights?

  Mike Naig voterbaseNo, they are not U.S. citizens and do not have constitutional rights

Foreign Policy  ›  Military Spending

Should the government increase or decrease military spending?

  Party’s support baseIncrease

Foreign Policy  ›  NATO

Should the U.S. defend other NATO countries that maintain low military defense budgets relative to their GDP?

  Party influenceYes, and refusing to defend other NATO countries sets a dangerous precedent for the balance of global power

Foreign Policy  ›  War on ISIS

Should the U.S. formally declare war on ISIS?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Ukraine

Should the U.S. provide military assistance to defend Ukraine from Russia?

  Party influenceYes, the Russian invasion of the Ukraine threatens the balance of power in the region

Foreign Policy  ›  India Arms

Should the U.S. sell military weapons to India in order to counter Chinese and Russian influence?

  Mike Naig voterbaseNo, and we should increase diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully

Foreign Policy  ›  NSA Surveillance

Should the U.S. continue NSA surveillance of its allies?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Russian Airstrikes in Syria

Should the U.S. prevent Russia from conducting airstrikes in Syria?

  Party’s support baseNo

Foreign Policy  ›  Cuba

Do you support President Obama’s move to lift the trade and travel embargo on Cuba?

  Party’s support baseNo

Foreign Policy  ›  Jerusalem

Should Jerusalem be recognized as the capital of Israel?

  Mike Naig voterbaseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  Saudi Arabia and Iran

Should the government support peace talks between Saudi Arabia and Iran?

  Party’s support baseYes

Foreign Policy  ›  F-35

Should the government cancel production of the F-35 fighter?

  Mike Naig voterbaseNo

Popular conversations

Join in on the post popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1 day1D

Border Bombshell: 8 Million New Arrivals Under Biden

The immigration surge of the past few years has been the largest in U.S. history, surpassing the great immigration boom of the late 1800s and early 1900s, according to a New York Times analysis of government data.Annual net migration — the number of people coming to the country minus the number leaving — averaged 2.4 million people from 2021 to 2023, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Total net migration during the Biden administration is likely to exceed eight million people.That’s a faster pace of arrivals than during any other period on record, including the peak years of Ellis Island traffic, when millions of Europeans came to the United States. Even after taking into account today’s larger U.S. population, the recent surge is the most rapid since at least 1850.The numbers in the Times analysis include both legal and illegal immigration. About 60 percent of immigrants who have entered the country since 2021 have done so without legal authorization, according to a Goldman Sachs report based on government data.The combined increases of legal and illegal immigration have caused the share of the U.S. population born in another country to reach a new high, 15.2 percent in 2023, up from 13.6 percent in 2020. The previous high was 14.8 percent, in 1890.Several factors caused the surge, starting with President Biden’s welcoming immigration policy during his first three years in office. Offended by Donald J. Trump’s harsh policies — including the separation of families at the border — Mr. Biden and other Democrats promised a different approach. “We’re a nation that says, ‘If you want to flee, and you’re fleeing oppression, you should come,’” Mr. Biden said during his 2020 presidential campaign.After taking office, his administration loosened the rules on asylum and other immigration policies, making it easier for people to enter the United States. Some have received temporary legal status while their cases wend through backlogged immigration courts. Others have remained without legal permission.

▲  1512 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…5hrs5H

Trump Slams Zelensky As "Foolish" Over Russian Missile Strike

President-elect Donald Trump went out of his way to criticize Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky over his decision to fire missiles into Russia, characterizing it as a “foolish decision” and even “the most dangerous” geopolitical development in recent days.Trump has met with Zelensky twice since winning the 2024 election. After speaking with the war leader in Paris last week, Trump declared that “He wants to make peace.”“He thinks it’s time, and [Vladimir] Putin should think it’s time because he’s lost — when you lose 700,000 people, it’s time. It’s not going to end until there’s a peace,” he continued.In his “Person of the Year” interview with Time, however, Trump took a detour from a question about Iran to blast Zelensky.“Iran recently plotted to have you assassinated. What are the chances of going to war with Iran during your next term?” asked Trump’s interlocutor.“Anything can happen. Anything can happen. It’s a very volatile situation,” replied Trump before turning his attention to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine.Elsewhere in the interview, Trump was asked if he would “commit to protecting Ukrainian sovereignty?”“I would like to see Ukraine—okay, ready? You have to go back a little bit further. It would have never happened if I were president. Would have never happened—” he answered.After being pressed about whether he would “abandon Ukraine,” Trump said, “I want to reach an agreement, and the only way you’re going to reach an agreement is not to abandon. You understand what that means, right?”

▲  208 replies

Active 2hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…5hrs5H

Pete Hegseth Slams Gay Troops Policy

Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, has repeatedly criticized policies allowing gay people to serve openly in the US military, calling them part of a “Marxist” agenda to prioritize social justice over combat readiness.In his 2024 book “The War on Warriors” and in subsequent media promotions this year, Hegseth described both the original “don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) policy and its repeal in 2011 as a “gateway” and a “camouflage” for broader cultural changes that he claims have undermined military cohesion and effectiveness.In a 2015 appearance on Fox News, Hegseth also argued these policies like repealing DADT “erode standards” in favor of political goals like social engineering.DADT was implemented under President Bill Clinton in the 1990s and allowed gay people and lesbians to serve in the military — provided they did not disclose their sexuality. Military officials were also barred from asking military members their sexual orientation. If a troop’s orientation came to light, it could lead to their discharge.The policy was repealed during the Obama administration, allowing openly gay service members.Hegseth writes in his book that he was initially ambivalent to the change but came to regret his passive stance, describing the repeal as a “breach in the wire” that opened the door for broader cultural and ideological changes in the military.On Thursday, Hegseth appeared to walk back his earlier remarks about DADT, telling CNN, “Oppose the repeal? No, I don’t,” and calling this report on his previous comments “more false reporting.”

▲  179 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6hrs6H

Elizabeth Warren Walks Back Murder Comments

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.“No one's condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.” Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”"We'll say it over and over," Warren said on MSNBC’S “The ReidOut.” " Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands."In a statement to POLITICO, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren's comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.“I don't really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There's great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There's no reason for them beyond the streets.”

▲  1614 replies