Try the political quiz

1.6k Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs8Y

Yes

 @9FXM6VVDemocrat from Illinois agreed…6mos6MO

Traditional ground campaigning and voter contacts remain the most effective strategies. Some research suggests that knocking on doors can increase turnout by as much as 10% and phone calls by as much as 4%. One study suggests that lawn signs increase vote share by 1.7 percentage points

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs8Y

Yes, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors

 @9FBDR3F from Massachusetts agreed…7mos7MO

In a lot of elections, there have been cans of worms opened about who is donating to who. For example, Trump called Hilary Clinton out about her being a hypocrite to the tax cut policy when he claimed that "you'd be cutting all your donors off." Or something along the lines of that.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs8Y

Yes, and ban all political donations and publicly fund elections

 @9C4MSQH from Alaska commented…10mos10MO

Greedy CEOs and ruling class people including Deep State and Zionist operatives have hijacked elections since Day 1 and use donations to buy out politicians and make them swear allegiance to the Deep State and the Zionist Lobby instead of the people.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs8Y

No, this is a violation of free speech

 @9FBDR3F from Massachusetts disagreed…7mos7MO

You are funding way too much money to the candidate, politicians shouldn't be pressured to impress there primary donors.

 @9F5ZXK7Socialist from Massachusetts disagreed…7mos7MO

This inherently values some (the rich donors) speech more than it does others. If expression of free speech depends on monetary assets, it is not speech at all.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs8Y

No, as long as all donations are public knowledge

 @9FXM6VVDemocrat from Illinois disagreed…6mos6MO

The evidence doesn’t support the notion that small donors are more polarizing than the big donors that currently dominate election spending. Amplifying small money with public funds is the best reform to counter the problems of big money in politics.

 @5DVLBZWfrom Indiana answered…3yrs3Y

All current regulations hurt all alternatives to the Democratic and Republican Party candidates. The limits the D/R politicians impose on themselves are routinely violated by them, in fact; but are vigorously enforced against people like me. You really should look into this yourself.

 @9B5CG66Republican from Pennsylvania answered…12mos12MO

No, this is a violation of free speech as long as all donations are public knowledge

 @9D3RPBQfrom Guam answered…8mos8MO

Donors should be only perceived by grassroots sources and sources that are entirely democratic and people oriented

 @8PP96SHfrom Maine answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors Yes, and ban all political donations and publicly fund elections

 @97KSZBQ from Georgia answered…1yr1Y

I think we should increase transparency, allowing everyone to know which interests are supporting which parties and candidates, and to offset the impact of private money with public money.

 @8GBN55KIndependent from California answered…3yrs3Y

Elimination of corporate donations and a limitation to how much individuals may donate. Ban PAC'S.

 @9KYDDB9 from New York answered…1wk1W

Yes, and both corporations and special interest groups should be barred from making political donations, since corporations are not citizens.

 @9L3PV69 from California answered…5 days5D

people should not be limited. corporations should. people are citizens with constitutional (first amendment) rights. corporations are not.

 @9L2XRM5 from Illinois answered…7 days7D

Politicians and their supporters will always find ways around campaign finance laws, Should set a dollar amount for each elected office and no more money can be raise with stricter rules on reporting expenditures.

 @9KDB59P from Texas answered…4wks4W

No, but I would require each candidate be required to put a graphic by their name on all signs, tv adds, radio adds, that shows where they politically plot on the ISIDEWITH.Com Quiz (blue star) with a ID number so voters can look up their answers. ISIDEWITH would be tasked with ensuring their political voting history matches their quiz. Donators would have their ISIDEWITH graphic shown on the contribution web sites as well.

 @9K7PKF9 from Texas answered…1mo1MO

Any donation to a political candidate should be taxed 30%, 30% to the republican/democratic committee, 30% to a congressional bank who will monitor that the money is spent for approved campaign or congressional activities, 10% to the candidate to spend as they wish.

 @9K5MYMGIndependent from Wisconsin answered…1mo1MO

Yes, but make it so all donations are completely anonymous to everyone even the person receiving the donation so the money cannot influence someone in the government's decision making.

  Deletedanswered…1mo1MO

Both Yes and No, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors; and ban all political donations and publicity fund elections; this is a violation of speech; as long as all donations are public knowledge.

 @9JZQG8T from Alabama answered…1mo1MO

No, but the money should be treated not as a donation, but as a gift (inheritance), and should be taxed appropriately.

 @9JZ6N38Libertarian from Colorado answered…1mo1MO

yes there should be a limit and any and all donations need to be traced to the original provider, no more hiding behind a super pac or other loopholes

 @9JTY6YB  from Illinois answered…2mos2MO

Yes, and only individuals can donate, no groups, businesses, or affiliations. And the donor limit should be small enough that any middle income family should be able to hit that limit and not overburden their financial stability.

 @9JLJF2D from California answered…2mos2MO

Yes. Donations should be severely curtailed and all donors should be citizens (natural-born or naturalized) and should be natural persons (no corporations or PACs should be allowed to donate in any fashion)

 @9J9G6DXfrom Montana answered…2mos2MO

No, but concealing donations for or against a person, party, or policy by washing the money through PAC's should be illegal.

 @9J8J2ZPProgressive from Georgia answered…2mos2MO

Yes, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors whether they be industry lobbyists or private citizens.

 @9J88MG6 from Illinois answered…2mos2MO

No, but there should be a cutoff period after which donations can no longer be accepted prior to any election.

 @9J759WY from Arizona answered…2mos2MO

Yes, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors. Moreover, all donations should be mandated to be anonymous.

 @9J65GLB from Arkansas answered…2mos2MO

Yes, and also publicly fund elections to supplement but not entirely ban individuals from donating up to a set monetary threshold.

 @9CNWMJTIndependent  from Texas answered…2mos2MO

If it is corporations and unions, then they should not donate at all since such entities are not individuals. I believe there should be a limit on the amount of money a candidate can receive from a donor to prevent billionaires and millionaires from buying politicians to govern as THEY see fit, not as the candidate sees fit.

 @9J24H3WLibertarian  from Colorado answered…3mos3MO

No but donations should be placed anonymously and dispersed evenly to avoid the persuasion of votes by politicians

 @9HZ8SG7 from Massachusetts answered…3mos3MO

All high office election should be limited to a publicly funded amount to ensure equal opportunities

 @9HZ8DMDPeace and Freedom from New York answered…3mos3MO

i feel that if it’s over a certain amount that it must go to funding for health care or something else to help others

 @9HRGMNT from Vermont answered…3mos3MO

Yes, and every candidate that meets an endorsement quota should have free and equal publicity time (debates, ads, news coverage)

 @9HR7GNT from South Carolina answered…3mos3MO

Yes, make the number $0. Political campaigns are a waste of time and money. They are toxic and divisive to society.

 @9HPRL7C from Tennessee answered…3mos3MO

No, but all the PACs and Super PACs should be removed and donation amounts should all be public record.

 @9HMCTC9Constitution from Indiana answered…3mos3MO

Yes, and we should do away with corporations and organizations and special interest donations, only allowing, private donations.

 @9HLK9DXfrom New York answered…4mos4MO

Only private donations, tax deductible within limits. No corporate, union or third party donations allowed

 @9HKVHBQ from Louisiana answered…4mos4MO

Yes, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors and wealthy supporters can show their support in other ways

 @9HJZMWN from Iowa answered…4mos4MO

Yes, and only citizens should be able to donate money, remove the employer information, and ban super packs

 @9HBZSD4answered…4mos4MO

Yes, but limit how much money that Political Action Committees and Super Political Action Committees can donate for a candidate.

 @9H3WN7S from Illinois answered…4mos4MO

If it’s corporate PAC money then yes absolutely. They should not receive any funding from those sources imo

 @9GZR62T from North Carolina answered…4mos4MO

Candidates should have the same amount of money for their campaigns regardless of their political party.

 @9GXBQLL from Massachusetts answered…5mos5MO

A candidate should be able to have their own choice on what their own limit is, but should also be using their own money.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...