Try the political quiz

396 Replies

@6CYGGL2Constitutionfrom Washington  answered…3mos

It has been the excuse to enforce the UN Global agenda. 9.11 was an inside job. Create the fear and terror, then work to destroy the country to the point they can call in UN "peacekeepers" who have no affiliation other than to the UN, and would work for their richest elite - not to help us.

@5VYWXFTLibertarianfrom Michigan  answered…3mos

No. I understand the idea, and I'm sure many terrorist acts have been prevented because of survelience. However, we cannot give up our individual freedoms in order to feel protected. You didn't see this scale of "American Infidel" in the past. We were a better country before. We were proud of our country (on the large scale) and there was such a thing as the American Dream. We have deterriorated as a country. There is no "American Dream" unless you county being materialistic, judgemental, and constantly offended. During World War II people gave up luxuries in order to support their country, even when their husbands/sons/brothers/friends were sent fighting. While there is still military support, it is not the same. It is not true support, but rather a support with a side of guilt and disgust to those that oppose it.

@5RCGHLLRepublicanfrom California  answered…3mos

No, many parts of it including section 215 completely undermine the constitutional rights of U.S citizens

@5T5LGY9Democratfrom Oregon  answered…3mos

Well... Not really. They've gone too far with it. I do support placing cameras everywhere and monitoring what people do in public. Are 2 guys carrying satchel charges to the stands of the Boston Marathon? Gosh, maybe that's a problem. Did an unattended bag explode? Gosh, maybe we can see who put it there before it blew up... Is someone mugging your mother in front of the A&P? Gosh, maybe we could alert the cop on the next block...

@63ZKR66Republicanfrom North Carolina  answered…3mos

@5T4VZ8QRepublicanfrom New York  answered…3mos

With a warrant for any American citizen. Must have an individualized warrant. Mass survallence on Islamic citizens. Ban refugees for 2 years. Push a propaganda campaign for women's rights in the Middle East and stop lying about Islam for political gain or political correctness

@5RV7C4LRepublicanfrom Illinois  answered…3mos

Absolutely not this gives big government too much power to spy and pry into citizens private lives. There doesn't need to be a patriot act for the government to protect itself and its citizens. It's called have a pair of balls and let Old Glory fly.

@5TV5LPCGreenfrom Maryland  answered…3mos

I have a brown skin. Anytime I travel on a plane, I have to endure extra security procedures. I am not middle-eastern, I am an all-American racial mix. Think about that.

@5XJ32KLRepublicanfrom Vermont  answered…3mos

Yes, but with sunset provision requiring Congressional approval every 2 years.

@5S3TZQFRepublicanfrom Georgia  answered…3mos

The Patriot Act should be subjected to a constitutional test as should be all legislation. It should have a sunset clause.

@5RD54QQDemocratfrom Indiana  answered…3mos

Yes, but do away with detainment and deportation because it violates due process.

@9MTNJHWDemocrat from Connecticut answered…3mos

Yes, but the government shouldn't be allowed do deny people with a different religion, such as Muslim, basic rights

@9MMVMVTVeteran from Idaho answered…3mos

@9M9QJL9Libertarian from Massachusetts answered…3mos

@9L85K7KDemocrat from California answered…3mos

@9L4ZM63Women’s Equality from South Carolina answered…3mos

No, but I could, but it depends on how effective the act is, and whether it helps the country in a good way or not.

@9L2QY83Veteran from Virginia answered…3mos

@9KP3GFSGreen from Tennessee answered…3mos

yes and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant

@Alan-RamsayRepublicanfrom Maryland  answered…3mos

Only if the scope of the government’s powers is limited and strict laws are passed prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant.

@9JRHH3SWomen’s Equality from California answered…3mos

@9HY36Z2Socialist from New York answered…3mos

@9HT8PRSPeace and Freedom from Illinois answered…3mos

It is outdated and should at least be updated to reflect current sentiment and national security needs.

@9HDMV6TVeteran from North Carolina answered…3mos

Yes, but only be able to take up actions against the suspects if they turn out to be a terrorist, and not be able to detain them forever just in case.

@9H78XDFDemocrat from Wisconsin answered…3mos

I will only support the patriot act if Donald Trump is tried as a traitor and if that happens I’d like to change my answer on the water boarding question to, “yes”

@9H5GJLMConstitution from Tennessee answered…3mos

No because what's stopping the government from labeling anyone as a terrorist

@9GZCYMMRepublican from Missouri answered…3mos

@ray522Democrat from New York answered…3mos

Evidence must be provided, innocent people should not be targeted purely for their race or religion.

@9GT5YSXVeteran from New Jersey answered…3mos

No, we have appropriate laws to handle the issues the Patriot Act is supposed to.

@9GPNX7PWorking Family from Kansas answered…3mos

I support the security and defense of the United States. The specific tactics should be reassessed at regular intervals to determine if they remain appropriate, legal and effective.

@Joshua-BeddallRepublican from New York answered…3mos

@9FN9T56Peace and Freedom from Virginia answered…3mos

@9FDV39HVeteran from Kentucky answered…3mos

I oppose any and all government surveillance, as it infringes upon the fourth amendment. Repeal the patriot act and hold the fed accountable for breaking the highest law of the land.

@9F8CYGYIndependent from Florida answered…3mos

I am not informed enough to respond to form a full opinion.

@9QYKXCDSocialist from South Carolina answered…1mo

No, but there should be CCTV cameras across the nation, and we should have moved on from 9/11 by 2006.

@madysen21Peace and Freedom from Utah answered…1mo

I would if the NSA actually had any evidence that surveillance is effective

@9PTVZ5RWomen’s Equalityfrom Maine  answered…3mos

@9PSKN9NRepublican from Minnesota answered…3mos

No, times and needs havechange and the act should be revised or removed


The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart...