Try the political quiz

Constitution Party

The Constitution Party was founded in 1991. The party’s ideology is based on strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution,…

Overview Policies Themes Ideology Discuss

Constitutionalists policy on self hosted digital wallets

Filters

Topics

Should citizens be allowed to secure their money in self-hosted digital wallets that the government can monitor but not control?

  ChatGPTYes, and also allowed to use a privacy layer that prevents monitoring of funds and transactions

Constitutionalists answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Strongly agree

Yes, and also allowed to use a privacy layer that prevents monitoring of funds and transactions

The Constitution Party would be very supportive of citizens' rights to use privacy tools to prevent government monitoring, as this aligns with their strong stance on the Fourth Amendment and opposition to warrantless surveillance. Their historical references to the Founders' distrust of centralized power and their opposition to the PATRIOT Act and similar legislation support this position. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes

The Constitution Party strongly supports individual liberty and the right to privacy, especially regarding property and financial matters. They would generally support citizens' rights to control their own money, but may have some reservations about government monitoring, as it could be seen as an overreach. Their platform emphasizes limited government and protection from unwarranted surveillance, but they also support law and order, which might justify some monitoring in their view. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

No

The Constitution Party would likely oppose outright bans on self-hosted digital wallets, as this would be seen as government overreach and an infringement on property rights and personal liberty. Their platform consistently criticizes excessive government control over private affairs, referencing the Founders' intent to limit federal power. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Very strongly disagree

No, and ban digital wallets that do not contain backdoor access for government agencies

The Constitution Party would strongly oppose any requirement for government backdoors in digital wallets, as this would be seen as a gross violation of privacy and property rights. Their platform repeatedly warns against the dangers of a surveillance state and forced government access to private information, referencing both the Constitution and historical abuses of government power. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Official answer

This party has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.

Voting record

We are currently researching this party’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.

Donor influence

We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this party’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.

Public statements

We are currently researching campaign speeches and public statements from this party about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

Updated 17hrs ago

Party’s support base

Constitution Party Voters’ Answer: Yes, and also allowed to use a privacy layer that prevents monitoring of funds and transactions

Importance: Less Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 417 voters that identify as Constitution.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this party’s stance here


How similar are your political beliefs to Constitutionalists policies? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1yr1Y

Biden retaliated against a Dem who called for him to step aside

Rep. Hillary Scholten, a first-term Democrat who flipped a traditionally Republican seat in 2022, was booted last week from from a coordinated effort between the the Biden campaign and the state party to elect candidates up and down the ticket, according to four people with knowledge of the situation, who were granted anonymity to speak candidly about private discussions.It happened soon after she called for Biden to step aside, those people said, which angered many Democrats behind the scenes. The Biden campaign was contacted by POLITICO Wednesday evening; Scholten was reinstated Thursday morning.“Rep. Scholten is welcome at the coordinated campaign and we look forward to campaigning with her this fall,” said Mia Ehrenberg, a spokesperson for the Biden campaign, when asked about Scholten’s removal from the coordinated campaign.The initial decision to remove Scholten from the joint effort — which would have essentially cut her off from the combined field effort between the presidential, Senate and House races — came from the Michigan state party, according to two people familiar with the discussions. If she had remained excluded from the coordinated effort, it could’ve meant that when Democratic organizers were campaigning in her district, they would tout Biden and the party’s Senate nominee — but not Scholten.The Michigan Democratic Party declined to comment. But two people familiar with discussions said Scholten had specifically infuriated state leaders when she spoke out against Biden — on the same day that the president was already visiting Michigan — without informing them of her plans, according to the two people.“This decision was made in Wilmington, full stop,” a Democratic operative who’s worked on competitive House races said. “Punishing her isn’t just petty and vindictive, it’s self-defeating.”An official for the Biden campaign denied that: “This did not come from Wilmington.”

▲  2014 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…11mos11MO

Trump’s Doom vs. Harris’s Hope as America Decides Its Fate

Donald J. Trump and Kamala Harris closed out their campaigns in the final hours before Election Day in starkly different moods: The former president, often appearing drained at arenas that were not filled, claimed that the country was on the brink of ruin, while the vice president promised a more united future as energized supporters chanted alongside her, “We’re not going back.”In stop after stop, the presidential rivals essentially offered up two competing versions of reality on Monday and into early Tuesday. Mr. Trump repeatedly raised the specter of unchecked immigration and the dangers of Democratic policies as he spoke to crowds in North Carolina and Pennsylvania before closing with a midnight rally in Michigan.With a comparatively more optimistic message, Ms. Harris crisscrossed Pennsylvania, which holds 19 electoral votes that could decide the race. Stopping in Scranton, Allentown and Pittsburgh before a nighttime rally in Philadelphia, Ms. Harris talked about bolstering the economy and restoring federal abortion rights. She asserted that Americans were “exhausted” and ready to move on from the politics of the past decade.About 30 miles to the southwest, Mr. Trump was in Reading, Pa., broadly portraying undocumented immigrants as mentally ill criminals and calling those accused of crimes “savages” and “animals.”Both leaned on Hispanic supporters as they tried to rally Latino voters. The pro-Harris rapper Fat Joe, who is Puerto Rican, practically shamed his fellow Latinos in Allentown as he asked, “Where’s your pride?” Mr. Trump, still facing fallout from his rally in New York at which a comedian called Puerto Rico a “floating island of garbage,” brought Roberto Clemente Jr., the son of the Puerto Rican baseball legend, to the stage at a rally in Pittsburgh.But Mr. Trump, reaching the end of a grueling marathon of a campaign that began in 2022, looked visibly weary, battling fatigue in front of listless crowds, though he was relatively more upbeat and energized in Michigan. Ms. Harris, still appearing fresh after a three-month sprint, appealed for unity and pressed the contrast to her rival without uttering his name.“The measure of a true leader is based not on who you beat down,” she said. “It is based on who you lift up.”Despite the sharply different tones, polls suggest the race remains tight, with the final New York Times/Siena College surveys showing the candidates tied or holding only narrow leads in all of the seven battleground states.

▲  611 replies