More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Less than High School voters
Last answered 7 years ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Less than High School voters.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Aug 18, 2012. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Education data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011).
Choose a demographic filter
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
a. Narendra Modi Enthralls Crowd at New York’s Central Park
9 years ago by indiatimes.com
b. UNESCO Rejects Coalition’s Bid to Delist Tasmanian World Heritage Forest Online
9 years ago by net.au
c. "Fuck Me" - Eric Cartman "South Park"
9 years ago by youtube.com
d. Yellowstone Animals Fleeing Park. Supervolcano Eruption Imminent?
9 years ago by politicalears.com
f. Incredible footage of BBC cameraman and hungry polar bear
10 years ago by youtube.com
Data based on unique submissions (duplicates or multiple submissions are eliminated) per user using a 30-day moving average to reduce daily variance from traffic sources. Totals may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
More stances on this issue
National Parks should continue to be preserved as a national park nominally by the government. however all forms of protection and natural upkeep should be handled by willing members of the public that enjoy and preserve the park already. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Glendale, AZ
Yes, if it were not for preservation rules in place we would not have our wonderful natural areas that have survived to this day and are some of the last remaining! Keep them. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Miami, FL
Yes, but allow more public access, have more reasonable fees to go to a park, fees are to high for the average family and parks are for all citizens--even the poor ones; limited logging to prevent large forest fires, and stop drilling and mining. National…. 9 years ago from a Republican in Tucson, AZ
Yes but should allow for individuals to log, mine or access lands for personal NON-commercial use. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Denver, CO
Yes. but let the states have a say in what land is added to the parks registry and i think that more land should be set aside for national parks. i also think that the budget for national parks should be offset by maybe a fee charged to tourist. most people…. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Roanoke, LA
Should be a joint non partisan endeavor between each state and the Federal Goverment. 9 years ago from a Republican in Cache, OK
National Parks are okay as is, but Bureau of Land Management lands all need to be auctioned off. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Laramie, WY
Yes, but with no drilling or mining. There should be more publicly available fruit and vegetable plants, and the wildlife and trees should still be protected. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Little Rock, AR
The majority of superfund sites are owned by the government. They have proven unreliable when it comes to protecting the environment. 9 years ago from a Republican in Lafayette, IN
No, because I think it should be privatized. 9 years ago from a Republican in Nashua, NH
Allow limited logging and possible drilling and mining and allow more public access. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Summerfield, FL
No, and they shouldn't be government property in the first place. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Annapolis, MD
Yes, but allow more public access alonside limited logging, drilling, and mining. 9 years ago from a Republican in Tulare, CA
The PEOPLE should protect and preserve the National Parks of their own free will. Instill the values that President Theodore Roosevelt had within our children as well as ourselves. He believed in conservation and so should we otherwise we shall all perish.…. 9 years ago from a Green in Pinehurst, TX
No, it is not clear how well these lands are protected given all the logging and cattle ranching. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Fort Pierce, FL
No, let private landowners protect them. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Groton, CT
The federal government owns too much land. Not all of it is a "national treasure". Benefit citizens by allowing people to claim ownership of parts of the public land via the mechanism of the old Homestead Act. 9 years ago from a Republican in Coronado, CA
National parks should be the states job to take care of, there is almost no good reason for the Federal government to be involved whatsoever. all they do is make it more expensive for people to enjoy!. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Prescott Valley, AZ
While the national government should preserve the parks, the state governments should have the ability to prevent the feds from federalizing an excessive amount of their land. 9 years ago from a Republican in Madison, WI
Let Natural wildfires burn, don't rescue people, leave them free to enter the way Pres. Teddy Roosevelt envisioned. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Spruce Pine, NC
Yes but with the assistance of employable and qualified unemployed Americans – including those who wish for a change of career. This would be one more small step toward improving the unemployment rate which is still quite high. Have you noted the seldom…. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Houston, TX
Laws should be in place to keep the land from being destroyed, however the park should be manage by a private firm. That way a small profit could be made to help improve the parks, along with people being fired by the private firm if mistake are made. 9 years ago from a Republican in Fayetteville, NC
Yes, but do not let private businesses profit from land that the taxpayers own and allow more public access to those who will respect the pristine areas. 10 years ago from a Democrat in Palm City, FL
In my opinion, they could perhaps be protected by the state government. That would be one less thing the federal government would have to deal with, giving them more time and energy to focus on making the economy stable and golfing. 10 years ago from a Libertarian in Ozark, AR
Long-term agreements should be available to local and state governments as well as certain corporate entities as ANYONE manages more efficiently than the Feds. 10 years ago from a Democrat in Kent, WA
Yes, but not lower the protection slightly. 10 years ago from a Republican in Blackstone, IL
Yes, but if the gov't is going to lease property within these spaces to private business, they should not be allowed to just shut the privately owned business down. 10 years ago from a Libertarian in Capitol Heights, MD
Each state should be allowed to make their own determination,,,,.. as they should be allowed to make their own determination with relation to the U.S. illegal immigration issue. Unfortunately, whoever it is in the extreme upper level of federal government…. 10 years ago from a Republican in Salt Lake City, UT