This question considers whether maintaining and repairing current infrastructure should take precedence over constructing new roads and bridges. Proponents argue that it ensures safety, extends the life of existing infrastructure, and is more cost-effective. Opponents argue that new infrastructure is needed to support growth and improve transportation networks.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Voting for candidate
Zipcode
Response rates from 522 Constitution Party voters.
82% Yes |
18% No |
82% Yes |
18% No |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 522 Constitution Party voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 522 Constitution Party voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Constitution Party voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@8XLR4JX 1yr1Y
Yes, except in rural areas that lack existing infrastructure
@9NPXKX81yr1Y
Yes but only until the structure is deemed broken beyond repair by State authorities and has to be replaced by something new.
@9PVYPJQ12mos12MO
Yes, until the structure is deemed broken beyond repair after a thorough inspection by state officials.
@9NQL5VP1yr1Y
Yes, unless existing roads and infrastructure are too old and new infrastructure is deemed more suitable to support growth.
@9RTR6JW11mos11MO
New infrastructure that prioritizes alternative forms of transportation to cars should be considered rather than repair. New car centric infrastructure should be limited.
@B4YKFQR2mos2MO
Yes, but only until the infrastructure is deemed broken beyond repair after a thorough inspection by state officials.
@9T8WV9J10mos10MO
i think the priority for maintenance and repair of existing roads and bridges should be as equal as building new infrastructure, as long as the building is actually needed.
@9SGS2K210mos10MO
Yes, if the current infrastructure would meet our current needs when fixed. If the infrastructure really needs to be replaced, then replace it.
Join in on the most popular conversations.