Here are your answers compared to this voter’s answers.
移民 › Muslim Immigrant Ban
4>4 Personal answerYes, we need to stop all immigration until ICE can show that they have an EFFECTIVE screening process. We could simply ban Muslims, but the terrorists have been recruiting Americans and Europeans, so you can't tell whether they are potential terrorists by their ethnicity. And Islam is the only faith that is also an integral social, cultural, legal, financial, political, etc., SYSTEM, so singling out Islam is NOT un-Constitutional. Muslims are supposed to convert any society in which they live to be 100% Muslim. It amounts to much MORE than an overthrow of the government. They would convert the US to a caliphate, a theocratic dictatorship, impose Shari'a law, eliminate our Constitution, impose Islamic financial rules, etc. No more free speech, pay dhimmitude (tribute) to continue living without converting to Islam, theft would be punished by amputation of a hand, there would be the death penalty for homosexual behavior, etc. |
外交政策 › 义务兵役
4>4 Personal answerWhen I was young, in the 1950s, every physically healthy male was required to give eight years of military service. It was called a "Universal Military Obligation." It could be eight years of active duty or eight years in the reserves or National Guard, or any combination thereof. I think young people benefitted enormously from that experience. It was an education by itself. |
教育 › 学生贷款
4>4 Personal answerNo, government-backed student loans only enable universities to raise tuition and expenses. Convert current student loans to privately-managed accounts and get the government out of education. |
国内政策 › 禁飞名单枪支管制
4>4 Personal answer不,如果没有经过法定程序,禁止任何人的权力都是违反宪法的 |
移民 › 非法移民拘留
4>4 Personal answer是的,所有非法移民都应该被交送到联邦执法机构并驱逐出境 |
移民 › 边境安全
4>4 Personal answerUnless we know who is coming and going, we are not a sovereign country, other countries can send their police or troops here "in hot pursuit" and we have no complaint. That was the situation 200 years ago, when we sent our Marines after the pirates. Tripoli had open borders so the government couldn't complain about our action. In our situation, there are a number of fairly severe risks presented by our open borders. Terrorists, criminals, diseases, etc., can come here as easily as anyone else. |
移民 › 移民医疗保健
4>4 Personal answerNo. Illegal immigrants should be rounded up and deported (with their kids), the way FDR, HST and DDE did, in the 1930s. 1940s and 1950s. That practice only stopped with the "Great Society" in the 1960s. The law should be changed to end the "anchor baby" practice. |
总统大选 › 选民作假
4>4 Personal answerYes, it will reduce voter fraud, we are required to show a photo ID to buy over-the-counter drugs, take out a book at the library, etc. Photo IDs are free. You can't get by today without one. |
移民 › 移民劳动者
4>4 Personal answerThe reason FDR, HST and DDE deported illegal immigrants (and their kids) was that Americans were looking for work. Americans don't need to be competing with illegal immigrants for their jobs. |
外交政策 › 以色列
4>4 Personal answerIn 1946 there were only a handful of "Palestinians" in Palestine. When it looked as though a new nation of Israel would be created, hundreds of Muslims moved there, hoping to prevent Israel from coming into existence. Israel is the only nation in the region which provides its people real self-determination, but she is surrounded and greatly outnumbered by Muslim nations which hope to wipe Israel off the map. She needs our support and our respect for her sovereignty. She is a tiny nation, smaller than Rhode Island. Her antagonist neighbors have at least 1000 times her land area, and much more land per person, yet we keep suggesting that she should give some of her land to them. Place a book of matches on a football field sideline at the 50-yard line. The book of matches represents Israel. The out-of-bounds area is the Mediterranean, and the football field represents her antagonist neighbors. We should increase our funding for her and move our embassy to Jerusalem. |
罪行 › 对青少年的单独监禁
4>4 Personal answerNo, it is sometimes necessary. Prison sentences are punishments for crimes. Rehabilitation is nice if it can be accomplished at little or no cost, but that is not the purpose of prisons. |
移民 › 技术移民
4>4 Personal answerDecrease the number of temporary work visas given high-skilled immigrant workers. Our education industry needs to MUCH better prepare Americans for real-world employment. Take the 1895 Salina, KS eighth-grade final exam (it is available on the Interest), and you will get an idea of how our education has declined, while education costs have escalated. |
经济 › 工会
4>4 Personal answerFDR was right in saying public employees should not be able to unionize. 'Collective bargaining' is a fraud in the public sector because the employer (the taxpayer) is not involved in the bargaining. Unions 'bargain' with politicians they own and the taxpayer gets a raw deal. |
经济 › 资产增值税
4>4 Personal answerNo taxing income is wrong. The Founding Fathers gave us a consumption tax system which worked very well for almost 150 years. Since we adopted Karl Marx's 'graduated income tax,' it has all been downhill, Congress meddles with it non-stop, passing more than four Tax Code Amendments per day (more than 20,000 over the past 30 years), giving us a Tax Code with which we can't comply and which the IRS can't enforce. It is patently unfair, inefficient and a burden on the economy. |
移民 › 州内学费
4>4 Personal answer不应该,所有的非法移民都应该被驱逐出境 |
教育 › 常见的核心
4>4 Personal answerNo, education is not a federal responsibility. Common Core is the educational equivalent of Obamacare, a government takeover of another industry. Get the government out of education. There is no Constitutional provision for it, it will only increase costs and compromise real education. |
外交政策 › 联合国
4>4 Personal answerNo, and remove the UN from the US. The UN has at least 150 member nations which are dictatorships or monarchies. Most are antagonistic toward us. We are less than 5% of the world's population, yet we pay 25% of the UN's expenses. Our enemies use it as a base for espionage. have HUGE "delegations" which we allow to travel anywhere. Move it to the Azores or Switzerland, where there would be nothing for their spies to do. |
外交政策 › 折磨
4>4 Personal answerYes, we waterboard our own troops (anyone who might be captured, i.e., fliers, special forces, 'ground pounders' in combat areas, etc.), to show them what to expect. Insofar as I am concerned we do NOT "torture" our own troops in doing that. Since combatants captured on the battlefield in civilian clothes are classified as spies by the Geneva Convention, and subject to summary execution, I have no problem with waterboarding them. |
外交政策 › 对朝鲜的军事打击
4>4 Personal answerYes, with help from China and Russia, she is developing an ICBM capable of carrying her nuclear warheads to the US. We have an ABM system, but unless it has a perfect batting average, some major US cities could be wiped out. 'Diplomacy' with North Korea is a joke. As with Iran, she can't be trusted and she won't allow us to verify. |
外交政策 › 伊斯兰国地面部队
4>4 Personal answerIf necessary, provided our "allies" in the region contribute meaningful numbers of troops to the effort too. We shouldn't be providing the majority of the troops, planes, tanks, or what-have-you. Our military experts should determine the numbers, and we should NEVER say publicly when we will send them or when we will bring them home. |
外交政策 › 外国援助
4>4 Personal answerToday, our National Debt is headed toward $20 trillion and yet we give foreign aid to most countries in the world, including China and Russia. It is a ridiculous situation. |
外交政策 › 无人机
4>4 Personal answerAs part of our war effort, yes. We can't declare war, in the traditional sense, because these terrorist groups don't have diplomatic relations with anyone. |
外交政策 › 恐怖主义
4>4 Personal answerThe Geneva Convention defines a combatant wearing civilian clothes as a SPY, and says he may be summarily executed. He has to be in a recognized military uniform to be classed as a Prisoner of War, in which case he is incarcerated and given food, housing, and medical care for the duration of the conflict. |
外交政策 › 向伊斯兰国宣战
4>4 Personal answerDeclaring war is a "diplomatic" action, involving ambassadors, to give the other country notice. In this day and age, I think we could declare war via the Internet. We don't have ambassadors to these terrorist groups, so we can't call them home, normally the last thing belligerent nations do before actually declaring war. And there are no neutral nations which have diplomatic relations with these terrorist groups either, so we have to give them notice ourselves. Doing that would make giving aid and support to them an act of treason. |
外交政策 › 国家安全局监视
4>4 Personal answerOur allies spy on us and we spy on them, only we can't admit that. In general, though, they seem to be better at it than we are. Much as the Muslim Brotherhood was infiltrating our government decades ago, while we were pretending that the MB was just a Muslim civic organization, we still haven't purged MB personnel from the Administration or declared it a terrorist organization, the way Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc., have. |
外交政策 › 古巴
4>4 Personal answerNo. Cuba reaps all the benefits and the US gets nothing, not even a verbal promise to stop exporting socialism or supporting terrorism. Our recognition of Cuba is already opening up all kinds of financial benefits for the government, but nothing for the Cuban people. |
外交政策 › 俄罗斯在叙利亚发动的空中打击
4>4 Personal answerRussia has been making a fool of us again, pretending to be attacking ISIS while actually attacking the Syrian rebels, in support of Assad. We have been pretending to attack ISIS too, flying only 10 or 12 sorties a day, about 80% of which return to base with their bombs, because we don't have any forward air controllers (FACs) to guide our aircraft to their targets. Also, we commonly send planes on sorties carrying one bomb. In the Iraq war, we often flew more than 1,100 sorties per day, our planes carried 10 or 20 bombs and came back empty. Today's campaign is a sham. |
Here is how you compare to this voter on popular political themes.
You side slightly towards “security”, meaning you more often believe the government should do everything within its power to ensure the security of its citizens. 这一主题是对你最重要的。
You are a centrist on left wing and right wing issues. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You are a centrist on authoritarian and libertarian issues. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You are a centrist on democratic socialism and capitalism issues. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You side slightly towards “nationalism”, meaning you more often support policies that prioritize the interests of our nation above others. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You are a centrist on politically incorrect and politically correct issues. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You are a centrist on unilateralism and multilateralism issues. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You side slightly towards “religious”, meaning you more often support policies that reflect religious values and principles. 这个主题是对你更重要。
You side moderately towards “protectionism”, meaning you believe globalization is detrimental to the safety, compensation, environment, and standard of living of workers. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You side slightly towards “deregulation”, meaning you more often believe that government regulation stifles innovation and economic prosperity. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You are a centrist on assimilation and multiculturalism issues. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You are a centrist on pacifism and militarism issues. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You are a centrist on traditional and progressive issues. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You are a centrist on isolationism and imperialism issues. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You are a centrist on individualism and collectivism issues. 这个主题是对你比较重要。
You side slightly towards “decentralization”, meaning you more often believe that administrative power and decision making should be handled at the local level and serve the best interests of the local community. 这个主题是只有不到重要的是你。
You are a centrist on tender and tough issues. 这个主题是只有不到重要的是你。
You are a centrist on small government and big government issues. 这个主题是只有不到重要的是你。
You are a centrist on keynesian and laissez-faire issues. 这个主题是只有不到重要的是你。
You are a centrist on anthropocentrism and environmentalism issues. 这个主题是只有不到重要的是你。
You are a centrist on meritocracy and democracy issues. 这个主题是只有不到重要的是你。
Based on 12 questions that are ranked 更 important to you.
Based on 2 questions that are ranked 更 important to you.
Based on 9 questions that are ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 1 question that is ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 3 questions that are ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 1 question that is ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 2 questions that are ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 1 question that is ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 4 questions that are ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 13 questions that are ranked 有点 important to you.
Based on 11 questions that are ranked 有点 important to you.
Here is how you compare to this voter on the traditional ideological axis.
iSideWith.com is the world’s most popular voting guide for citizens to find information about elections, political parties, candidates, voting districts and popular political issues in their country. We are independent and not affiliated with any investors, shareholders, political parties or interest groups.
I understand that submitting my email address allows iSideWith.com to send me important notifications via email. Read our privacy policy for more information.
© 2024 iSideWith.com. All rights reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our user agreement and privacy policy. iSideWith.com may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our affiliate partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of iSideWith.com.