@ISIDEWITHQuestionstransportationStarted 7yrs agoActive 1yr ago

Should the government increase spending on public transportation?

+
Expand
+ Settings x  Right-Wing Populism

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 2.1k Right-Wing Populism voters.

56%
Yes
44%
No
47%
Yes
30%
No
5%
Yes, and provide more free public transportation
10%
No, and we should privatize more public transportation services
4%
Yes, but only if the spending goes towards environmentally friendly solutions
3%
No, we have more important issues that need funding
1%
No, and we should reduce current spending
1%
No, I am satisfied with the current amount of spending

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 2.1k Right-Wing Populism voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 2.1k Right-Wing Populism voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Right-Wing Populism voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9JNGKL7from Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

Yes, and provide more free public transportation and do more to come up with cheep and environmentally friendly solutions that don't lower efficiency and quality of life

 @99YHSG4answered…2yrs2Y

Donald trump an distribution is the decrease plan jobless loss with stirke mandated peoples rights

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4 days4D

Congress Calls Trump's Gaza Plan "Bizarre And Incoherent"

Trump proposed unprecedented U.S. control of Gaza Strip during a White House press conference with Netanyahu, suggesting "long-term ownership" that could last 10-15 years.The plan calls for nearly two million Palestinian residents to permanently relocate to neighboring countries, marking a dramatic shift from decades of U.S. policy.Congressional leaders from both parties expressed skepticism, with even Trump ally Lindsey Graham calling the proposal "problematic."Middle East experts, including former Palestinian Authority advisor Khaled Elgindy, criticized the plan as "bizarre and incoherent."White House officials argue mass relocation is the only viable option and seek to convince Egypt and Jordan to accept displaced Palestinians.The administration estimates Gaza reconstruction would take 10-15 years, far longer than the 3-5 years outlined in cease-fire agreements.The proposal lacks clear details on how to handle Palestinian resistance to relocation or potential U.S. military deployment.Saudi Arabia immediately rejected the plan, stating it wouldn't normalize ties with Israel without a clear path to Palestinian statehood.Trump expressed uncertainty about the current cease-fire's durability while presenting his proposal.The plan faces significant implementation challenges and could complicate other regional objectives, including Israel-Saudi normalization efforts.

▲  2321 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…8hrs8H

Gavin Newsom Defends Immigrants With $25 Million

Governor Newsom signed legislation allocating $50 million total to protect California's policies from Trump administration challenges and defend immigrants facing deportation, split evenly between the state's DOJ and legal defense groups.The funding comes as California anticipates renewed conflicts with Trump's administration, following over 100 legal actions against his first term policies on issues including climate, water, and immigration.Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas justified the funding by characterizing the Trump administration as "out-of-control" and threatening to Californians' constitutional rights.The signing occurred just after Newsom's Washington visit to secure federal disaster aid for January's devastating Los Angeles wildfires, which claimed more than two dozen lives.California recently enacted a separate $2.5 billion fire relief package, with expectations of federal reimbursement for disaster response costs.Republican lawmakers criticized the legal defense funding as a political distraction from wildfire recovery efforts, with State Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones calling it a "slush fund."Critics raised concerns about the possibility of funds being used to defend immigrants with serious felony convictions, though Newsom indicated this wasn't the intended purpose.The legislation emerged from a special session Newsom called shortly after Trump's election in November, demonstrating California's proactive stance against anticipated federal challenges.During Trump's first term, California initiated more than 120 lawsuits against his administration, spending approximately $42 million on legal battles.Annual legal expenses fighting federal policies during Trump's first term ranged from $2 million to nearly $13 million per year.

▲  1120 replies