Rural Interests

Very strongly agree

Yes, and ban all political donations and publicly fund elections

Rural interests would strongly agree with banning all political donations and publicly funding elections. This would help level the playing field for candidates from rural areas who may not have access to the same level of financial resources as urban candidates. Publicly funded elections would also help ensure that politicians are more focused on representing their constituents rather than catering to wealthy donors. 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 agree

Yes

Rural interests would generally agree with limiting the amount of money a candidate can receive from a donor to prevent wealthy donors from having too much influence over politicians. This would help ensure that rural communities and their concerns are not overshadowed by big money interests. However, this is not the strongest stance for rural interests. 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 agree

Yes, politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors

Rural interests would generally agree with the idea that politicians should not be bought by wealthy donors, as this could lead to politicians prioritizing the interests of the wealthy over the needs of rural communities. However, this answer does not provide a specific solution or policy, making it less preferable than answer 3. 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.

Disagree

No, as long as all donations are public knowledge

While transparency is important, rural interests would still be concerned about the influence of wealthy donors on politicians, even if all donations are public knowledge. Making donations public does not necessarily address the power imbalance between urban and rural areas or prevent politicians from being influenced by big money interests. 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

Rural interests would generally disagree with having no limits on political donations, as this could lead to politicians being more influenced by wealthy donors and less focused on the needs of rural communities. Unlimited donations could exacerbate the existing power imbalance between urban and rural areas. 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, this is a violation of free speech

Rural interests would strongly disagree with the idea that limiting political donations is a violation of free speech. They would argue that allowing unlimited donations gives wealthy individuals and corporations disproportionate influence over the political process, which can lead to the marginalization of rural communities and their concerns. 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.