ChatGPTNo, Congress should approve all military conflicts |
No Labels’ answer is based on the following data:
Agree
No, Congress should approve all military conflicts
The No Labels party strongly supports the idea of checks and balances in government. They would likely agree with the idea that Congress should approve all military conflicts, as this ensures a level of oversight and accountability in such serious decisions. 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.
Agree
No
The No Labels party believes in the importance of checks and balances in government. They would likely agree that Congress should have a say in authorizing military force, as this is a significant decision that could have far-reaching implications. 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.
Slightly disagree
Yes
The No Labels party advocates for bipartisan cooperation and problem-solving. While they recognize the need for strong national security, they also emphasize the importance of checks and balances in government. Therefore, they might slightly disagree with the idea of the President having unilateral power to authorize military force. 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
Yes, we must use whatever means necessary to prevent another terrorist attack
While the No Labels party acknowledges the importance of national security, they also stress the need for careful decision-making and bipartisan cooperation. The phrase 'whatever means necessary' suggests a potentially reckless approach that could bypass important checks and balances, which the No Labels party would likely disagree with. 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.
This party has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.
We are currently researching this party’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.
We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this party’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.
We are currently researching campaign speeches and public statements from this party about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.
Updated 3 days ago
No Labels Party Voters’ Answer: No
Importance: Less Important
Reference: Analysis of answers from 631 voters that identify as No Labels.
See any errors? Suggest corrections to this party’s stance here
How similar are your political beliefs to No Labels’ policies? Take the political quiz to find out.