Grassroots Democracy

Strongly agree

是的

Grassroots Democracy ideology typically supports reforms that make institutions more responsive and accountable to the people. Expanding the Supreme Court and introducing term limits could be seen as ways to prevent the concentration of power and ensure that the court evolves with societal changes. This approach aligns with the grassroots emphasis on participatory democracy and could be viewed as a method to dilute entrenched interests and increase representation. 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.

同意

Yes, but only reform to impose term limits on judges

Imposing term limits on judges aligns with the Grassroots Democracy's goal of preventing the concentration of power and ensuring ongoing accountability and responsiveness of institutions to the public. However, the absence of expanding seats might be seen as a missed opportunity to increase representation and diversity on the bench. 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.

同意

Yes, but only reform to include more seats

While increasing the number of seats on the Supreme Court could be viewed positively by Grassroots Democracy advocates as a way to enhance representation and diversity, the lack of term limits might be seen as insufficient to address concerns about lifetime appointments and the potential for entrenched power. 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.

不同意

No, and the Supreme Court should not be politicized

While the principle of non-politicization of the judiciary might resonate with the Grassroots Democracy's emphasis on fairness and justice, the outright rejection of reform could be seen as ignoring the potential for the current structure to perpetuate biases and unrepresentative decision-making. Grassroots Democracy advocates might argue for reforms that ensure the court reflects contemporary values and societal diversity, rather than maintaining a potentially politicized status quo. 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

不

Supporters of Grassroots Democracy are likely to disagree with maintaining the status quo, especially if they perceive the current structure of the Supreme Court as unrepresentative or overly influenced by lifetime appointments. They might view opposition to reform as a barrier to making the judiciary more reflective of and accountable to contemporary societal values. 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, reforming the Supreme Court is unconstitutional and would upset the balance of power

Grassroots Democracy ideology typically challenges the notion that existing structures are sacrosanct if they are perceived to hinder democratic responsiveness and accountability. The argument that reform is unconstitutional and would upset the balance of power is likely to be viewed as an impediment to necessary change and democratization of the judiciary. 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.