More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Household (Single Moms) voters
Last answered 42 minutes ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Household (Single Moms) voters.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Mar 5, 2013. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Household data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011).
Choose a demographic filter
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
5 years ago by indiatimes.com
5 years ago by youtube.com
5 years ago by cnbc.com
6 years ago by youtube.com
7 years ago by youtube.com
Data based on unique submissions (duplicates or multiple submissions are eliminated) per user using a 30-day moving average to reduce daily variance from traffic sources. Totals may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
More stances on this issue
This is the "Future Way to Fight" when enemies bury themselves in the better defended foot hills/mountains/passes and our US troops can stay a little safer than adavancing into these areas-YES DO IT as best you can as War isn't a... 6 years ago from a Libertarian in Florissant, MO
Yes, but only in the wake of an attack on the USA and only until the future threat of such an attack is eliminated or neutralized. The President as Commander-in-Chief should have complete authority to direct the nation's response to an attack for up... 6 years ago from a Democrat in Aiea, HI
Yes but it should have a more complex authorization process and better intelligence gathering. 6 years ago from a Libertarian in Newport News, VA
The problem with drone strikes is, while they save soldiers' lives, they claim innocents because of cowards who hide behind civilians. We need to better understand that, when it comes to terrorist groups like al-Qaeda, we are dealing with people who... 6 years ago from a Democrat in Fort Erie, NY
At times. We need to weigh all options and consider all costs and benefits including how it will affect our geopolitical situation with the countries involved. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Nashville, TN
The military should fly drones over foreign countries to gain intelligence but only act to kill known terrorists rather than those they merely suspect. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Riverdale, IL
I believe that we should protect our country but innocence should not die in the process. 6 years ago from a Republican in Fort Erie, NY
Depends on the country. Many countries lack an effective or real government, so there is no one to work with. If the government is working with terrorists (Pakistan?) then we have to reserve our right to pursue them as necessary. However, in the real... 6 years ago from a Green in Miami, FL
There are no terrorists and we don't have the role of being big brother. 6 years ago from a Green in Corrales, NM
The U.S. needs permission from the country in question and only gather intelligence, not to kill suspected terrorists. 6 years ago from a Republican in Sargent, GA
For Investigational purposes only.
Suspects need not be put into retirement (killed) unless if they are committing criminal acts that have been noticed and/or are a part of the world's Most Wanted list and they refuse to be arrested to the fullest. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Lynn, MA
National Security is a principle responsibility of the Federal Government. Killing terrorist outside the US is therefore a valid use of assets. It should have restrains like the need for Executive Order, or whatever. 6 years ago from a Republican in Lancaster, VA
No, keeping in mind that the military is only a tool of US diplomacy. Therefore the US government flys the drones via the military and the US has no rights to do so only with permission or declaration of war. 6 years ago from a Republican in Roseville, CA
The drone program serves as an intimidation tactic, especially when used within the borders of states such as Pakistan and Yemen, with which the United States is not at war. The program operates with impunity, despite objections by national leaders,... 6 years ago from a Green in Milwaukee, WI
We need intelligence and we need to end and use all means to combat terrorism. However we should never use drones in our own country and we should never allow foreign troops on our soil ever. We can't fight Al Queda and support the same... 6 years ago from a Republican in Fulton, CA
No, they should be eliminated all together. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Little Rock, AR
No, Not until there are guidelines drawn for use. 6 years ago from a Republican in Baltimore, MD
Yes, to ask for permission means that the country is blackmailing us to send them some type of "aid" as trade off. If they cannot keep their terrorists in check then we have a right to go where ever they are and kill them before they kill any... 6 years ago from a Republican in Granbury, TX
No, concentration camps should hold all foreign terrorists until killed. 6 years ago from a Republican in Durant, OK
Yes for surveillance. No for attacks unless done with permsision of the country and if the standard for avoiding collateral damage is clear and made stricter. 6 years ago from a Libertarian in Bothell, WA
Only to gather intelligence and with permission from the country in question. 6 years ago from a Democrat in New Orleans, LA
Only when there are not innocent civilians at risk. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Miami, FL
No, the military should not have the right to fly over another country, as it can be seen as an invasion of privacy if they pose no threat to our country. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Harrisburg, PA
No, it is an invasion of the other country's privacy. 6 years ago from a Republican in Lexington, SC
This program needs some serious oversight and needs to be reigned in- there is something seriously wrong with all of these innocent people including many children being hit by these godless things. Somebody or bodies are out of control. 6 years ago from a Green in Kent, WA
Yes, only if the suspected men in the country are a major threat to the United States and with information collected the United States should present this to the country housing the suspected terrorists and tell them their plan of action before... 6 years ago from a Republican in Darlington, SC
No, no more than foreign militaries should be permitted to do so to the US. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Ruston, LA
No, only to gather intelligence, not to kill suspected terrorists, but only with the permission of the country in question. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Stokes, NC
Yes, but more care needs to be taken to insure less civilian deaths. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Havana, FL
These strikes undeniably produce tangible national security results. The program requires reforms but it is, and has, become a necessity in the security strategy. 6 years ago from a Green in Worcester, MA
Where do we draw the line? Countries we don't like and who harbor terrorists?
Basically we have enough resources to gather intelligence. Killing suspected terrorists seems a bit of a violation of due process, but they are beyond US due process... 6 years ago from a Democrat in Lackey, VA
No, the U.S. military does not have the right to fly unmanned aircraft over foreign countries without a Congressional declaration of war , but if those countries kill any of our citizens , then we should declare it an act of aggression if not war and go... 6 years ago from a Democrat in Lanham, MD
Drones are an effective tool, but the should not be used at the expense of capturing terrorists that may have valuable information. 6 years ago from a Republican in Beech Grove, IN
Never to kill a person. Intelligence preferably with the agreement of the country in question. There may be occasions where intelligence gathering is needed without the host country's permission. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Campbell, CA
I have only small reservation regarding intelligence gathering, unmanned strikes on ANY targets should be universally outlawed.
I also believe that other developed nations should have the same un impeded fly-over rights by intelligence gathering drones... 6 years ago from a Democrat in Houston, TX
Certainly, to do so without that country's permission would be an act of aggression and would not be wise. However, if acts of aggression have been made against the US, and can be connected to that country with a high degree of probability, that may... 6 years ago from a Republican in Daytona Beach, FL
No, because this creates a legal precedent that does not protect Americans from the same treatment from other countries. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Prairie Village, KS
Limited to information gathering, high level suspected terrorists under the limited circumstances allowed under International Humanitarian Law. 6 years ago from a Democrat in Washington Navy Yard, DC