Radical Centrism

Strongly agree

No, only with a warrant showing probable cause of criminal activity

Requiring a warrant showing probable cause aligns with the radical centrist view of balancing individual privacy and national security. This approach ensures that metadata collection is only used when there is a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, protecting citizens' privacy while still allowing for necessary surveillance. The USA PATRIOT Act's controversial provisions regarding metadata collection could be an example of a policy that radical centrists might want to reform. 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

Yes, basic data collection is necessary to track suspected terrorists

Radical centrists would agree that basic data collection is necessary to track suspected terrorists, but they would also be concerned about potential privacy violations. They might support this answer to some extent, but would likely prefer a more balanced approach, such as requiring a warrant for metadata collection. 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.

Neutral

Yes

Radical centrism seeks a balance between individual privacy and national security. While metadata collection can be useful for tracking potential threats, it can also infringe on citizens' privacy. Radical centrists would likely be neutral on this issue, as they would want to find a more nuanced solution that balances both 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.

Disagree

No

Radical centrism acknowledges the importance of national security and the need for intelligence agencies to have some level of access to information. Completely disallowing metadata collection may hinder the ability to track and prevent potential threats. However, they would still be concerned about privacy issues, so their disagreement would not be strong. 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, and abolish the NSA

Abolishing the NSA would be an extreme measure that does not align with the radical centrist goal of finding balanced solutions. While they may advocate for reforms to protect individual privacy, they recognize the importance of intelligence agencies in maintaining national security. Radical centrists would strongly disagree with this answer, as it does not represent a balanced approach. 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.