Polls: Society & Politics

I think you’re super rich when you are worth 10million US dollars or more. When you hit that mark. That for me is the threshold

I believe the Founding Fathers shown here would overwhelmingly reject the DSA’s proposals to replace major parts of the constitutional system they created.

George Washington would likely view abolishing or replacing core institutions as a threat to the national unity and constitutional order he spent his later life building and defending.

Benjamin Franklin supported reform and adaptation, but he also urged compromise and accepted the Constitution as the best system the Convention could produce. I believe he would favor lawful amendments over dismantling the structure entirely.

John Adams feared concentrated power, factionalism, and unchecked majorities. He would likely strongly oppose eliminating constitutional checks such as an independent judiciary and a bicameral legislature.

Alexander Hamilton defended a strong federal government, an energetic executive, the Senate, and an independent judiciary. He would probably be among the DSA agenda’s fiercest opponents.

James Madison, the principal architect of the Constitution, designed checks and balances specifically because no faction or temporary majority should control the entire government. He would likely see the DSA’s proposals as destroying those safeguards.

Thomas Jefferson was more suspicious of centralized power and more open to periodic reform, but he championed natural rights and limited government. I do not believe he would accept replacing the Founders’ system with centralized socialist control.

Overall, they might support constitutional amendments and reforms through the process they created, but I believe they would resist an agenda aimed at abolishing major institutions and replacing their constitutional republic with an entirely different political order.

Radical DSA manifesto calls to abolish presidency, US Senate and Electoral College - https://nypost.com/2026/07/16/us-news/radical-dsa-manifesto-calls-to-abolish-presidency-us-senate-and-electoral-college/

Islamic activist Linda Sarsour, who is a member of the communist DSA, used Independence Day to bolster fellow fascists’ spirits. She wanted them to know they would win, and she planned to replace the Declaration of Independence with a document reflecting her values. - https://www.independentsentinel.com/radical-islamist-wants-to-replace-the-declaration-of-independence/

The Declaration of Independence is not merely an old document to be discarded whenever activists decide America needs new “values.” It states the foundational principles of the United States: that all people possess inherent rights, that those rights do not come from government, and that legitimate government derives its authority from the consent of the governed.

Calling for a new document to replace or supersede the Declaration is therefore an attack on the philosophical foundation of the country. It is an attempt to substitute the Founders’ principles of natural rights, limited government, and individual liberty with a new ideological vision defined by today’s political movement.

The Declaration acknowledged that America had often failed to live up to its principles. The proper response is to apply those principles more faithfully—not erase and replace them. A movement that wants to rewrite America’s founding creed is not simply proposing another economic reform. It is openly seeking to redefine what the United States is and what it stands for.

Women tend to be more emotional and more concerned with social issues, so they often lean more toward left-wing views. Is it possible to get women into bed by pretending to care about feminism and human rights?

I’d say Trump/MAGA because, in my view, defending democracy requires more than repeatedly calling political opponents a “threat.” It requires protecting both lawful access to the ballot and confidence that only eligible citizens vote, voter rolls are accurate, ballots remain auditable, and election systems are secure.

President Trump has advanced a specific election-integrity agenda: proof of citizenship for federal voter registration through the SAVE America Act, citizenship-verification tools for states, enforcement against unlawful voting, stronger voter-roll maintenance, paper-based voting safeguards, and greater scrutiny of vulnerabilities in electronic election systems.

Democrats say they are defending democracy through voter-registration drives, voting-rights litigation, and opposition to measures they believe could remove eligible voters. Those are real activities, but I disagree with their approach when they oppose citizenship-documentation requirements, resist federal examination of voter rolls, or portray audits and verification measures as voter suppression rather than working toward safeguards that protect both access and integrity.

Democracy is not protected by treating every Republican proposal as “fascism” or by claiming Trump and MAGA are inherently illegitimate. It is protected when eligible citizens can vote, unlawful votes are prevented, every lawful ballot is counted accurately, results can be independently verified, and political disagreements are resolved through elections and constitutional institutions.

That is why I believe Trump/MAGA are doing more to defend American democracy and election integrity than Democrats and the DSA.

You're a firefighter, your team responds to a call thats been made of a 2 story house on fire, there's 3 blind puppies that are too weak to walk, upstairs in the bedroom. However the only person that knows this crucial information is the grandmother that was safely removed from the house, she is a democrat voter. Your firefighting team is made of republican voters and don't believe any of the words the grandmother is saying, brushing her words aside as her being delusional.
She begs you to listen to her and save her puppies. But what will you do?

The White House has released four collections of documents concerning election integrity: Electronic voting and ballot-counting systems: Intelligence assessments warn that foreign adversaries and other groups may have the capability to compromise election infrastructure, especially centralized voter databases, electronic pollbooks, election websites, voting machines, and ballot-counting systems. The release also includes intelligence concerning methods allegedly developed by Venezuela’s Maduro regime to digitally alter vote totals. China’s acquisition of American voter data: The documents concern China’s alleged acquisition of as many as 220 million U. S. voter files, including names, addresses, phone numbers, party preferences, and other personal information, as well as intelligence about efforts to exploit that data. Michigan voter-registration investigation: FBI and state-police records address an alleged fraudulent voter-registration operation in Muskegon involving applications reportedly signed in other people’s names, registrations for nonexistent individuals, and incentives tied to the number of applications submitted. These remain allegations requiring full investigation and prosecution where crimes can be proven. Noncitizens on state voter rolls: A Department of Homeland Security review reportedly identified approximately 278,000 noncitizens registered for federal elections within the records it examined, raising questions about voter-roll accuracy, citizenship verification, and cooperation between federal and state authorities. Together, these documents address foreign cyber threats, compromised voter information, alleged registration fraud, and inaccurate voter rolls. Regardless of political affiliation, should protecting the integrity and security of American elections be treated as a national priority?

election integrity- https://www.whitehouse.gov/election-integrity/

Naturally there can be more questions you consider private and may not answer honestly or openly to who asked but do they personally trigger you?
Myself I couldn't care at all what someone asks I'll simply answer in the way I want to without taking offense.
Also I'm not talking about a case where someone may pester you over and over with the same question.

Who owns them, is it Argentina, England, or Donald Trump?

I know Pakistanis worship us, but this question is mainly for you.

Do you see us as a political threat? The second-largest military in NATO is not a threat; it provides security for you.

Is it our history that bothers you? It's true that we once reached Vienna, but the British and the French also fought each other for centuries. Besides, Protestantism spread in Germany and Hungary thanks to us; we were their protectors.

Do you find us antisemitic? Jews lived most comfortably under Muslim states throughout history. Those who fled the massacre in Spain preferred the Ottoman lands for this reason.

Is it Islam that bothers you? Turkey was the seat of the Caliphate and today is a state respected by Muslims around the world. If you want to dominate the Middle East, Turkey is an asset thanks to its proxy role; Greece cannot do that.

Is it because of crime-prone immigrants? In fact, they commit fewer crimes than citizens of Western countries.

Do you hate Erdoğan? His famous saying is, "The world is bigger than five." (The number "5" refers to the five permanent members of the UN Security Council with veto power: the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France.) He defends the rights of the oppressed.

The once powerful hitlerian inner-circle, saluting the burning carcass of the despicable rat who brought them to their doom, along with the whole country, in a scene of the movie Der Untergang (Downfall, 2004)

It's no secret that MAGA has been shrinking ever since the January 6, 2021, insurrection, leaving behind only the hard to scrape scum: the true believers.

Over the last three elections, Trump has consistently attracted between 65 and 75 million idiots, depending on voter turnout.

In 2024, however, he somehow managed to convince a large number non-MAGAs to vote for him—not because of his platform, which was essentially centered on keeping himself out of jail and exacting a deeply undeserved revenge against his political opponents, but because many believed he was the better choice on the economy than Kamala Harris.

*There are also plenty of unexplainable morons who believe that intelligent women are incapable of governing, yet somehow think a twice-proven-to-be-incompetent, criminally convicted, serially dishonest piece-of-dog-sh** pedophile facing multiple criminal allegations like trump is fit to lead.

In your opinion, what percentage of the original MAGA movement (at its peak) is left?

The Democratic Socialists of America’s official program calls for moving beyond capitalism and creating a democratic socialist republic under a new Constitution. Its proposals include public ownership of major corporations and essential industries; abolishing the Senate and Electoral College; making the executive and judiciary subordinate to Congress; abolishing ICE; moving toward abolishing police and prisons; extending voting rights to permanent residents; universal government programs; phasing out fossil fuels; reducing military power; ending aid to Israel; and eventually replacing the present economic and constitutional order.

These are not claims invented by the DSA’s opponents. They appear in the organization’s own official program, linked below. Supporters may believe these policies would produce greater equality and democracy. I oppose them because I support capitalism, private property, constitutional checks and balances, citizen voting, secure borders, law enforcement, independent courts, and individual ownership of one’s work and livelihood.

Official source:
program. dsausa. org

Ask your friends and family outside of GirlsAskGuys what they think as well!

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has proposed a platform that includes a wide range of social, economic, and governmental reforms.

Among its proposals are replacing the Supreme Court with a judiciary chosen by Congress, expanding the House of Representatives, implementing wealth taxes, supporting reparations, reducing or restructuring the Department of Defense, and advancing its “Feminism for All” platform.

According to the DSA’s published platform, “Feminism for All” supports queer liberation, abortion access, gender expression and transition, expanded protections against sex discrimination, support for care work, and policies affecting childbirth, child-raising, marriage, divorce, and family life.

This poll is asking about the overall direction of these proposals rather than any single policy in isolation.

Do you generally support or oppose this platform? Explain your reasoning in the comments.

https://program.dsausa.org/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

After watching Young Washington, I became curious about George Washington’s family and learned something remarkable: Robert E. Lee married Mary Anna Randolph Custis, George Washington’s step-great-granddaughter through Martha Washington’s first marriage.

Washington had no biological children, but he helped raise Martha’s children and grandchildren, and his influence continued through the Custis family. Lee later lived at Arlington House, which had been built as a memorial to Washington and contained many of Washington’s belongings.

I believe Washington likely would have condemned Lee’s decision to fight against the Union. Washington was deeply loyal to Virginia and had served Virginia during the French and Indian War, but his later life was devoted to creating and preserving the United States. In his Farewell Address, he warned against sectional division, and during the Whiskey Rebellion he demonstrated that armed resistance to federal authority could not simply be tolerated.

Lee did not merely disagree with the federal government. He resigned from the United States Army and accepted command of forces fighting against the country Washington helped create.

Of course, no one can know with absolute certainty what Washington would have thought. Still, based on his writings, actions, and commitment to national unity, I believe he would have seen Lee’s choice to place Virginia above the Union as a tragic betrayal of the republic.