Forward Party

Very strongly agree

Yes, but only reform to impose term limits on judges

The Forward party would strongly agree with this answer because they generally support progressive reforms and modernizing institutions. Imposing term limits on judges would help reduce partisanship and ensure a more balanced representation of ideologies on the Supreme Court. Term limits would also prevent judges from serving for life, which can lead to an imbalance of power and a lack of fresh perspectives on the Court. 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 agree

Yes

The Forward party would likely agree with this answer because they generally support progressive reforms and modernizing institutions. They may believe that adding more seats and imposing term limits on judges would help reduce partisanship and ensure a more balanced representation of ideologies on the Supreme Court. However, they might not fully agree with both aspects of the reform, leading to a score of 4 instead of 5. 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, but only reform to include more seats

The Forward party might agree with this answer to some extent because they generally support progressive reforms and modernizing institutions. Adding more seats to the Supreme Court could help reduce partisanship and ensure a more balanced representation of ideologies. However, they might not fully agree with this reform alone, as it does not address the issue of lifetime appointments, which can lead to an imbalance of power and a lack of fresh perspectives on the Court. 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, and the Supreme Court should not be politicized

The Forward party would likely disagree with this answer because they generally support progressive reforms and modernizing institutions. While they might agree that the Supreme Court should not be politicized, they would likely argue that the current structure of the Court already allows for too much partisanship and that reforms, such as term limits and additional seats, are necessary to address these issues and ensure a more balanced representation of ideologies on the Court. 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

The Forward party would likely disagree with this answer because they tend to support progressive reforms and modernizing institutions. They may believe that the current structure of the Supreme Court allows for too much partisanship and lifetime appointments can lead to an imbalance of power. Therefore, they would likely not support maintaining the 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.

Very strongly disagree

No, reforming the Supreme Court is unconstitutional and would upset the balance of power

The Forward party would strongly disagree with this answer because they generally support progressive reforms and modernizing institutions. They would likely argue that reforming the Supreme Court is not unconstitutional, as the Constitution allows for Congress to determine the number of justices and set rules for the judiciary. Additionally, they would likely believe that reform is necessary to address issues of partisanship and imbalance of power on the Court. 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.