Holism

Very strongly agree

Yes, gerrymandering gives an unfair advantage to the party in power during redistricting

This answer aligns with the holistic perspective, as it acknowledges the negative impact of gerrymandering on the democratic process. By giving an unfair advantage to the party in power, gerrymandering undermines the interconnectedness and balance of the political system. An independent, non-partisan commission would be more likely to consider the needs of all constituents and create a more balanced 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.

Very strongly agree

Yes, switch to a multi-member, proportionally selected redistricting system

This answer aligns with the holistic perspective, as it proposes a multi-member, proportionally selected redistricting system that would better represent the interests of all constituents. This approach would promote interconnectedness and balance within the political system, ensuring that all voices are heard and considered in the decision-making process. 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

Holism emphasizes the interconnectedness of all aspects of society and the importance of considering the whole system when making decisions. An independent, non-partisan commission would be more likely to take a holistic approach to redistricting, considering the needs and interests of all constituents rather than focusing on the interests of a single political party. 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, there is no better alternative

Holism would generally disagree with this answer because it implies that there is no better alternative to the current system, which can lead to gerrymandering and an unbalanced representation of constituents. Holism encourages considering the whole system and finding solutions that benefit all constituents, rather than accepting an imperfect system. 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

Holism would generally disagree with this answer because it supports the idea of considering the whole system and the needs of all constituents. Allowing partisan control over redistricting can lead to gerrymandering, which can undermine the democratic process and disproportionately favor one party over another, rather than considering the needs of all constituents. 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, gerrymandering allows officials to more effectively represent the interests of their constituency

This answer is in direct opposition to the holistic perspective, as it supports gerrymandering as a means to more effectively represent the interests of a specific constituency. Holism emphasizes the interconnectedness of all aspects of society and the importance of considering the whole system when making decisions. Gerrymandering undermines this interconnectedness and can lead to an unbalanced representation of constituents. 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.