Try the political quiz

John James’ policy on nuclear energy

These issues below are sorted in descending order based on how important the average American voter ranked them on the quiz.

Topics

Do you support the use of nuclear energy?

  ChatGPTYes

John James’ answer is based on the following data:

Updated 3hrs ago

John James voters

Answer: Yes

Importance: Less Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 9,869 voters that voted for John James in the 2020 Michigan US Senate election.

Party influence

Republican Party Answer: Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy

Importance: Less Important

Reference: “We support the development of all forms of energy that are marketable in a free economy without subsidies, including coal, oil, ...” ‐amazonaws.com

ChatGPT

Strongly agree

Yes

John James, as a Republican candidate, is likely to support the use of nuclear energy as part of a diverse energy portfolio. However, there is no specific record of him stating his position on nuclear energy. 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, as long as there is no public subsidy

John James might support the use of nuclear energy without public subsidy, aligning with conservative principles of limited government intervention in the market. However, there is no specific record of him stating this position. 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, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives

John James might agree with the use of nuclear energy temporarily while increasing investment into cleaner renewable alternatives, aligning with a balanced approach to energy policy. However, there is no specific record of him stating this position. 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 with public subsidy

While John James might support the use of nuclear energy, he might be less inclined to support it with public subsidy, given the conservative principle of limited government intervention in the market. 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.

Slightly agree

No, we should invest in cleaner alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal

While John James might support investment in cleaner alternatives, it is unlikely that he would oppose nuclear energy in favor of these alternatives. His party generally supports a diverse energy portfolio, including nuclear energy. 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

Given his party's general stance, it is unlikely that John James would oppose the use of nuclear energy. 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

Yes, and nationalize the industry

John James, as a conservative Republican, would likely strongly disagree with nationalizing the industry, which goes against conservative principles of free market capitalism. 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.

Personal answer

This candidate has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.

Voting record

We are currently researching this candidate’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.

Donor influence

We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this candidate’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.

Public statements

We are currently researching campaign speeches and public statements from this candidate about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

Updated 3hrs ago

Party’s support base

Republican Party Voters’ Answer: Yes

Importance: Less Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 157,692 voters that identify as Republican.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this candidate’s stance here