October Voice Your Opinion Poll Comments:

Will you vote for a US presidential candidate based on their science and technology policy?

1. Not solely, science and technology policy are important, but so is domestic policy, international policy and a host of other factors. (USA)

2. The policies and voting history of the presidential candidates regarding science and technology definitely weigh into the overall decision *greatly*, but I would not base my ultimate decision on this issue alone. (USA)

3. Economic, fiscal, and taxation matters come far ahead of a president's views on science. (USA)

4. I would like to point out that the president is the leader of a country, not the PI for the nation's research. Even though I am a scientist, I believe other issues take precedent over the president's opinion on science. The most applicable example relating to this poll would obviously be the stem cell issue. May I point out that President Bush has not made stem cell research illegal, he just won't allow tax dollars to fund its research, which I think is a fair and balanced view for all citizens of the U.S. Thank goodness that we think about things before jumping into them. (USA)

5. My vote is to select the candidate who will do the best overall job, not necessarily the one who represents my view on a single issue. Science and technology positions are important, though. (USA)

6. If I was a US CITIZEN? BUT ALSO AS A FRENCH scientist I will favor by my vote a president candidate who will not submit the real interests of science to the only grid of some industries stakeholders . The world needs good US SCIENCE AND WILLINGNESS TO COOPERATE ; one candidate is very clear on that point , the actual president is clearly negative on that point . IF SCIENCE (all domains including sociology, humanistic sciences) are well supported, and not called for support for a middle aged ideology, then the true questions can arise, but not before. CLIENTELISM is never a good political issue . (France)

7. We cannot ignore what is being revealed in the days discoveries. (USA)

8. Being a scientist, I obviously always pay serious attention to candidates' science and technology policies and proposals. But in this year's election especially, my overriding concerns are honesty, leadership ability, performance record, and intelligence. (USA)

9. This would not be the most important reason at this time. (USA)

10. Science policy is but one item I consider. Without a sound fiscal policy, there will not be enough money to fund a good science policy. Dropping 130 billion into deep pit like Iraq is not good fiscal policy. Bush is trying to do something akin to what Johnson did in the 60s. Johnson had a war on poverty and a war in Viet Nam. Bush has a war in Iraq and massive tax cuts. A crude comparison, but in either case, money is being wasted when it could go for something good. (USA)

11. I cannot imagine anyone voting exclusive on science policy, but that policy certainly reflects on a politicians other views. (USA)

12. My life is presently dedicated to solving our energy independence and global warming problems by capturing the very high energy contained in high altitude winds using flying electric generators. The Department of Energy currently is divided into departments covering only existing technologies, and funding primarily going towards fossil fuels and nuclear. Thus, apparently in the unspoken belief that no new technology is possible, there are no solicitations seeking suggestions on completely new technologies. If one of the candidates would recognize that, I would vote for that one. (USA)

13. The question could be interpreted to mean that one's vote would be based exclusively on the candidates' science policy. Mine will not be. (USA)

14. For the last four years science has been under threat. This threat ranges from inadequate funding, to suppressing research, and to government support of religious teaching. Let me point out one example... The controversy over the sale of the creationist anthology "Grand Canyon: A Different View" in the bookstores in Grand Canyon National Park continues. On October 13, 2004, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility -- "a national non-profit alliance of local, state and federal scientists, law enforcement officers, land managers and other professionals dedicated to upholding environmental laws and values" -- issued a press release accusing the National Park Service of failing to carry out its promised high-level review of the policies governing the selections of books for sale in the bookstores overseen by the NPS. The press release also stated that the NPS failed to respond to complaints from the heads of seven geoscience societies about the book and to a scathing memorandum from the chief of its own Geologic Resources Division. We read newspaper reports from EVERY state that religious groups are pressing public education to discontinue teaching evolution and cosmology, or to include as "scientific" the religious view of "creation science". These are not isolated events, but along with opposition to stem cell research, security-driven calls to curb open publication, and inadequate funding, constitute a well-organized war on science. We must not forget our history. Throughout most of the last 500-years, scientists have had to face many threats in order to carry out objective research and maintain open publication. (USA)

15. Bush's science and technology policy is similar to all the other policies he supports: designed to financially support himself and others in his administration whether or not it is helpful to others in our country or in the world. That is why I support Kerry, who I believe to be an honest man and will support science to do what is best for humankind. (USA)

16. I will base my decision in part on science policy, but certainly that is not the only issue at stake. Fortunately, there is a fair consistency among the issues that alarm me. (USA)

17. I'm a lifetime Republican. George W. Bush and his crew are scientific morons; therefore unable to make rational decisions in any respect. (See Kahneman, Tversky, and Slovic on bias.) (USA)

18. I do not agree with all of the Bush science policy. However, the Kerry position on stem cell research is so misleading that it shows a total ignorance of real science. Under Kerry we would not have a science policy. Just PC. (USA)

19. You might have also asked which candidate would get the vote, based on science and technology policy (Kerry) versus voodoo, superstition, blind faith and cronies' financial interests (Bush). (USA)

20. The Science policies are not that different. The capacity for funding is. But that issue cuts across the board to all sorts of issues. (USA)

21. Science policy is certainly a very important issue, but it is not the only important issue in the current campaign. My vote will be based on the combined weight of all of them. (USA)