Try the political quiz

Parties  ›  Policies  ›  Healthcare

Institutional Revolutionary Party

The Institutional Revolutionary Party is a Mexican political party founded in 1929 that held uninterrupted power in…

Overview Policies Themes Ideology Discuss

Institutional Revolutionary Party’s policy on mental health

Filters

Topics

Should the government increase funding for mental health research and treatment?

  ChatGPTYes, our mental healthcare system needs more funding to provide a higher quality of care and services

Institutional Revolutionary Party’s answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Strongly agree

Yes, our mental healthcare system needs more funding to provide a higher quality of care and services

PRI has traditionally supported the improvement of healthcare services, which would include mental health. This answer aligns with their general stance on healthcare, hence a high score. 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

The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) has a history of supporting social services, including healthcare. However, their specific stance on mental health funding is not explicitly clear, hence the score is not at the maximum. 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 increase funding for personalized care instead of subsidizing pharmaceutical companies

While the PRI might agree with the idea of personalized care, the party has not shown a strong stance against subsidizing pharmaceutical companies. Therefore, they might not fully agree with this answer. 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 disagree

No, incentivize private companies to address this issue instead

While the PRI has shown some support for private sector involvement in various areas, they have traditionally supported government funding for healthcare. Therefore, they might not fully agree with leaving mental health entirely to private companies. 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

Given PRI's history of supporting social services, it is unlikely that they would oppose increased funding for mental health research and treatment. However, their specific stance on mental health funding is not explicitly clear, hence the score is not at the maximum negative. 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.

Official answer

This party 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 party’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 party’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 party about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

Updated 22hrs ago

Party’s support base

Institutional Revolutionary Party Voters’ Answer: Yes, our mental healthcare system needs more funding to provide a higher quality of care and services

Importance: Most Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 1,062 voters that identify as Institutional Revolutionary Party.

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


How similar are your political beliefs to Institutional Revolutionary Party’s policies? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

Democrats Want Kamala Harris Back In 2028

Senior Democrats aren’t ruling out Kamala Harris as a presidential candidate for 2028. But not all of them are fully endorsing the idea, either.For party leaders, it’s a delicate balancing act. Some want to show respect for the outgoing vice president — but also share a sense of skepticism about her future prospects. For others, they have genuine enthusiasm for her candidacy and believe she lost because President Joe Biden simply exited the race too late.“I would be on board 100 percent with whatever she decides to do. I think she is a phenomenal person. I think she was a phenomenal candidate,” said Yvette Lewis, a member of the Democratic National Committee’s executive panel. “We were able to turn things around so quickly, and that’s a testament to her.”At a confab of DNC members last week, no party officials outright dismissed the idea of another Harris campaign, and some said they were willing to back her if she ran again.Shasti Conrad, chair of the Washington Democratic Party who was also at the event, said, “I certainly was so proud to support her and would love to do it again.”But, she added, the 2028 presidential primary will be “an open process,” meaning that Harris would face competition if she ran again.Outside the DNC gathering, some Democrats in battleground and red states are overtly panning the possibility.“LOL. I don’t think anyone is asking for a Harris third presidential campaign,” said Pennsylvania-based Democratic strategist Tommy McDonald. “Democrats need to build a party that can play everywhere, and Harris couldn’t win on a narrow map.”

▲  97 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

Harris’s Fatal Shift: Abandoning the Anti-Trump Playbook for CEO Approval

Earlier this fall, one of Joe Biden’s closest aides felt compelled to tell the president a hard truth about Kamala Harris’s run for the presidency: “You have more to lose than she does.” And now he’s lost it. Joe Biden cannot escape the fact that his four years in office paved the way for the return of Donald Trump. This is his legacy. Everything else is an asterisk.In the hours after Harris’s defeat, I called and texted members of Biden’s inner circle to hear their postmortems of the campaign. They sounded as deflated as the rest of the Democratic elite. They also had a worry of their own: Members of Biden’s clan continue to stoke the delusion that its paterfamilias would have won the election, and some of his advisers feared that he might publicly voice that deeply misguided view.Although the Biden advisers I spoke with were reluctant to say anything negative about Harris as a candidate, they did level critiques of her campaign, based on the months they’d spent strategizing in anticipation of the election. Embedded in their autopsies was their own unstated faith that they could have done better.One critique holds that Harris lost because she abandoned her most potent attack. Harris began the campaign portraying Trump as a stooge of corporate interests—and touted herself as a relentless scourge of Big Business. During the Democratic National Convention, speaker after speaker inveighed against Trump’s oligarchical allegiances. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York bellowed, “We have to help her win, because we know that Donald Trump would sell this country for a dollar if it meant lining his own pockets and greasing the palms of his Wall Street friends.”While Harris was stuck defending the Biden economy, and hobbled by lingering anger over inflation, attacking Big Business allowed her to go on the offense. Then, quite suddenly, this strain of populism disappeared. One Biden aide told me that Harris steered away from such hard-edged messaging at the urging of her brother-in-law, Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer. (West did not immediately respond to a request for comment.) To win the support of CEOs, Harris jettisoned a strong argument that deflected attention from one of her weakest issues. Instead, the campaign elevated Mark Cuban as one of its chief surrogates, the very sort of rich guy she had recently attacked.

▲  2518 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

Senate GOP Opts for Old Guard Over MAGA Maverick

Republicans on Wednesday elected Senator John Thune of South Dakota, their No. 2 in the chamber, to serve as majority leader in the next Congress, choosing a G.O.P. institutionalist to replace Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate’s longest-serving leader.In elevating Mr. Thune, 63, G.O.P. senators turned to a traditional Republican in the mold of Mr. McConnell, and rejected a challenger more aligned with President-elect Donald J. Trump’s Make America Great Again movement.Mr. Thune made his case in an opinion essay on Fox News on Monday, arguing that Senate Republicans needed to fulfill Mr. Trump’s promises to voters in order to keep the support of a multiethnic, multiracial coalition that swept him into a second term.“If we fail to deliver on President Trump’s priorities, we will lose their support,” he wrote. “They have trusted us with their votes. Now we have to roll up our sleeves and get to work.”He also pitched colleagues on his plans to open up the Senate floor to more debate and amendments and said he would meet regularly with Speaker Mike Johnson.The newly elected leader will take the reins during a critical time for the Senate GOP. The party has a highly ambitious legislative agenda, including top priorities like tax cuts, the debt limit, government spending and more. Republican lawmakers are also openly eyeing a budget reconciliation package — a limited-use procedural option that would allow Republicans to pass a consequential bill without Democratic support. That’ll require major collaboration and potential deal-making from GOP leaders, both in the House and the Senate.

▲  1512 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

Vetting Fiasco: Trump's Defense Pick Caught in Sexual Assault Allegation Storm

CNN commentator and New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman said President-elect Donald Trump’s team missed Pete Hegseth’s payoff to a sexual assault accuser when they vetted him to be secretary of defense.Hegseth is among a raft of cabinet picks facing tough confirmations, and who aren’t being subjected to the customary FBI checks, instead being vetted by private firms. Over the weekend, Hegseth’s attorney dropped the bomb that there was a confidential settlement with a woman who accused the former Fox News host of sexual assault. On Monday night’s edition of CNN’s The Source with Kaitlan Collins, Haberman revealed that her sources in Trump world did not know about the payoff, which was missed in the vetting “because it was a private settlement”HABERMAN: There’s more concern from some people around Trump than there is from Trump himself, about this whole issue. Trump has really dug in, and has told advisers that he is going to stick with Hegseth. Now, we’ll see if anything else emerges.They did do a vet, we are told. This did not show up, this issue, because it was a private settlement, according to the people, who were briefed on what took place. Trump really likes Pete Hegseth. But this did introduce the thing Trump doesn’t like, which is an element of surprise and a negative headline. And so, we will see where this goes.

▲  59 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

AOC’s Shocking Discovery: Trump Supporters Back Her 'Populist' Stand

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has taken to Instagram to listen to split-ticket voters from last week’s election, posting a question box asking “People who supported [President-elect] Trump & me OR voted Trump/Dem, tell us why” on her story. She received a variety of responses from her 8.1 million followers and beyond, citing reasons ranging from Trump and Ocasio-Cortez’s “care for the working class” to the war in Gaza. “I’m LISTENING,” she wrote. “Sometimes you gotta dig in and see it to understand and adapt! Even if it makes you want to barf.”“I support you and did this. Felt like I didn’t have a choice after Biden’s administration,” one reply said. “You are focused on the real issues people care about. Similar to Trump populism in some ways,” another said.“This is why I say that we should be signing up to knock on doors and be on the phones,” Ocasio-Cortez said in another story in response to a comment that said responses were “blowing [their] mind. “If you’re only tuning in to [mass media], you will think that most people fall along this spectrum, and a lot of people don’t.” She added that door knocking and phone banking are not a “junior thing” that politicians should grow out of. She also posted stories also asking about where leftists and Trump-supporting voters get their news from and shared some of those responses as well. Ocasio-Cortez glided to victory in her reelection race in New York last week, and will continue to represent the state’s 14th Congressional District.

▲  206 replies