He did say that we need a heck of a lot more than 1 million legal immigrants per year. The cap needs to be lifted.
His position might be the best one, because, as the above post (Huffington Post, that is)shows, Democrats are trying to water down the meaning of decriminalization to the effect that it almost will be "nothing different from what happens today".
Might as well go for increasing public support for 2 to 3 million legal immigrants a year, because:
1: Open Borders has been completely trashed by professional Democrats (despite growing support among registered Democrats)
2: (Even) Decriminalization is being torn to worthless bits by professional Democrats, as well.
I almost want Biden to win the nomination, as it looks like the professional Democrats will reduce the meaning of "decriminalization" to miserable levels, while claiming to support the idea.
There was support from 36% of Democrats, but the poll did not break down party support by age.
Overall (all Americans), those over 64 were 89% to 11% opposed, but those under 50 were about 66% to 34% opposed. Those (all Americans not just Democrats) 18 to 34 were only 57% opposed and 43% supportive.
About 74.5% to 24.5% opposition among everybody.
But 64% to 36% opposition among Democrats.
I would assume that over 45% of Democrats under 50 were supportive of "open borders".
(The only caution is the polling data I saw in the poll that showed 66% opposition to decriminalization. See my above posts for that link. I will link it again, below. That poll also had a breakdown by age, and younger folks did not seem so disproportionately supportive of decriminalization relative to older folks)
(See Below)
This first link shows the 66% opposition poll that got the lion's share of attention in every aspect of the United States media.
Scroll 70% down, in THE LINK BELOW, to see results. See page 26 in actual scan (it says 28/39 in bar)
Now, the MARIST POLL was the one with 66% opposition to decriminalization. The poll seems to have age demographic opinions which seem out of step with the other 2 polls. See page 26 in link.
quote:This survey of 1,346 adults was conducted July 15th through July 17th, 2019 by The Marist Poll sponsored in partnership with NPR and PBS NewsHour. Adults 18 years of age and older residing in the contiguous United States were contacted on landline or mobile numbers and interviewed in English by telephone using live interviewers.
Now see my link for detailed Open Border support by age (and other) demographics. I totally changed the format and typed it manually (it would not paste at all, and the massive document made it extremely difficult for people to find)
141 (or 56%) said there should only be a fine, while 61 (24%) said there should be criminal charges, and 48 (19%) were undecided.
There were 260 35-49 year olds polled.
69 said fine ( 27%). 110 said it should be a crime (42%). 81 were not sure (31%).
That is 510 under 50, and 210 to 171 supported decriminalization, with 129 not sure.
8% more support, among 18-49 year old Americans, for changing the current criminal status to a NON CRIME immigration offense.
The younger they are, the more pro immigration they come.
There were 280 50-64 year-old Americans polled, and 210 65+ year's old people polled.
The 280 50 to 64 year olds were only 23% supportive of reducing the penalty to a fine, and 50% favored keeping the criminal status that is the current law.
The 210 Americans over 64 were only 21% in favor of decriminalization with 48% favoring the criminal charges.
Overall, there is a 41% to 32% breakdown in favor of keeping the criminal charges policy verses reducing the penalty to a fine.
The Marist poll (the 66% opposition to decriminalization poll) just seems out of sync when opinions by age are looked at.
So you can not name one Democrat that is advocating for open borders. One poll means nothing. The question in this poll was as follows.
quote:Do you think we should have basically open borders or do you think we need secure borders?
As there is no definition of what is meant by open borders and secure borders the question itself is suspect. 13% of republicans also chose open borders.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
Here's my stab at it: an open border is one you can walk across without any legal constraint and without any inspection -- like what we have between states.
You may want to check out the inspections needed when crossing the borders of the Nation of California:
But it's Kevin Drum's (writing for Mother Jones) way of summarizing Elizabeth Warren's plan. It's not the Democrats' plan. The Democratic candidates have a number of different positions on immigration, so it doesn't really make sense to ask for the Democrats' immigration plan.
His point is that whenever we hear a Democrat explain the situation on the border, its unequivocally met with a bunch of platitudes. And Warren's proposal, for what its worth, does sound like a de facto open border. All of the criticism is on CPB and every illegal alien is treated within the plan to have some pathway to citizenship. But nowhere in that, or any plan that I've ever seen proposed, does it clearly diagram how it ought to operate on a day-to-day basis.
he also says, "No one will ever be deportedexcept, presumably, for serious felons, though Warren doesn’t even say that explicitly." It's true that Drum's summary of Warren's plan doesn't mention deportation, but why do I have a feeling that Warren does have something to say about deportation?
Then why do multiple left-leaning outlets report the same thing?
And just to be very clear: no Democrat running for president is in favor of open borders.
Yeah, no candidate is stupid enough to say that outright... as I'm sure even they are aware of the issues concerning human trafficking, drug smuggling, indentured servitude, etc that occurs simultaneously with benign families crossing. But as Drum's article points out, as well as others, making any attempt to see anything less than a de facto open border nearly impossible.
I am not endorsing any particular immigration plan, I'm not even very familiar with any of them (including Bill Weld's, the other Republican candidate for president) but I am definitely opposed to Trumpian border cruelty and to breaking our DACA promise.
Immigration is of vital and critical importance to the stability of the US; even on the Southern Border. We need immigrants, so long as it is done the right way. I'm all for easing restrictions, but not bypassing a port of entry. This is certainly a challenging issue and I don't envy anyone in the position of correcting past mistakes without sacrificing things that do work. The problem is that I rarely see politicians, on both sides of the aisle, making a concerted effort to actually address the issues at hand beyond making platitudes and empty promises.
On Trump's side its "Build a Wall and Mexico is gonna pay for it." Yeah, okay.... Just another empty and unfulfilled promise, even though that was categorized as one of his top priorities as first day on the job... meanwhile, four years later....
On the other side of aisle, I see a lot of platitudes that refer only to the positive aspects of illegal immigration and a scathing critique of CPB. Not much else. Beto is probably the worst when it comes to this. The guy doesn't have an actual plan for anything... he just knows what voters like to hear.
I, for one, would like to see a comprehensive plan that gets into the finer details. I'm sick of bullet-point talking points. Give us some substance.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.
"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
The media in the United States is beyond corruption at this point. There is no such thing as objectively reporting the news any longer, its about manufacturing the news... Guiding it, steering the course of destiny, by hook or crook. Its so obviously a hit job against Tulsi because she's now viewed as a legitimate threat after she scalped Harris in the 2nd debate. Establishment Democrats view her as a potential regime change against the status quo.
If Tulsi's talking points were made against Trump, they'd all give her a standing ovation. But because its against their establishment candidates, Kamala and Biden, they have to rush in with a smear campaign in this political assassination attempt. He may be loathsome to you, but when Trump talks about "Fake News," its hard to argue against it. Pure propaganda.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.
"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
Since his presidential announcement speech in June 2015 Trump has tagged brown people an invasive species to be crushed. The republicans, the whole damn party, has echoed that blatant racism.
quote:Wow. Whoa. That is some group of people. Thousands.
So nice, thank you very much. That’s really nice. Thank you. It’s great to be at Trump Tower. It’s great to be in a wonderful city, New York. And it’s an honor to have everybody here. This is beyond anybody’s expectations. There’s been no crowd like this.
And, I can tell, some of the candidates, they went in. They didn’t know the air-conditioner didn’t work. They sweated like dogs.
They didn’t know the room was too big, because they didn’t have anybody there. How are they going to beat ISIS? I don’t think it’s gonna happen.
You cannot know it is growing. There is one poll you presented. There is nothing you can have compared it to. Show me some other polls and we can compare the questions and the poll results. Until then don't make claims that are not supported by any evidence whatsoever.
I also love the claim that since "professional Democrats" opppose open borders the base must support it. Again no evidence just one random poll result.
Again I need to say it again I guess. Decriminalization Open borders. That little formula there means they are not the same thing.
Edited by Theodoric, : rant added
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
™ Version 4.2
(1)