Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Campaign
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 124 of 505 (859335)
07-31-2019 12:14 AM


David Axelrod is a liar ( telling disgusting lies about decriminalization)
(a friend just told me this, and I am not sure if he is accurately quoting what Axelrod just said during post-debate commentary on CNN)
Apparently, Axelrod just said that Democrats have to drop "the decriminalization card" because "Democrats need to face the fact that even many Democrats simply don't agree with decriminalization".
The truth is that only 67% of Republicans will say illegal immigrants should be criminals for crossing the border without papers.
(33% are unsure or think it should result in a fine as opposed to getting a criminal charge -felony or misdemeanor)
Right now, illegal border crossers are charged with a misdemeanor criminal offense. If it is the first time getting caught anyway. (62% overstay a VISA, mind you, and that is the same thing as somebody who lacks papers when they initially come over)
Amazing that the much maligned Koch-brothers have made it clear they will support pro-trade, pro-immigration Democrats over Trump Republicans for every federal office, yet Axelrod says Democrats should drop pro-immigration policies to win those voters who are politically on the margins (swing voters).
Amazing that only 41% of Americans start off with a position supporting criminal charges against (what are currently ILLEGAL status) illegal immigrants for their border.
Axelrod wants Democratic candidates to drop decriminalization as an election issue, so they can be salable to the electorate.
Democratic candidates could, actually, fight for making migrants SAFE FROM CRIMINAL CHARGES, and the fight - ALONE - would hold those who support criminally charging migrants into a territory that is below 50% (or no worse than the low-mid 50's percentage PRESENTLY, with further progress in eroding the anti-immigration support in future years beyond 2019/2020).
Fight for just public policy, and let the political winds blow as they may. I don't care if there is a narrow loss TODAY, when 2-4 years down the road there will be support.
I just heard Axelrod (11:13 PM Central talk crap to Senator Warren LIVE) say the Americans don't agree with her on decriminalization.
My friend is correct on the general report he gave me. I think he might have fudged the "card" use by Axelrod, however.

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-31-2019 2:03 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 144 of 505 (859514)
07-31-2019 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by RAZD
07-31-2019 6:02 PM


The government already spends $1.8 trillion per year on healthcare (out of $3.5 tril)
The government will need $1.7 trillion per year under a no co-pay (like Sanders seems to have) plan, or about $1.1 trillion under a plan where people pay 20% co-pays. (Medicaid is generally free, so that will be a no co-pay plan)
Then the $400-$500 billion savings in eliminating the insurance companies becomes vital in cost analysis.
The Sanders plan has a real cost of about $1.2 trillion a year, not $3-3.5 trillion, like the media keeps harping.
The others have a cost of about $600-$700 billion per year. (Medicare-For-All with 20% co-pays)
I suspect Sanders plan would require a 10% flat tax, which would be roughly in-between the 6% ObamaCare tax for the Bronze plan, or 12% for the Gold (or Silver) plan.
The 6% plan has a deductible of about $5000 a year, and only 60% coverage of covered costs.
The 12% plan covers 80% of covered costs and has a much smaller deductible.
But on to the drug issue.
quote:
With "medicare for all" the government would also be in a position to negotiate drug costs with big pharmacy and bring costs more in line with what you see in Canada for the same medications:
Banks earn more profits per year than drug companies.
Banks earned $67 billion in profits last year.
Pharmaceutical companies have a profit margin of less than 20% (more like 15% I think)
Even assuming, every last penny in profits will be taken, that will only be a 1.5-2% dent in total healthcare costs.
And it will have a major effect (very negative for us all) on drug development. (unless the government agrees to take up the cost of R & D like never before)
How about taking bank profits instead of pharmaceutical profits?
(perhaps they can be used for the poorly devised & ruinous price control schemes Democrats and Donald Trump are pushing?)
Why can't Donald Trump and the Democrats understand the value of industries and professions relative to one another?
quote:
Dutch historian: ‘200 years from now, borders and the way we treat animals will rank among our biggest crimes’
Published: July 30, 2019 12:21 p.m. ET
....
Bregman says universal basic income, where everybody starts by getting enough to live on, is all about freedom to make choices and unlocking potential, and it could potentially go a long way in righting some current wrongs.
If we actually rewarded people for the value of the work they do, I think that many bankers would earn a negative salary while many nurses and teachers will be millionaires, he said. This is one of the most important effects of a guaranteed basic income. If you actually give those garbage collectors and nurses and teachers more bargaining power, they can always go on strike. And we know what happens when the garbage collectors go on strike it’s a terrible disaster.
Bregman went on to make the case for open borders.
I think you can easily make the argument that borders are the biggest source of inequality world-wide, he said. 60% of your income is dependent simply on where you were born something that you didn’t choose.
He explained that most of the anti-immigration bullet points they’ll take our jobs, they’re lazy, they’re criminals, etc. don’t stand up to the data.
Dutch historian: ‘200 years from now, borders and the way we treat animals will rank among our biggest crimes’ - MarketWatch
Democrats (and Trump) want to avoid funding health care coverage for prescription drugs, but want to nickle and dime the pharmaceutical industry to the point of cutting all of our throats.
Why are banks a sacred cow?
What do banks do?
What innovation do they bring?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2019 6:02 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 146 of 505 (859516)
08-01-2019 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by Hyroglyphx
07-31-2019 2:03 PM


Re: David Axelrod is a liar ( telling disgusting lies about decriminalization)
quote:
I still don't know what it is that they actually want and at this point I don't think they know what they want. They say the border patrol is akin to the gestapo but many say it's "bullshit" that democrats want open borders and to stop using that argument. So what exactly is it that you do want? Because as it stands, CPB is enforcing laws that Congress passed. And then Congress are the one's who bitch about it as if CPB has any control over what laws are passed. I mean... seriously?
Democratic candidates often want to use people for votes.
The 2 anti-decriminalization Colorado candidates are examples of that
(Hickenlopper, to his credit, is pro free-trade, unlike the worthless & dishonest Bennett)
Others candidates are more sincere in putting their political butts on the line to defend immigrants.
Booker and Warren come to mind.
Decriminalization means there is lots of border control (like Castro pointed out tonight), but those who make it past the border get fined for the civil violation.
Americans feel paperless (the law actually says "paperless" though we call them illegal immigrants) immigrants should be put on a pathway to citizenship.
Biden opposed decriminalization and supports paperless immigrants being charged as criminals and then (possibly) deported, as we saw him say tonight.
20% of Republicans support charging illegal immigrants in civil court (thus the immigrants will not be criminally "illegal"), and 13% of the grand old party is undecided.
24% of Democrats support charging the immigrants as criminals.
Only 67% of Republicans want to make the "illegal" immigrants criminals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-31-2019 2:03 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 147 of 505 (859517)
08-01-2019 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Hyroglyphx
07-31-2019 11:47 PM


The law making immigration a "crime" came in 1929
Decriminalize the Border? Obviously. But Then What?
Part of the article.
quote:
What is Improper Entry?
The crime itself found at section 1325, Title 8 of the US Code is actually called improper entry, not illegal entry. Section 1325 makes eluding inspection by immigration officers, or willfully misleading them, a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of at least fifty dollars. Doing it a second time is a felony offense and is punishable by up to two years in jail. Hoping to control immigration from Mexico, in 1929, Congress made it a crime to enter the United States without going through controlled inspection areas.
Many critics have pointed out that the law was drafted by Coleman Livingston Blease, a white supremacist senator from South Carolina. But being written by racists is hardly a distinctive feature in American law, or immigration law in particular.
Five years earlier, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1924, which was heavily influenced by the American eugenics movement. The 1924 law banned virtually all immigrants from Asia, the feeble-minded, alcoholics, and the physically disabled from immigrating to the United States.
The immigration controls started in 1924, but immigration was not a crime until 1929.
The "crime" was not effectively charged that way until 2004.
The 1929 law was almost unused for 75 years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-31-2019 11:47 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 148 of 505 (859518)
08-01-2019 12:29 AM


1000 Americans were scientifically polled on fines verses criminal charges
250 18 to 34 year-olds
260 35 to 49 year-olds
280 50 to 64 year-olds
210 65+ year olds
The results:
317 said "Face civil fines"
413 said "Be subject to criminal prosecution"
A 9.6% gap in favor of making migrants criminals.
But 27% were undecided
https://thehill.com/...il-fines-for-illegal-border-crossings
BUT LOOK AT THE RESULTS FOR THOSE UNDER 50
The 250 18 to 34 year-olds answered the poll saying:
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. They said:
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.

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 163 of 505 (859871)
08-04-2019 12:40 AM


What is a Frontier? A border? What did the United States repeatedly burst through?
Think Texas, for starters.
There was a "white invasion" of lands that Mexicans, Native Americans, and (racially mixed) Spanish already lived in.
This was not peaceful migration, but an outright military invasion.
What is so wrong with an "open border", if it is peaceful migration?
The truth is that the United States is a young nation, and it did not exist 250 years ago.
And the whole of today's United States did not simply drop from the sky 230-245 years ago. It swallowed up non-white lands bit by bit.
Texas was not in the United States till the mid 19th century. About 100 years before Nixon was Vice President.
The South was just Virginia at the end of the 18th century.
Just as El Paso was invaded in the middle of the 19th century, a white nationalist invaded the town today (a legal travel, from 10 miles away, in a town that was not part of the United States 200 years ago). This boy did not like Hispanics in the United States, so he attacked a Frontier town. But it is ONLY today seen as a crossing point from one country to the next. From the non-white country to the - "white country" - United States. It was Hispanic long before the white United States took it by force in the mid-19th century.
This young country expanded and swallowed up non-white people, like in El Paso.
It was violent.
Now:
What is wrong with "open borders"?
What is wrong with peaceful "open borders", anyway?
What is wrong with peaceful migration, free of (racist ignorance or other ignorance) ignorance and artificial borders?

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 164 of 505 (859872)
08-04-2019 12:53 AM


Allen is more than 10 miles away. (my mistake)
It is near Dallas.
But that was swallowed up by the white United States around the same time as El Paso.
Whites were not planted there like Adam in the Garden of Eden.
It is all artificial.
And opposition to Open Borders is a feature of the ignorant.
Democrats have their ignorant folks too. That does not make the opponents, of open borders, correct.
Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 165 of 505 (859971)
08-04-2019 9:00 PM


Another poll backs up the real possibility of support for decriminalization
Most Democrats Want Border-Crossings Decriminalized, Poll Says | HuffPost Latest News
quote:
POLITICS 07/31/2019 06:23 pm ET
Most Democrats Want Border-Crossings Decriminalized, Poll Says
A progressive think tank’s results conflict with other major surveys but its poll also asks a more accurate question.
By Roque Planas
Nearly two-thirds of Democrats favor leaving civil immigration authorities in charge of immigration violations by decriminalizing border-crossing violations, according to a new poll conducted by Democratic pollster YouGov Blue.
The poll offers the first sign of liberal support for a sweeping immigration proposal that has gained traction among Democratic presidential hopefuls over the last few months. But the results of the survey of 1,014 voters, carried out on behalf of left-wing think tank Data For Progress, conflict with two similar polls released in the last month, indicating that voters’ perception of the issue hinges on the context in which pollsters pose the question.
The Data For Progress poll asked whether voters would support or oppose treating illegal entry to the United States as a civil violation rather than a criminal violation. It then said that civil violations are addressed by the immigration system, while criminal violations are addressed by the criminal justice system.
Some 64% of respondents who identified as Democrats voiced support for the proposal, compared to 31% of Republicans. Total support, including by independent and unaffiliated voters, clocked in at 48%, with 32% opposed, 11% expressing no opinion, and 8% saying they didn’t know.
....
But crossing the border without authorization is also a federal crime. And Democratic presidential candidates have increasingly scrutinized the use of that 1929 law to route migrants into federal jails at the border since President Donald Trump used it to systematically split up migrant families in a widely reviled experiment last year.
Immigrant rights groups and criminal justice reformers have long criticized the policy, first implemented in 2005 under the George W. Bush administration, of fast-tracking migrants through criminal courts to vastly expand the bed space available to immigration authorities.
....
"We need to reject the absurd assertion that we cannot protect immigrants and win elections, McElwee wrote in an email to HuffPost.
The Data For Progress poll sheds light on voters’ perception of an issue that has rarely received public debate. Presidents Bush and Obama vastly expanded immigration prosecutions using their control over the attorney general’s office to enforce existing law, rather than by trying to pass new legislation through Congress.
....
Two other surveys conducted in recent weeks drew sharply different results, likely because the pollsters’ questions intimated that repealing the illegal entry law would leave immigration violations either scaled down to fines or unpunished.
A Hill-HarrisX poll released earlier this month reached the opposite conclusion of the one commissioned by Data For Progress, with 41% of voters backing criminalization and only 31% saying the civil system should handle those offenses.
But the pollster posed a false question. The Hill-HarrisX poll asked whether voters thought migrants who cross the border without authorization should face civil fines or should they be subject to criminal prosecution. No one has proposed shifting immigration enforcement to a scheme based on fines. The punishments under civil law include deportation and yearslong prohibition from returning legally to the United States. ICE’s detention system that locks up more than 50,000 migrants per day and the temporary holding facilities run by Border Patrol also both operate under civil law.
I should point out that I skipped over a dozen paragraphs.
See the link.
There were seven more paragraphs after I stopped pasting.

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 166 of 505 (859981)
08-04-2019 10:35 PM


Give Joe Biden some credit.
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.

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Theodoric, posted 08-04-2019 10:38 PM LamarkNewAge has replied
 Message 232 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-10-2019 4:39 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 168 of 505 (859993)
08-05-2019 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Theodoric
08-04-2019 10:38 PM


Re: Give Joe Biden some credit.
quote:
Please show me evidence showing a large number of registered Democrats supporting open borders.
Decriminalization Open borders
There was only 1 poll EVER that I have ever seen that asked about support or opposition to "open borders".
I have a thread which I started (back in early July 2018) on the issue and the poll.
EvC Forum: Lots of big Public Opinion polls on immigration. "Open Borders" is even polled.
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)
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/...Tables_1907190926.pdf#page=3
But the 41% opposition to decriminalization poll shows sharp age division on par with the Open Borders poll.
https://thehill.com/...il-fines-for-illegal-border-crossings
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)
Here:
EvC Forum: Lots of big Public Opinion polls on immigration. "Open Borders" is even polled.
Now the decriminalization poll that has consistent age opinions:
Here is text from another post, of my own, on the 41% opposition poll.
quote:
56% of 18-34 Americans feel illegal immigration should be punished with a fine, not criminal charges.
18-34 males are 61% supportive of decriminalization (only 23% feel there should be criminal charges)
https://thehill.com/...il-fines-for-illegal-border-crossings
There were 250 18-34 year olds polled.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Theodoric, posted 08-04-2019 10:38 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Theodoric, posted 08-05-2019 10:27 AM LamarkNewAge has replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 170 of 505 (860135)
08-05-2019 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by Theodoric
08-05-2019 10:27 AM


Re: Give Joe Biden some credit.
quote:
So you can not name one Democrat that is advocating for open borders. One poll means nothing.
The fact that professional Democrats oppose open borders supports my post 166.
The fact that you dismiss the 36% support (and "growing" due to the younger folks being so supportive), among registered Democrats, speaks volumes.
I hear you, loud and clear.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Theodoric, posted 08-05-2019 10:27 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Theodoric, posted 08-06-2019 9:57 AM LamarkNewAge has replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 186 of 505 (860332)
08-06-2019 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Theodoric
08-06-2019 9:57 AM


Support for open borders growing due to age demographics.
Theodoric took issue with my "growing" part:
quote:
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 whatsoer
If you would read my (rejected by EvC staff as a promoted topic) thread posts, you will see what I am talking about.
EvC Forum: Lots of big Public Opinion polls on immigration. "Open Borders" is even polled.
I was simply pointing out that the 90% opposition, to open borders, among 64 & older Americans means that the strongly opposed side is the same side that will be passing away, generally. They are, more often than not, the age group that dies.
The youngest age group (18-34) is almost 50% supportive of open borders. This group is the least likely to die, infact its gets newer members every day, plus the oldest members of this group move into the 35-49 age group.
The poll was back in June of 2018.
This is August of 2019.
The fact that many of the 65+ group have died since then, means the group is getting replaced by the most supportive age group.
Thus "growing" support.
quote:
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.
Actually I was lamenting the fact that the professional Democrats are giving "open borders" a bad odor due to endless propaganda against the idea. I am sure that could erode support among Democrats, but I am not entirely sure.
I am pretty sure many minority groups and immigrants have been intimidated against supporting "open borders" They probably feel their patriotism demands opposition, because the Democrats told them so.
quote:
Again I need to say it again I guess. Decriminalization Open borders. That little formula there means they are not the same thing.
I am glad you can read people's minds when they are asked polling questions.
You need to consider WHEN the poll was asked, before forming an opinion.
I think the Marist/NPR/PBS NEWSHOUR poll (the one with 66% opposition to decriminalization that we heard so much about) might have had a lot of people interpret the question in a way that might have - AT THE TIME OF THIS CHRONOLOGICALLY EARLY POLL - made the question & answer seem like an "open border's" issue.
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/...Tables_1907190926.pdf#page=3
Again, the professional Democrats have effectively trashed Open Borders since the poll came out.
Heck, the professional Democrats seem to want to bitch about the Hill-HarrisX poll, which actually showed fairly underwhelming opposition to illegal immigrants simply receiving a fine. (41%)
https://thehill.com/...il-fines-for-illegal-border-crossings
Why do I say the professional Democrats are attacking the idea of genuine decriminalization?
See this again:
quote:
Two other surveys conducted in recent weeks drew sharply different results, likely because the pollsters’ questions intimated that repealing the illegal entry law would leave immigration violations either scaled down to fines or unpunished.
A Hill-HarrisX poll released earlier this month reached the opposite conclusion of the one commissioned by Data For Progress, with 41% of voters backing criminalization and only 31% saying the civil system should handle those offenses.
But the pollster posed a false question. The Hill-HarrisX poll asked whether voters thought migrants who cross the border without authorization should face civil fines or should they be subject to criminal prosecution. No one has proposed shifting immigration enforcement to a scheme based on fines. The punishments under civil law include deportation and yearslong prohibition from returning legally to the United States. ICE’s detention system that locks up more than 50,000 migrants per day and the temporary holding facilities run by Border Patrol also both operate under civil law.
Most Democrats Want Border-Crossings Decriminalized, Poll Says | HuffPost Latest News

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Theodoric, posted 08-06-2019 9:57 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 187 of 505 (860452)
08-07-2019 4:23 PM


I found another poll that touches on Open Borders (pre-Democratic smear campaign)
I managed to miss this one when it came out.
I can not access the poll (it requires a subscription), but it actually can be interpreted as only 53% of Americans opposing a type of Open Borders (not exactly open borders because it does involve checks), with 39% supporting.
Here I will have to try to link our way to an understanding, since I do not have the actual poll before me.
It came from Rasmussen Reports
quote:
Voters Want Strong Borders, Say Wall is Not ‘Immoral’
Jan 14
Most voters continue to favor strongly controlled borders and reject House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s charge that it is immoral for the United States to build a border wall.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 53% of Likely U.S. Voters think it is better for the United States to tightly control who comes into the country. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree and say it is better to open our borders to anyone who wants to come here as long as they are not a terrorist or a criminal. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on January 10 and 13, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Voters Want Strong Borders, Say Wall is Not ‘Immoral’ - Rasmussen Reports®
Here is the way I can present the poll, by quoting the ultra-conservative source celebrating the results.
quote:
Poll: 65% of Democrat Voters Say ‘Open Our Border to Anyone’ Who Isn’t ‘A Terrorist or Criminal’
By Craig Bannister | January 16, 2019 | 2:27 PM EST
About two-thirds of Democrat voters want the U.S. to open its borders to anyone who wants to come here — as long as that person isn’t either a criminal or terrorist, a new Rasmussen Poll finds.
In the national survey of 1,000 likely voters, conducted January 10-13, 2019, 65% of those identifying as Democrats said it is in America’s best interest To open our borders to anyone who wants to come here as long as they are not a terrorist or a criminal. Only about a quarter (26%) of Democrats said the U.S. should tightly control who come into the country.
In contrast, 80% of Republican voters said the U.S. should tightly control who enters the country, as did 56% of all likely voters surveyed. Only a third (34%) of all voters said the U.S. should welcome anyone in who isn’t a terrorist or criminal.
Generally speaking, which is better for the United States?
Democrats’ Response:
To tightly control who comes into the country: 26%
To open our borders to anyone who wants to come here as long as they are not a terrorist or a criminal: 65%
Not Sure: 10%
Republicans’ Response:
To tightly control who comes into the country: 80%
To open our borders to anyone who wants to come here as long as they are not a terrorist or a criminal: 16%
Not Sure: 4%
All Likely Voters (Including Other party affiliations):
To tightly control who comes into the country: 56%
To open our borders to anyone who wants to come here as long as they are not a terrorist or a criminal: 34%
Not Sure: 10%
The perceived consequences of illegal immigration appears to have influenced respondents’ views. Fully 91% of those who said illegal immigration increases the level of serious crime in America also said they want tight border control, as did 86% of those who said illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the U.S. budget.
Meanwhile, 74% of those who said illegal immigration has no impact on serious crime, and 77% of those who said it does not provide a significant strain on the U.S. budget, also said the U.S. should open its borders to anyone who isn’t a threat.
Poll: 65% of Democrat Voters Say ‘Open Our Border to Anyone’ Who Isn’t ‘A Terrorist or Criminal’ | CNSNews
Democrats have been attacking Open Borders so much lately, that there will probably be a retreat from this ONCE momentous movement toward much higher immigration.
Only 53% opposed!
Wow.
That was EARLY 2019.
Those were the days.
(Democrats seem to be against making the case to change people's minds and would rather join Republicans in the smear)

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Theodoric, posted 08-07-2019 5:57 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 191 of 505 (860485)
08-07-2019 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Theodoric
08-07-2019 5:57 PM


Re: I found another poll that touches on Open Borders (pre-Democratic smear campaign)
quote:
Again the question asked is pretty meaningless. What is meant by "open our borders"? Maybe we are discussing different concepts. What is your definition of open borders?
Who is "we"?
I never know if you are talking about opinions of those polled, or my view?
I better wait for a clarification from you.
(I can't even talk about Democratic primary issues without you finding all sorts of views to plaster me with)
(Theodoric is good at pulling stuff out of his a$$ and then launching the sticky (?) stuff at his target)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Theodoric, posted 08-07-2019 5:57 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Theodoric, posted 08-07-2019 11:46 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 193 of 505 (860494)
08-07-2019 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by Theodoric
08-07-2019 11:46 PM


Re: I found another poll that touches on Open Borders (pre-Democratic smear campaign)
Run from any and all attempts to respond to you.
You said, in the other thread, that I would ignore the links you gave me.
You then bragged that they had links to the source material, which you said I would ignore.
I went to your links.
Then:
I actually found the source material.
(I have been searching the internet to get all the relevant information, relative to the discussion, in your other topic)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Theodoric, posted 08-07-2019 11:46 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024