Jun 27 2007
Another Poll Confirms The Amnesty Hypochondriacs Small Minority
The Amnesty Hypochondriacs who oppose any legislation that provides a path, with retribution to society, for the illegal aliens here claim to represent 75% of the people. OK, ego-maniacal observations aside (that would mean the GOP had enormous leads in Congress) we also have polls and other DATA to understand what is really going on here. Some question the clearly simple math I used on the Senate vote to note that the immigration hypochondriacs only garnered 25% support. Well it is pretty easy to do the math. 24 GOP members voted ‘naye’ (the rest were liberals who felt the bill was too harsh on immigrants. 24 out of 99 is…?
While the hypochondriacs mull over that little problem we have a new poll out from CNN/Opinion Research which shows an interesting and similar result:
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Monday showed 47 percent of Americans opposed the bill, while 30 percent supported it and 19 percent said they didn’t know enough about it to make a judgment. The poll’s sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
However, the poll found a significant division among opponents of the immigration plan. About 28 percent said they were opposed because it did too much to help illegal immigrants, but 15 percent said they were opposed because it did too little.
There is that same number again – 28%! The far right cannot claim (but they do try) alliance with liberals who would truly open the borders and provide immediate citiznship to illegals here now. If they do they are only kidding themselves. But the pollsters make a valid point:
So while much of the opposition to the bill has come from those who believe it is too soft on illegal immigration, the poll found that 45 percent of Americans either support the bill or want it to be more immigrant-friendly, compared to 28 percent who feel it’s already too immigrant-friendly.
Ooppps. No where near the 75% the far right claims they represent! And let’s not forget those undecideds – who are probably more likely the ‘who the hell cares anymore’ crowd. The point is these 19 percent don’t have a position – and they DO NOT agree with the 28% who are the amnesty hypochondriacs. Finally, in a 50-50 nation between Rep and Dem support at the polls 28% is not a solid majority. And all those traitors and quislings on the right who support Bush will not be allying again anytime soon with the hypochondriacs so they could even hope to get near 50% again. These are strong indicators that there is no wide spread support for the far right, and in fact they are rapidly forcing the vast majority of people to line up AGAINST them.
Update: And another poll out showing similar results (remember opposition comes from far left AND far right – so only a subset are from the far right)
To correctly gauge the difference of this issue, we asked people whether they would favor or oppose creating a program that would allow illegal immigrants already living in the United States for a number of years to stay in the country and apply for U.S. citizenship. Then, there was a twist — the question one-half of our sample read continued “if they had a job and paid back taxes” while the question the other half read concluded “even if they don’t pay back taxes”.
Not surprisingly, there was a large difference. Well over half (57%) of adults who had the first statement with the back tax provision favored such a program while two in five (39%) opposed. Among the adults who had the provision of not paying back taxes, two-thirds (66%) opposed such a program while only one-quarter (28%) favored it.
Under certain conditions – those outlined in the bill as opposed to some cherry picked by partisans – the country still supports “amnesty”. And I would wager that 39% opposition is 25% far right and 14% far left, give or take a few points. Which can be seen in the polls internals:
Partisan leanings also show a split on this divisive issue. When back taxes are included, two-thirds of Democrats (65%) favor this program as do 56 percent of Independents. Republicans are split straight down the middle as 49 percent favor it and 49 percent oppose it.
The 25% “majority” marches on, splitting the GOP in half and making it impotent on all other issues.
Update: OK, now a third poll.
In the study, respondents stated that they strongly agreed with the statement, “The nation’s immigration system was broken,†with a rating of eight (8.03) on a ten point scale. They also felt (6.9) that “Building more fences will not stop the flow of immigrants into the U.S.â€
Most favored the statement, “A legal path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship should be available to all immigrants who have built a life in this country.†Two-thirds (66.6%) of those surveyed expressed their support and only about one-in-four (26%) disagreed with the statement.
All these folks must be working for Ted Kennedy of course, that is the only reason the same result keeps coming up. Folks, you can only cook the polls so much and MAYBE move them 5-7 points. We are not in the 5-7 point range. And there is that mid 20’s number again. Imagine that?
I will look and see where I read that, but here is the other kicker: it has been used many, many times
You use a Canadian site to support your view? And one whose headline is “U.S. senator to use rare ‘clay pigeon’ manoeuvre to revive immigration bill”? And in the body of the linked article it says “and any one senator can demand that it be divided into separate fragments to be voted on piecemeal.” (which, BTW, is the rule I mentioned above). And it also tells you something else I said above “Ironically, the move is usually used by mavericks – not leaders – to slow down legislation, not free it from a procedural thicket.”
My bad, over interpretted what was in the Reid Letter.’
“The so-called “clay pigeon” procedure is unusual, and I would not have considered employing it in this instance without the full support of Senator McConnell. It seems to me appropriate for the two leaders to work together to overcome the tactics of a small number of Senators in order to allow the full Senate to debate an important national issue like immigration”
Oh well, still legal.
Can you tell me now why you think what you read in the link to the article above proved it has been used many, many times?
No Sue,
I do not have time to read and interpret for you. That is something you must do for yourself.
And how about this for Bush? Just win baby!
LOL! Why would it bother me if the pigeon is being used by the majority verses the minority? Tell you what, why don’t you go find a Senate rule that says pigeons only fly for the minority….
OMG. I just read and interpreted it for you, AJ. I certainly don’t need you doing it for me, not if I want to know what it actually says.
You were wrong, AJ. And the chicken little comment was inappropriate in light of the fact that you were wrong. But carry on. You will anyway. **grin**
I can’t understand. Even when you admit a faux pas, Sue and the other hissyfitters want to keep babbling on about it.
MOVE ON.
This is why it is useless to debate hissyfitters. They spend too much time crying about being called names and repeatedly harping on the same things.
I do enjoy the comments though and am glad to see more responses by AJ as he defends his position.
Quite interesting indeed.
Remember the $4.4 billion that the Pres is touting will be used for border security?
Read this and know how you are being lied to:
http://demint.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=490
I think the touchback is useless and making people pay a fine and wait anywhere from 10 to 15 years is not “giving” them anything. As far as that is concerned, they could go back now and then come into the country in the future legally and how would you know? Would you give them all lie detector tests and ask them have ever over stayed a visa or committed the misdemeanor of illegal entry?
If you asked me if I thought border security was a priority I would say yes, but that does not mean I am on Tancredo’s side. I just think that as long as we have all these people here that in and of itself will be a draw to more people coming.
In other words, I don’t think that people always think of enforcement as the same thing. I was talking to someone earlier today and he was surprised to find out the enforcement only people did not support stronger employment verification systems or back ground checks, etc. He assumed that all of that was part of enforcement.
But to some people enforcement just means a wall. It is confusing for people.
Oh yeah, Demint. I am not going to read that. After all Demint is a Senator, that means he is a liar, right?
Besides the right has made up its mind, they could spend that money on the border and there are people out there who would still be claiming they did not get it.
And you know something? The government is spending more on border security right now than it ever has in the history of the country. I keep hearing how they don’t really mean it, they won’t really put the money into it, and yet there they are spending the money, building the fence, using the technology, sending in the Guard, hiring more border agents, etc and it is not enough to make people on the right think that Bush or for that matter anyone who in anyway disagrees with them about anything…just might be sincere. Oh no, they are being lied to.
Now if their heroes in the Minute Men movement want to rip people off with some direct mail scam, well that is ok fine, but by God, until that money has not only been appropriated and allocated, but by God spent they are just going to assume they have been lied to.
There is no dealing with that kind of attitude.
Terrye, your gig is up. You have finally shown your true colors. The report that DeMint is referring to is from the Congressional Research Service. So you really don’t give a rat’s ass what a bi-partisan group says. You are just goosestepping to the beat of the drummer that leads you.
One other point, us “enforcement first” radical, right wing immigration hypochondriacs are the ones demanding stronger employment verification and stronger background checks. So your mysterious partner in conversation has been mislead by you who hasn’t got a clue.
And I, for one, don’t donate to the Minute Men. I donate to the Border Patrol Relief Fund that takes care of those BP killed, or injured, in the line of duty. But you don’t even care what they, the BP says, do you. Just ram this bill up our rears and pay for the consequences later.
When it comes to credibility, Terrye, you have not only used up all your capital, you have maxed out your credit cards.
Ro5 takes another trip into the sewer with the Nazi analogy…
Clearly the hypochondriacs are losing if the nazis are coming! LOL!
Yeah he admitted the “faux pas” alright. He had no choice but to admit his “faux pas”.
OK, so now AJ acuses me of throwing up “insults” then turns around and calls me a “hypochondriac”. What a damn hoot that is. No better case of the pot and the kettle has ever been shown.
And sorry, AJ, but I was under the impression that Terrye was an adult and could defend his/herself. But perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps all your followers are just uninformed children that you have to stick up for. That would explain a lot.
No, retire I don’t care what you think, that is the jig. There are all kinds of reports saying all kinds of things, we know which ones you link to. I have seen it before, I remember in the lead up to the pescription drug plan someone linked to a socalled Congressional report, one of many which claimed the bill would costs more than it was supposed to and would not work, etc.
And none of that happened. Ofcourse the people doing the linking, just like the people who did the report did not care about what would or would not actually happen, they had their plan and they were sticking to it.
I know what Demint thinks of this and I am sure he found some report that he thinks will back up his views, but I am not interested in following your link. You would not give me a fair hearing. You would assume anything I told you or linked for you that was contrary to your thinking was lie…so why should I show you more courtesy?
Remember when the recent report was released by the administration on the positive effects of immigration? How open minded were people on your side of the debate about that report?
Watching the debate right now on cspan 2 and Grassley has an amendment up which would allow zcard holders to sue employers for job discrimination if they higher native americans first.
This is from the WSJ, it is interesting:
A recent WSJ/NBC News poll showed that Hispanics now self-identify as Democrats rather than Republicans by 51% to 21%. Restrictionist Republicans like to spin this as proof that Hispanics, like blacks, are lost to the party, and that more Mexican immigration inevitably means more Democratic voters. Leaving aside that such determinism betrays a lack of confidence in the appeal of Republican principles, the Hispanic-black comparison doesn’t hold up.
Black GOP support has hovered around 10% since 1992, according to exit polls. Hispanic support for Republicans over the same period has often been more than three times higher. Unlike blacks today, Hispanics are a legitimate swing voting bloc, and the GOP’s current low standing among Hispanics represents an ominous reversal of recent trends.
In 2004, exit polls showed Republicans winning 44% of the Hispanic vote, up from 35% in 2000 and 38% in 2002. As Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg noted after last year’s elections, “the Latino vote had swung more heavily into the Republican camp than any other vote in America. They went from 21% in 1996 to 44% in 2004. This was a doubling of the Republican market share, one of the most significant political achievements of the Bush era.”
But in the run-up to last year’s midterm elections, Republicans chose to make immigration their lead issue. The GOP leadership in Congress encouraged talk radio and cable news shows to inflate the illegal alien problem, and Republican candidates took a hard-line anti-immigration stance in hopes of turning out GOP voters. It didn’t work. Not only did the strategy fail to help Republicans hang on to their majorities in Congress, but support from Hispanic voters fell to 29%, the lowest level this decade. If running against illegal immigration were a winner, Arizona’s J.D. Hayworth would still be in Congress.
***************
Now when they get done running off the hispanics, are they going to start on the Asians? Some of them are illegal too you know.
Oh yeah right, like people are going to be sued for that. I think some people are just making a game of this.
Kennedy just admitted that the GAO estimates the will be as many as 300,000 errors they estimate that will slip by in the Zcard process.