Jun 27 2007

Another Poll Confirms The Amnesty Hypochondriacs Small Minority

Published by at 10:48 am under All General Discussions,Illegal Immigration

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.”

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?

130 responses so far

130 Responses to “Another Poll Confirms The Amnesty Hypochondriacs Small Minority”

  1. reader2007 says:

    Sue:

    To be honest, I was grasping at anything regarding why you would think I don’t read what I type as it related to one my comments.

    Specifically, my earlier comment:

    “Why you would want to hang yourself up on the difference between an oversight and a mistake (or faux pas) is beyond me.
    To each his/her own.
    Left by reader2007 on June 27th, 2007”

    especially in light of your curious response:

    “To each his/her own.

    You really don’t read what you type? I guess if you don’t read it, I should just skip it too.

    Maybe there is still hope for my side after all.

    Republicans Richard Burr of North Carolina and Christopher Bond of Missouri and Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska said they oppose permitting a vote on final passage. Virginia Democrat Jim Webb and Republicans John Ensign of Nevada and Pete Domenici of New Mexico said they were leaning that way.
    Left by Sue on June 27th, 2007”

    The gender thing was the only thing I could come up with.

    Oh well. Took a shot and missed. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt. I am nice that way.

  2. Sue says:

    Looks like Senator Reid has run into a snafu. Oh well, at least it’s legal.

    the Senate cannot consider any more of the “clay pigeon” amendments until cloture is invoked on the immigration bill (S.1639). This is the result of the Senate failing to table an amendment by a vote of 45 to 52.

    It takes all 100 (99 since Johnson isn’t there) to vote to proceed with other amendments. Don’t think that is going to happen.

  3. For Enforcement says:

    AJ, you should check out this comment, you’ve got some kid trying to imitate you.

    Poor Ro5 was called a ‘hypochondriac’, sniff, sniff…. That’s much worse than insinuating some one is a Nazi – isn’t folks? Let’s have a big ‘ol pity party for the guy who insinuated Terrye was a Nazi – shall we??? Awwwwwww. Feel proud of yourself R05???? And pulleeaase don’t whine to me about the name calling. I don’t care, honestly R05. I am glad to see your side losing their composure (what little they had) and threatening to stay home (and please, please honor that promise) if the GOP turns their back on you folks. Then we all will celebrate the calm and quiet that will follow.

  4. Sue says:

    Reader,

    I’m going to bow out of this ‘debate’ with you, since you are the better
    ‘debater’ and I will lose anyway. I’m sure Merlin understood my post, which is where you came in again.

  5. reader2007 says:

    Indeed. HA HA HA

  6. For Enforcement says:

    Reader said:

    Your oversight has called your credibility on this particular bit of information into question.

    Fortunately for Reader, nothing calls his credibility into question.  He has none.  D

    By they way reader, have you figured out if you are related to any laughing animals yet? 

  7. For Enforcement says:

    (FYI: I am a republican
    Sure you are…

  8. Sue says:

    (FYI: I am a republican
    Sure you are…

    Why would you doubt it? We have a whole senate full of republicans who support this bill. Even though they don’t even know what is in it. Take Voinovich, for example. **grin**

  9. For Enforcement says:

    You see all those tabling amendment votes today, all in the 50s vs 40s, wanna guess what the cloture vote is gonna be, anyone guessing 50s vs 40s. which means no cloture and no bill. just guessing.
    But gotta get by this latest little technicality.

    It takes all 100 (99 since Johnson isn’t there) to vote to proceed with other amendments.
    and they did agree to do all the clay pigeon amendments didn’t they?

  10. Sue says:

    and they did agree to do all the clay pigeon amendments didn’t they?

    They don’t have to. But they can’t present any more amendments without full consent because Reid failed in a procedural move. But it’s legal, so that’s all that matters.

  11. For Enforcement says:

    Sue, that Republican comment (sure you are) was aimed at laughing boy. not you. I like your writing, you have a good sense of humor and I agree with most of what you say.
    Yea, I know they don’t have to vote on all those amendments, even tho that was part of the agreement. but as I said, they’ll have plenty of time because cloture tomorrow will be in the 50s vs 40s so no cloture and no bill. And the Republicans will have a big victory.

  12. For Enforcement says:

    I forgot to check if that’s AJ’s prediction, if it’s not then it’s not mine either, I’m with him on his prediction.

  13. Sue says:

    FE,

    I know who the republican comment was aimed at. I’m glad you like my sense of humor. Not all do. What I was trying to convey was Reid failed in a procedural maneuver and by doing so he can’t go forward with other amendments without the full consent of the senate. No more amendments means the cloture vote is going to be close. There are already 4 who voted yes earlier this week who are on record as no votes. Whether Reid did this deliberately or not is anyone’s guess. I don’t think he is really all that het up over this bill and giving Bush a victory sure wouldn’t be in the cards for him. For whatever reason it happened, deliberate or not, I will take the win (assuming it turns out a win for me).

  14. Sue says:

    FE,

    And the Republicans will have a big victory.

    I also meant to say something about that part of your post. I don’t consider the bill not passing a victory for republicans. Too many support it for it to be considered a republican victory. I consider it a victory for those of us who oppose this bill in its present form. I certainly don’t oppose all of the bill, and given a true debate on it, I think they could salvage it. Since that isn’t going to happen, the only thing worse I can think of is this bill actually becoming law and the only provisions enforced are the ones I object to.

  15. AJStrata says:

    No FE,

    I just figured I try and relate to you folks in that 5th grade level.

    Actually, Merlin’s panic attack was pretty funny – don’t you think? I mean running scared from typos and a possible 2.5% error rate?

    Did you also shake in your boots at Merlin’s news FE? Did you go as wobbly as you did when, oh my, criminal record checks might take a little more than the two hours they take now?? Did you break out in a sweat at the pending doom of our nation over these Earth shattering revelations???

    Comical. Way comical!

  16. For Enforcement says:

    AJ,, 

    Did you also shake in your boots at Merlin’s news FE?    Actually, No.

    Did you go as wobbly as you did when, oh my, criminal record checks might take a little more than the two hours they take now??

    I thought you were kidding about that.  You mean you actually think a complete background check can be made in two hours?  I gave you more credit than that.  I wouldn’t think anyone could think that.  

    So I’m from say…..  Guatamala,  and I’ve killed four people and raped  6   4 year old girls and I didn’t get caught (they don’t know, in Guatamala who did the crimes) and get safely into the US.  I fill out my form and get  my background check run.   Will it show me as a criminal?  will I be given a Z card.  If you were that criminal, would you be the first in line to get your legal status?    Yes and they would also.   See any defects in the system?    No,  I didn’t think so.

  17. For Enforcement says:

    Did you break out in a sweat at the pending doom of our nation over these Earth shattering revelations???

    LOL, not nearly as much as you will when the Cloture vote fails Thurs or Friday.  You want me to go ahead and write your panic sticken diatribe about the sky falling in on the Republicans and how you’re glad you are formerly a Dem and are thinking about going back to your roots since they will be in the majority for the next 2-300 years or so?   Actually, I’ll say a prayer to ask for guidance for you through the turmoil you will be going through.    But then since you’re so good at predictions, it’s not gonna be a surprise, is it? 

  18. reader2007 says:

    “So I’m from say….. Guatamala, and I’ve killed four people and raped 6 4 year old girls and I didn’t get caught (they don’t know, in Guatamala who did the crimes) and get safely into the US. I fill out my form and get my background check run. Will it show me as a criminal? will I be given a Z card. If you were that criminal, would you be the first in line to get your legal status? Yes and they would also. See any defects in the system? No, I didn’t think so.”

    This is a most ridiculous scenario. So, I guess you want to stop immigration from Guatamala altogether since a person who did as you say and applies for a VISA would also get into the country since NO ONE CAUGHT THE RAPIST. If the person was never caught, then THERE WILL BE NO RECORD!!!!!

    How many criminals who are US citizens haven’t gotten caught. So when they go get a passport, do you think the passport agent will be able to look in that individual’s eyes and determine he is a criminal who hasn’t gotten caught?

    Absolutely ludicrous!!!

  19. reader2007 says:

    Will anyone be able to look into anyone’s eyes and determine if a person committed a crime? Background checks would point to anything BECAUSE THE PERSON WASN’T CAUGHT.

    The degree of ridiculousness of the scenario posted by FE deserves two posts emphasizing how ludicrous he is being.

  20. reader2007 says:

    Will anyone be able to look into anyone’s eyes and determine if a person committed a crime? Background checks would not point to anything BECAUSE THE PERSON WASN’T CAUGHT.

    The degree of ridiculousness of the scenario posted by FE deserves two posts emphasizing how ludicrous he is being.