Poll: Americans favor incremental immigration reform, border enforcement
posted at 7:08 pm on June 13, 2007 by Allahpundit
You won’t see this in the LA Times poll. Conveniently, they neglected to ask any questions about border enforcement.
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters would favor an approach that focuses exclusively on “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.” Support for the enforcement only approach comes from 84% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 69% of those not affiliated with either major party…
Fifty-seven percent (57%) favor a proposal giving “all illegal aliens up to three years to leave the United States. After leaving, the illegal aliens would have to get in line and wait their turn for legal entry into the United States.” Support for that concept comes from 67% of Republicans, 49% of Democrats, and 56% of unaffiliated voters.
The Senate immigration reform bill that failed last week was far more popular in Congress than among the American people. It was strongly opposed by a cross-section of the nation’s voters. At the end, just 23% of voters favored the legislation.
Exit question: Some of our readers are giving me static for suggesting that we should stay home next year if they pass amnesty rather than sit out, hand the election to the Democrats, and teach our own side a lesson. How will the Lindsey Grahams of the party learn their lesson if we don’t show them we mean business?
Update: St. John of Tucson declares himself “guardedly optimistic.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
That’s what primaries are for. Isn’t Graham’s up in ’08?
Kid from Brooklyn on June 13, 2007 at 7:11 PM
Vote for the Green party or Ron Paul?
Kini on June 13, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Border enforcement?
Oh.
You mean those nativists hate brown people.
Of course.
Exit answer: Vote ‘law & order’ – and don’t vote for the Grahams or reids of this world.
I can dream.
locomotivebreath1901 on June 13, 2007 at 7:15 PM
We need a concerted effort to recruit and support true conservatives in these areas. There’s already one now to replace Martinez in Florida.
bj1126 on June 13, 2007 at 7:16 PM
The problem is after they are kicked out of office how do we even know they get the message? There almost as many reasons given for why the ‘pubs lost Congress last election as there are pundits. Graham and the boys will probably blame it on Bush.
Spirit of 1776 on June 13, 2007 at 7:16 PM
They’ll get the message because we’ve called their office more on this issue than any other. They’re pretending not to have heard us at this point, so they can do what they want to do anyway. If this amnesty passes, the term ‘country’ and ‘voting’ will become essentially meaningless anyway. Bottomline, AP is right.
PRCalDude on June 13, 2007 at 7:19 PM
Blame it on Bush is the default MSM spin when the obvious is overlooked.
Making the message plain is vetting a true conservative that enforces the laws currently on the books! Then voting them in.
Whicheva, Elections have consequences. The midterm shoulda answered that question.
Kini on June 13, 2007 at 7:23 PM
I think you are right actually. One of them said in his 30+ years, this bill had stirred more reaction then any other in his career(roughly paraphrased).
Spirit of 1776 on June 13, 2007 at 7:24 PM
I thought that 2006 was the “sit out and let the Dhimms win” lesson. I submit they learned a lesson VERY well, and it wasn’t, “Listen to us.”
steveegg on June 13, 2007 at 7:24 PM
FEARG, Scottish Gaelic
definition: anger, ire, wrath
pronounciation: ferr-ack
Americans are saturated with neck deep, decades old manure, they’ve had enough, they’re fearg as hell and they’re not going to take it anymore.
It would be a bad mistake for politicians to think that the public will go back to sleep and not wake up at the very instant the warning bell is rung because they’re fearg to the bone now and there’s no forgetting and possibly no forgiving either.
Speakup on June 13, 2007 at 7:25 PM
go to hell McCain!!!
DwnSouthJukin on June 13, 2007 at 7:26 PM
Let’s not forget that money talks and buys votes and special interests.
Bush said it before, “Money Trumps All”
Kini on June 13, 2007 at 7:26 PM
Rasmussen is quoted on the radio shows, and not only on the rightie ones.
This way. Staying home results in the picture and reality of what’s on top of Drudge, right now.
Entelechy on June 13, 2007 at 7:35 PM
Read my lips: NO NEW ILLEGALS!
Mojave Mark on June 13, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Kid from Brooklyn on June 13, 2007 at 7:11 PM
Exactly. The purge begins in ’08. I hope Hagel has the gumballs to run again, he has hinted at retirement. Seeing him lose the primary will be sweet.
Is it just me or did Hagel realize he needed to stay out of the immigration spotlight. He was on the amnesty train in 2006. Now he is conspicuously absent which makes me think he is going to run again. Seems he is betting on Nebraskans with short term memories. Hey Chuck, elephants never forget…
Theworldisnotenough on June 13, 2007 at 7:43 PM
Here’s his primary challenger. I hope HotAir promotes him.
PRCalDude on June 13, 2007 at 7:46 PM
Staying home is exactly what got the conservatives in the mess from 2006.
Wade on June 13, 2007 at 7:53 PM
You cultivate and support primary challengers targeted at those who support the bill. If you sit out, you throw out the baby with the bathwater.
TheBigOldDog on June 13, 2007 at 7:54 PM
That’s exactly right. One of the first questions the MSM asked Bush the day after the midterm election was if he thought this now meant he could get his immigration plan passed.
TheBigOldDog on June 13, 2007 at 7:55 PM
I had forgotten that! This is right, though, that was one of the first things he said, as a silver lining so-to-speak!
Spirit of 1776 on June 13, 2007 at 8:01 PM
Senor Graham is indeed up for re-election in SC next year, but he has NO ONE running against him in the primary (yet). There is an effort afoot to recruit a real conservative to run against him. Let it be so!
SouthernGent on June 13, 2007 at 8:05 PM
My sentiments exactly – although we should first try to take guys like Lindsey out during the primaries.
We should also avoid donating to the party in general and committees such as the NRSCC and so forth, instead donating directly to the candidates we support. The grass roots needs to get on the ball to defeat the party apparatus, which will continue to support RINO’s like Specter, Chaffee, and so on, who will sell us down the river every time.
thirteen28 on June 13, 2007 at 8:09 PM
Yes. Some idiot reporter asked him that right off the bat. But the fact is, the Senate wasn’t cooperating with the House even before the 2006 election. The Sensebrenner bill could have been law by now, but who’s to say Jorge Arbusto would have signed it anyway? The Senate was pulling the same tricks even when the Republicans were in charge. I say we stay home again if the primary challenges fail. Project Payback should definitely be promoted widely.
PRCalDude on June 13, 2007 at 8:09 PM
Exit question: They should be giving you “static”, AP. Your suggestion is horrible.
JohnJ on June 13, 2007 at 8:20 PM
NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To This Amnesty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These traitorous termites and seditious slime must go.
If you have no borders, you have no country.
profitsbeard on June 13, 2007 at 8:29 PM
chavez on BO, said border enforcement advocates are NOT bigots! Shocking.
lorien1973 on June 13, 2007 at 8:34 PM
Defeating them in primary?
I don’t think he could pull a Lieberman and win.
JayHaw Phrenzie on June 13, 2007 at 9:02 PM
You should get static. Is far worse facing America than just immigration. The issue are far too serious to play democratic party games.
If you want to get rid of problem Republicans then there is such a thing as a primary. That is where you do that. Else in the General Election even a Rino is better than a Dino(saur)
William Amos on June 13, 2007 at 9:04 PM
I support incremental border security, build the fence one incremental mile at a time and when we’re finished we can begin talking about what we should do about all the people who broke our laws by coming here illegally or staying here after their visas expired. But somehow I don’t think that’s what they mean so NO.
Buzzy on June 13, 2007 at 9:10 PM
You know, it don’t trump a vote out of office. Ask McVain…there isn’t enough money in the world to get that b!tch elected now.
tickleddragon on June 13, 2007 at 9:14 PM
Splain dis;
The term ‘rather than’ denotes options to consider. Looks like only one choice here using different words for the same suggestion. Political double speak….
Are you Federal or State politician?
News2Use on June 13, 2007 at 9:25 PM
Ring-a-ding-ding. Morever, we cannot be complacent and think 1 or 2 “lessons” will be enough.
steveegg on June 13, 2007 at 10:08 PM
69%?
Did the Pentagon just detonate a “Kinky Bomb?”
Metro on June 13, 2007 at 10:29 PM
Finally! Pres. Bush, and idiots like Kennedy, and Graham, keep talking about how important it is to have “comprehensive reform.” Then there’s this “of course no one’s going to like everything in it; it’s comprehensive,” shpiel I keep hearing. What mountain did this truth descend from? Could someone in the press corps please as the President or Tony Snow, or Kennedy, or Graham, or anyone who is pushing this monstrosity, “Why is it more important to have a comprehensive bill than a good bill?”
smellthecoffee on June 13, 2007 at 10:50 PM
AP
Cutting ones nose off to spite their face is NEVER an acceptable solution.
doriangrey on June 14, 2007 at 12:16 AM
SouthernGent on June 13, 2007 at 8:05 PM
So run for his seat………..
doriangrey on June 14, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Bush seems to have wondered in Carter Land, where you imagine what you would like the world to be. I cannot find a single American that wants the Amnesty and Open Borders Bill except hard core deconstructionalists. It is truly scary how he and his cabinet have become to believe the Saudis are friends, Mexicans and Southern Hemisphere residents are all Americans, his appointees are competent, and Republicans are the enemy of America and should be locked up for hate speech. A delusional President and a delusional Senate. At least he had enough sense to hide his watch in a crowd of Albanians.
pat on June 14, 2007 at 12:38 AM
Coulter on subject.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56166
pat on June 14, 2007 at 12:53 AM
It seems to me the first thing that needs to be done in conjunction with border enforcement is speed the process for legal immigration. The fact that it is a bureaucratic nightmare is a big reason why illegals don’t bother with the process in the first place. What do you think is gonna happen when 12 million people get at the end of line that already takes years to get through? Unless the broken legal immigration system is fixed concurrently, an enforcement-only approach is gonna be a nightmare. The sticks of enforcement are fine, but you need some carrots in there too.
NPP on June 14, 2007 at 1:45 AM
To me, it’s not about teaching lessons. I’m just beginning to feel that voting is an exercise in futility. I can no longer tell the Republicans from the Democrats.
BeachBaby on June 14, 2007 at 8:28 AM
Unfortnately, staying home in November 08 is simply not an option. As justifiably riled as we are at Bush and Company, it is still far and away better to have a Republican in the Oval Office than Hillary, Obama, or even, God forbid, Edwards. Remember, while illegal immigration is a very important issue, there are other issues as well that the Democrats are far worse on than Bush (consider the war against the terrorists, Supreme Court appointments, Hillary’s desire to socialze our health care system, Supreme Court appointments, gun control, taxes, Supreme Court appointments, etc.)
The ones arguing that we should go for the primaries are right; that’s our best bet to get rid of the open-borders RINOs and put real Republicans in their place. I do have another suggestion to add: If the priary in your district does not pan out, go ahead and vote-but only for President. You don’t have to cast a vote for the other Congressional races. I think this is as good a backup plan as we can get, given the alternatives.
Lancer on June 14, 2007 at 9:08 AM
Are you serious? I thought you were one of the ones saying we shouldn’t stay home when this idea was brought up for the past election. I guess I could be wrong.
Esthier on June 14, 2007 at 9:26 AM
Not if the enforcement is actually enforcement. We don’t have to provide anything for people who break into this country. We could simply ban them for life if we chose. And so long as the enforcement measures are actually keeping illegal aliens out, it won’t matter.
And really, we need to stop blaming our own country for illegal immigration: we have so much money, and they’re so poor; it takes years to come in here legally; keeping Mexicans out (cause supposedly they’re the only ones breaking in /sarc) is akin to slavery, or worse.
The only blame that I see this country as having when it comes to illegal immigration is that we treat it like it’s not illegal.
Esthier on June 14, 2007 at 9:42 AM
I’m sorry but I disagree. How is it better to elect someone that takes your vote and your money and then gives you the finger once they get into office? They think, act, and vote like a Democrat and they think you’re stupid because you put them there. I’d rather have someone in office who I know what they stand for than a RINO sack of weasel cr*p who took advantage of me and is acting the exact same way the democrat would. You don’t reward backstabbers. I won’t anyway.
austinnelly on June 14, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Don’t take this out on whoever the Republican Presidential Candidate is (unless of course it’s McCain – yeah right), who have all been on the right side of this issue. I don’t mind losing a few of these senators, however, if we can’t bounce them in the primaries. Hagel, Graham and Martinez (whose approval rating in FL has slipped below 40%) are the prime candidates.
Dudley Smith on June 14, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Put the military on the border while building the wall, with loaded weapons. If anyone in Washington was serious, they should be proposing this.
moonsbreath on June 14, 2007 at 11:08 AM
If you are in South Carolina, send the RNC a voided check for $500. Enclose a letter with the check telling them, you voided the check because you are disgusted with Lindsay Graham. Tell them you will send a real $500 check if the RNC backs an opponent to unseat Graham. Is it worth $500 to you to have the republican fraud removed from office?
paulsur on June 14, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Vote for President and the House if your Senate candidate isn’t to your liking. The Republican House members have been pretty strong on immigration! It would also be easier to make changes there in the primaries if he isn’t strong. We could at least try to regain the House, especially since they have to run ever 2 years! It would be possible if we make that our focus along with the White House!!
SSG Fuzzy on June 14, 2007 at 1:56 PM