Posted on 08/17/2015 5:59:35 AM PDT by xzins
Donald Trump set off yet another wave of anguish and frustration among Republican political elites Sunday with more provocative statements about immigration, along with the release of a Trump immigration plan influenced by the Senate's leading immigration hawk. But there are indications Trump's positions on immigration are more in line with the views of the public — not just GOP voters, but the public at large — than those of his critics.
"Donald Trump: Undocumented Immigrants 'Have to Go,'" read the headline at NBC News, where Trump appeared on "Meet the Press." "They have to go," Trump told moderator Chuck Todd, referring to immigrants in the U.S. illegally. "We either have a country or we don't have a country." At the same time, Trump unveiled a brief immigration position paper, created in consultation with Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, calling for, among other things, an end to the 14th Amendment's guarantee of birthright citizenship.
Some of Trump's presidential rivals, and no doubt many in the GOP establishment, were appalled. "Our leading Republican is embracing self-deportation, that all of the 11 million have to walk back where they came from, and maybe we'll let some of them come back," Sen. Lindsey Graham said on CBS. "I just hope we don't go down that road as a party. So our leading contender, Mr. Trump, is going backward on immigration. And I think he's going to take all of us with him if we don't watch it."
But are Trump's views on immigration as far out of the mainstream as Graham suggests? Are they out of the mainstream at all? A recent academic paper, by Stanford professor David Broockman and Berkeley Ph.D candidate Douglas Ahler, suggests a majority of the public's views on immigration are closer to Trump's than to the advocates of comprehensive immigration reform.
The Broockman/Ahler paper, published in July, is about more than just immigration; it examines the range of public opinion on several issues. On each, the authors gave a scientifically-selected group of respondents a broad range of policy options. On immigration, they listed seven possibilities, ranging from open borders to shutting down all immigration. These are the options Broockman and Ahler presented to respondents:
1. The United States should have open borders and allow further immigration on an unlimited basis.
2. Legal immigration to the United States should greatly increase among all immigrant groups, regardless of their skills. Immigrants already in the United States should be put on the path to citizenship.
3. Immigration of highly skilled individuals should greatly increase. Immigration by those without such skills should continue at its current pace, although this immigration should be legalized.
4. Immigration of highly skilled individuals should greatly increase, and immigration among those without such skills should be limited in time and/or magnitude, e.g., through a guest worker program.
5. The United States should admit more highly skilled immigrants and secure the border with increased physical barriers to stem the flow of other immigrants.
6. Only a small number of highly skilled immigrants should be allowed into the United States until the border is fully secured, and all illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. should be deported.
7. Further immigration to the United States should be banned until the border is fully secured, and all illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. should be deported immediately.
Here are the results Broockman and Ahler got: 4.7 percent supported Option One; 17.4 percent supported Option Two; 10.8 percent supported Option Three; 12.0 percent supported Option Four; 17.0 percent supported Option Five; 13.8 percent supported Option Six; and 24.4 percent supported Option Seven.
The largest single group, 24.4 percent, supported the most draconian option — closed borders and mass deportation — that is dismissed by every candidate in the race, including Trump. Add in the next group that supported Option Six, which would allow only a "small number" of highly skilled immigrants to enter the U.S. and also involve mass deportations, and the number increased to 38.2 percent. Then add Option Five, which would allow only highly skilled immigrants while physically blocking the border, and the number increased to 55.2 percent.
"Many citizens support policies that seem to fall outside of the range of policy options considered in elite discourse," Broockman and Ahler conclude.
Trump's immigration stance appears to fall somewhere between Option Five and Option Six, perhaps a little closer to the latter. It's probably fair to say that, if Broockman and Ahler are correct, a majority of Americans — not just Republican voters, but all Americans — hold views that are consistent with Trump's position, or are even more restrictive. Opponents like Graham portray Trump's immigration position as far out of the mainstream, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
Trump is right there where the American people are.
Jefferson Sessions as Vice President
Department of State , (Return INS.) – John Bolton
Department of Justice - Trey Gowdy (Suggested by The Donald)
Department of Treasury, (includes HHS Customs) – Carl Icahn (Offered and Accepted)
Department of War, (change the name back, include VA function.) - LTC. Allen West
Department of Interior, (includes former Agriculture, Transportation, HHS Border Patrol, and Energy legitimate functions) – Gov. Palin
Department of Labor and Commerce – ELIMINATE
Department of Health and Human Services - ELIMINATE
Department of Homeland Security – ELIMINATE
Department of Education - ELIMINATE
Department of Housing and Urban Development – ELIMINATE
Policy paper here:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/images/uploads/Immigration-Reform-Trump.pdf
What’s really significant about this article is that Byron York actually wrote this. Is that a sign some of the insider media types are beginning to get it?
“Enforce existing immigration law” was not one of the options. If it were, I suspect the support level would be a lot higher than 55%.
Media bias? What Media bias? I see no Media bias.
I keep saying this. President Trump is going to need Jeff Sessions, Ted Cruz, and the others in the small number of reliable conservatives to be in the US Senate in order to clean up that sewer. Sessions and Cruz have both political and legal knowledge that will keep the endeavor on track.
Trump is the only one who has said build a wall
Trump is the only one that put out his immigration plan, talked against China,Mexico, Saudi Arabia
Trump is the most pro-American ,not owned by big donors like Soros or Koch brothers or zuckerberg billionaires that are for amnesty and or foreign interests as are the politicians
The same survey shows that most Americans are with Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren on Social Security.
FWIW, Marcia Radditz got to ride on the Trump helicopter while the kids were having a field day. She was as close to gushing as she's ever been, raving about how much Trump enjoyed the kids and the kids had a great, fun time.
I listened to Chris Christie spin about ‘the wall’ this morning, bad-mouthing the concept by saying people could go over, under, around, or through it. They know it has always been presented as complete with high tech monitoring, increased Border Patrol, etc.
They also know that ‘the wall’ is a metaphor for completely gaining control of access to this nation: visa control, port control, airport control, coastal control, and border control. What is so hard about being honest by these people?!!
This is not the year to argue Social Security. There are bigger fish to fry than whether the younger generation can’t start collecting until 68 years old.
In Boston there are no Hispanics around. All the jobs I see Hispanics doing here are done by blacks and whites in Boston no problem.
So from that I can say that Hispanics are taking the jobs of poorer blacks and whites in California and other places and they are also making Spanish another road block for America citizens to work.
A straw man argument is a sure sign that they’ve lost the argument.
“I keep saying this. President Trump is going to need Jeff Sessions, Ted Cruz, and the others in the small number of reliable conservatives to be in the US Senate in order to clean up that sewer. Sessions and Cruz have both political and legal knowledge that will keep the endeavor on track.”
And, you are correct
The VP needs to be someone who does not dilute the Senate or House majority. As the VP is a fairly powerless position I’d look to a Fiorina or Carson type pick for VP
All right there. Sessions as VP.
I absolutely agree with that. The obvious problem with a 3rd party run is the US Constitution and the state-by-state denial of access to having a candidate appear on a ballot. The only 3rd party currently with almost all states (48, I think) is the Libertarian Party.
From the article: “”Many citizens support policies that seem to fall outside of the range of policy options considered in elite discourse,” Broockman and Ahler conclude.”
A simply priceless piece of statistician interpretation-speak!
“Seem to fall outside”...? Doesn’t look like there is any ‘seem’ to it.
The politicos are wholly out of touch with mainstream America on this issue, and many others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.