WashPo: Democrats Will Lose Shutdown Polls If Public Blames Their Amnesty Push

[Right_in_Virginia]

WashPo: Democrats Will Lose Shutdown Polls If Public Blames Their Amnesty Push
Breitbart, Jan 18, 2018, Neil Munro

The Democrats’ 2018 chances will be damaged by the government shutdown if voters blame the Democrats’ pro-amnesty agenda, a Washington Post report admitted Thursday evening.

The good news for President Donald Trump and the bad news for amnesty-advocates was buried in the last paragraph of the article, which is based on a poll conducted for Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer:

If Democrats can make this looming shutdown about Trump and his ability to govern, they will be in a strong position to win the fight nationally and help the “Big Five [Democratic Senators]” hold their own.

If Republicans can make it about immigration, the victory is probably theirs.

More: http://www.breitbart.com/2018-elections/2018/01/18/democrats-lose-government-shutdown-fight-if-public-blames-amnesty-demand/

[Right_in_Virginia]

Jury’s out on winners and losers in latest shutdown standoff
Washington Post, Jan 18, 2018, Paul Kane

Congress and President Trump are headed into new territory in their standoff over funding the federal government amid Democratic demands to resolve the immigration status of up to 1 million residents brought here illegally as children.

The uncertainty lies in this question: Who will win in the court of public opinion?

Public and private polling is giving each side something to hang their hat on if the federal government partially shuts down this weekend — an increasingly likely scenario. For Democrats, there is hope in surveys showing that more Americans would blame Trump and the GOP. For Republicans, the numbers offer this glimmer: In conservative states, the blame would shift to Democrats if the public perceives the immigration issue as the reason for the impasse.


More: https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/jurys-out-on-winners-and-losers-in-latest-shutdown-standoff/2018/01/18/b5dd2a82-fc7f-11e7-ad8c-ecbb62019393_story.html?utm_term=.2124bf0d6000

[Jazzhead]

Other worrisome optics for Dems:

Amnesty for illegals trumps health care for kids (CHIP)

Amnesty for illegals trumps military readiness

As I noted on another thread, the GOP's best course may be to take Judge Alsop's ruling and run with it.  Keep DACA in place for the 700,000 who already applied (as Judge Alsop has essentially ordered),  and shut down further negotiations for enshrining DACA in legislation.   

The negotiations so far suggest that Dems want to expand DACA to not only the several million additional folks who were eligible for the program, but haven't apply so far, but also to their parents.   I've heard numbers of up to 9 million.    Trump should accept the Judge's ruling and declare victory -  DACA for 700,000, but not person more.   

[driftdiver]

Other worrisome optics for Dems:

Amnesty for illegals trumps health care for kids (CHIP)

Amnesty for illegals trumps military readiness

As I noted on another thread, the GOP's best course may be to take Judge Alsop's ruling and run with it.  Keep DACA in place for the 700,000 who already applied (as Judge Alsop has essentially ordered),  and shut down further negotiations for enshrining DACA in legislation.   

The negotiations so far suggest that Dems want to expand DACA to not only the several million additional folks who were eligible for the program, but haven't apply so far, but also to their parents.   I've heard numbers of up to 9 million.    Trump should accept the Judge's ruling and declare victory -  DACA for 700,000, but not person more.

@Jazzhead
Accepting the ruling would allow those 700k to use the chain migration to add another 3 million or more.

The judges ruling is blatantly illegal and should be struck down and the judge removed.  Allowing it to stand only furthers the cause of the leftists who want to use judicial activism to jam their agenda down everyones throat.

[txradioguy]

The message from every Republican who has a mic shoved in their face should hammer away on the message that "this shut down happened because the Democrats led by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer believe that illegal immigrants are more important than the American people."

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.


Sadly I won't hold out much hope that this will happen.

[WingNot]

Other worrisome optics for Dems:

Amnesty for illegals trumps health care for kids (CHIP)

Amnesty for illegals trumps military readiness

As I noted on another thread, the GOP's best course may be to take Judge Alsop's ruling and run with it.  Keep DACA in place for the 700,000 who already applied (as Judge Alsop has essentially ordered),  and shut down further negotiations for enshrining DACA in legislation.   

All well and good except this SJW activist judge needs to be slapped down, Once Again I might add, for legislating from the bench.

[skeeter]

Other worrisome optics for Dems:

Amnesty for illegals trumps health care for kids (CHIP)

Amnesty for illegals trumps military readiness

As I noted on another thread, the GOP's best course may be to take Judge Alsop's ruling and run with it.  Keep DACA in place for the 700,000 who already applied (as Judge Alsop has essentially ordered),  and shut down further negotiations for enshrining DACA in legislation.   

The negotiations so far suggest that Dems want to expand DACA to not only the several million additional folks who were eligible for the program, but haven't apply so far, but also to their parents.   I've heard numbers of up to 9 million.    Trump should accept the Judge's ruling and declare victory -  DACA for 700,000, but not person more.

You may be right. Unfortunately, though, this would give away Trump's leverage for the other reforms he has to get - border wall funding and an end to chain migration.

Without ending chain migration the democrats will get their massively expanded DACA program even if they agree to limit it to 900k now.

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Accepting the ruling would allow those 700k to use the chain migration to add another 3 million or more.

No it wouldn't.  Let's not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  A legislative enshrinement of DACA would almost certainly expand the program.   By accepting the Judge's ruling,  the DACA program remains limited and the Administration retains the ability to limit its application without the meddling of Dems in Congress. 

The judges ruling is blatantly illegal and should be struck down and the judge removed. 

Nonsense.

The Judge's rhetoric aside, the ruling is nothing out of the ordinary and is based on sound and quite conventional legal principles.   Enforcing a bargain on the basis of detrimental reliance is what courts do all the time,  because it represents simple justice.   

[Jazzhead]

You may be right. Unfortunately, though, this would give away Trump's leverage for the other reforms he has to get - border wall funding and an end to chain migration.

Without ending chain migration the democrats will get their massively expanded DACA program even if they agree to limit it to 900k now.

Trump has all the leverage he needs.  700,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to 11 million illegals the Dems want normalized.   

By the way, we shouldn't be "ending" chain (family based) migration, but limiting it.  Immigrants should be generally allowed to bring over their spouses and kids (absent a guest worker program),  but should be restricted in bringing over parents and siblings unless those family members satisfy skills-based criteria for immigration on their own accord. 

[skeeter]

Trump has all the leverage he needs.  700,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to 11 million illegals the Dems want normalized.   

By the way, we shouldn't be "ending" chain (family based) migration, but limiting it.  Immigrants should be generally allowed to bring over their spouses and kids (absent a guest worker program),  but should be restricted in bringing over parents and siblings unless those family members satisfy skills-based criteria for immigration on their own accord.

There's no need for a special cut out for 'chain migration'. Nothings stopping immigrants from applying for regular visas with their spouses and kids at the same time. All that would be required is a minor adjustment to the process for considering who gets a visa.

[txradioguy]

Trump has all the leverage he needs.  700,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to 11 million illegals the Dems want normalized.   

By the way, we shouldn't be "ending" chain (family based) migration, but limiting it. Immigrants should be generally allowed to bring over their spouses and kids (absent a guest worker program),  but should be restricted in bringing over parents and siblings unless those family members satisfy skills-based criteria for immigration on their own accord.

Yet another "right" made out of whole cloth that didn't exist before an activist SCOTUS created it.  No onwder you think it should stay.

[Jazzhead]

Yet another "right" made out of whole cloth that didn't exist before an activist SCOTUS created it.  No onwder you think it should stay.

Family-based migration is statutory/regulatory, not judicially-created.   It is a choice made by our elected representatives,  not imposed on us by judges.   

[txradioguy]

Family-based migration is statutory/regulatory, not judicially-created.   It is a choice made by our elected representatives,  not imposed on us by judges.

And the courts with activist judges have continually strayed into this area where they need to stay away form.

Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”

For the last several decades, the Supreme Court has effectively trampled on Congress’s constitutionally mandated, separate, and exclusive power and taken upon itself the task of rewriting America’s immigration laws.

We didn't even know what chain migration was until 1965 thanks to that murdering philanderer Ted Kennedy.  No other country that I'm aware of allows this kind of insanity.

It needs to go away.  It's bad for the country.

[txradioguy]

Chain Migration also undermines national security, by failing to establish merit-based criteria for evaluating entrants into the United States – instead, familial relations are all that is required to obtain a green card and, in turn, become a voting U.S. Citizen within a short period of time, with access to Federal welfare and government benefits.

[truth_seeker]

The message from every Republican who has a mic shoved in their face should hammer away on the message that "this shut down happened because the Democrats led by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer believe that illegal immigrants are more important than the American people."

Agreed.  Keep it simple. Stay on message.

[Jazzhead]

Chain Migration also undermines national security, by failing to establish merit-based criteria for evaluating entrants into the United States – instead, familial relations are all that is required to obtain a green card and, in turn, become a voting U.S. Citizen within a short period of time, with access to Federal welfare and government benefits.

An individual who is allowed to come here on merit should be permitted to bring his spouse and children.   But not his parents and siblings, unless they also qualify based on merit.   I have no objection to family-based (chain) immigration as so limited.   

(Different rules should apply, of course, to refugees.)   

[Jazzhead]

We didn't even know what chain migration was until 1965 thanks to that murdering philanderer Ted Kennedy.  No other country that I'm aware of allows this kind of insanity.

Then you should educate yourself.   The U.S. lets in a greater percentage of immigrants based on family status than most nations, but most nations do so to varying degrees.   As noted above,  family-based immigration should be limited - spouses, kids - but not eliminated entirely.