U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-08-2014, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,890,891 times
Reputation: 6517

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef View Post
No, bogus poll = one taken by a propaganda organization, like the CIS as opposed to one taken by a legitimate news gathering/polling operation.

CIS has a stated agenda, do you think they would produce a poll that shows any other result than one they'd find favorable? If they did I guarantee we'd never hear of it.
About the Center for Immigration Studies | Center for Immigration Studies
Doesn't appear to be anti-immigration to me. However they aren't especially supportive of illegals.
You disagree with them therefore they are bad. I got it.
The propaganda Org that is lying, misstating facts and confusing the issue is the Obama Administration.
Another is the left leaning Media who insist upon calling illegals, immigrants with the intent to equate one to the other. Sort of like equating shoplifters to people who pay for their merchandise. Yes both can be called shoppers, but one group are criminals where the other is not.
You have Obama parading a chemical engineer on stage and representing her as the average illegal. That kind of false advertising would land a private sector company in court. If you want to accuse people of spreading propaganda you better start with Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-08-2014, 07:52 PM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,766,623 times
Reputation: 1459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
We all know that it is done on purpose.
It is. It's also a nice shorthand since you know what I'm talking about as this is the illegal immigration section.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 07:59 PM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,766,623 times
Reputation: 1459
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
About the Center for Immigration Studies | Center for Immigration Studies
Doesn't appear to be anti-immigration to me. However they aren't especially supportive of illegals.
They exist to give the right cover to go after illegals. That is their purpose.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
You disagree with them therefore they are bad. I got it.
They are not bad because I disagree with them. They are not an unbiased source for information. That was the point you seemed to miss. The CIS has a stated agenda and they're never going to release information that doesn't conform to that agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
The propaganda Org that is lying, misstating facts and confusing the issue is the Obama Administration.
????

Who said anything about Obama? This is about a group with an agenda and a bogus poll vs a large number of legit polls by legit polling outfits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Another is the left leaning Media who insist upon calling illegals, immigrants with the intent to equate one to the other. Sort of like equating shoplifters to people who pay for their merchandise. Yes both can be called shoppers, but one group are criminals where the other is not.
lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
You have Obama parading a chemical engineer on stage and representing her as the average illegal. That kind of false advertising would land a private sector company in court. If you want to accuse people of spreading propaganda you better start with Obama.
Did he say she was the average illegal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,890,891 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
We all know that it is done on purpose.
Yes it is done to blur the lines, to confuse the issue. To make it an anti-immigration issue rather than an anti- illegal issue. It makes it much easier to stir societal guilt that way. After all who wants to support a criminal's crimes? Not many. Now if you make it sound like protesters are against legal immigrants that changes the game. There is a very good reason the media and the white house likes to do this. The same reason they are using a broad brush to paint the majority of this surge as helpless children when that is hardly the truth. They like to pull the heart strings of Americans.
When was the last time you heard Obama talk about all the illegals in prison for violent crimes? How about all the victims of ID theft? Victims of illegals driving without a license or insurance? Whoops his Uncle comes to mind.
When he talks about taxes he spins the story like it is our fault for not giving illegals a path to legal status. Isn't that like saying it's the banks fault they were robbed for not handing out free money?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,890,891 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef View Post
They exist to give the right cover to go after illegals. That is their purpose.


Your opinion

They are not bad because I disagree with them. They are not an unbiased source for information. That was the point you seemed to miss. The CIS has a stated agenda and they're never going to release information that doesn't conform to that agenda. Your opinion



????

Who said anything about Obama? This is about a group with an agenda and a bogus poll vs a large number of legit polls by legit polling outfits.



lol



Did he say she was the average illegal?
You talk about outfits spreading propaganda. I have you fine examples of propaganda.
Obama and his chemical engineer. He paraded her on stage and talked about how people like her are the future of America. How people like her are denied opportunities simply because they weren't born here. His message was clear to any but those who wish to defend his many lies.
You of course have a link to the CIS agenda that states they are anti-immigration, or that they will hide any relevant facts that doesn't support this alleged agenda?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 08:26 PM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,766,623 times
Reputation: 1459
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
You talk about outfits spreading propaganda. I have you fine examples of propaganda.
Obama and his chemical engineer. He paraded her on stage and talked about how people like her are the future of America. How people like her are denied opportunities simply because they weren't born here. His message was clear to any but those who wish to defend his many lies.
Again, this has nothing to do with what I'm discussing. At all. I don't care what Obama says about any particular illegal immigrant. I don't think Obama has claimed, or insinuated that most illegal immigrants were chemical engineers. Most people know that's not the case (NYT poll: 66% of Americans say illegals do the jobs Americans won't do--I don't think chemical engineer is one of those jobs).

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
You of course have a link to the CIS agenda that states they are anti-immigration, or that they will hide any relevant facts that doesn't support this alleged agenda?
They're pretty upfront about their positions:

Downsizing Illegal Immigration: A Strategy of Attrition Through Enforcement | Center for Immigration Studies


Immigration, Population, and the Environment: Experts to Debate Impact of Current Policies | Center for Immigration Studies


You're not actually going to try to argue that they're some kind of neutral, non-biased group are you? They are group that was formed with the specific purpose of serving a specific agenda. In fact, they were formed by breaking away from the Federation for American Immigration Reform, another anti-illegal group. The bottom line is that they're not a group that produces "research" that should be taken seriously by anyone who isn't just looking for confirmation bias. Which is all they produce.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 08:41 PM
 
Location: San Diego
32,813 posts, read 30,061,070 times
Reputation: 17697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef View Post
Comments on news articles is not scientific polling. Actual polls indicate that you're wrong and that's it's not as close as you'd like it to be.



No they don't. Not only do most not want illegals out, most place blocking the border as less important than dealing with illegals already here (and most support a pathway to citizenship).



Cantor, who took his renomination for granted, lost in a heavily Republican district that saw a turnout of 12%. I'm not sure why that's more meaningful than a few days later when pro-reform Graham won handily across the entire state of South Carolina.



The vast majority of people you know don't appear to reflect the views of the majority of Americans. But to answer your original question, yes, illegal immigration will have an effect on the 2016 election, it's one of the reasons the GOP has no chance to win.
I propose a lottery that favors Nations separated from the US by water. No land bridge advantage. What makes S, Central America and Mexico so damn important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 09:00 PM
 
31,565 posts, read 14,591,651 times
Reputation: 8411
Most non-Hispanic Americans (black, white, Asian, etc.) aren't voting for a president based on the candidate's advocacy for an amnesty. Even if they are lukewarm on this issue other issues are at least or more important than this one is to them. So no, any future election will not be based on a candidates promise of an amnesty. It is mostly Hispanics who want it and a few bleeding heart liberals. Romney did not lose based on his stance on illegal immigration. Hispanics like many minorities will vote Democrat no matter what the issues are anyway. They aren't going to suddenly vote GOP if that candidate is an advocate for amnesty. That's just propaganda and idle threats used to sway the GOP into thinking they will gain more of the votes from the above so that they will join them in this amnesty travesty. I think most GOPers can see thru this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 11:15 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,890,891 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef View Post
Again, this has nothing to do with what I'm discussing. At all. I don't care what Obama says about any particular illegal immigrant. I don't think Obama has claimed, or insinuated that most illegal immigrants were chemical engineers. Most people know that's not the case (NYT poll: 66% of Americans say illegals do the jobs Americans won't do--I don't think chemical engineer is one of those jobs).



They're pretty upfront about their positions:

Downsizing Illegal Immigration: A Strategy of Attrition Through Enforcement | Center for Immigration Studies


Immigration, Population, and the Environment: Experts to Debate Impact of Current Policies | Center for Immigration Studies


You're not actually going to try to argue that they're some kind of neutral, non-biased group are you? They are group that was formed with the specific purpose of serving a specific agenda. In fact, they were formed by breaking away from the Federation for American Immigration Reform, another anti-illegal group. The bottom line is that they're not a group that produces "research" that should be taken seriously by anyone who isn't just looking for confirmation bias. Which is all they produce.
How is immigration enforcement anti-immigration? No that isn't anti-immigration it is anti-illegal immigration.
Link #2
Recognizing impacts of immigration and studying the impacts is anti-immigration? Well maybe if you are for unlimited immigration it would be.
The fact is that we do need reform. Just not what S.744 suggests or attempts to do.
CIS is correct in that enforcing our laws is the best first step in getting control of illegal immigration. I'm sorry you can't see that. I think we have seen what relaxed enforcement produces.
Do suggest that a biased org like NBC or CBS is to be trusted? Next you will be saying CNBC is trustworthy.
Obama and his chemical engineer. No he didn't say that they all were chemical engineers and I never made that claim. I said that he paraded her on stage and represented her as the average illegal. His speech praising her then talking about all the illegals who are denied the opportunity blah blah blah. The speech was designed to garner sympathy for dreamers and illegals. It wasn't just a chat, he had a mission. Why else parade the chemical engineer? A more accurate representation of illegals would be both his Aunt and his Uncle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 12:47 AM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,766,623 times
Reputation: 1459
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
How is immigration enforcement anti-immigration? No that isn't anti-immigration it is anti-illegal immigration.
Link #2
Recognizing impacts of immigration and studying the impacts is anti-immigration? Well maybe if you are for unlimited immigration it would be.
The fact is that we do need reform. Just not what S.744 suggests or attempts to do.
CIS is correct in that enforcing our laws is the best first step in getting control of illegal immigration. I'm sorry you can't see that. I think we have seen what relaxed enforcement produces.
Well, at least you agree with me. They're an organization with an agenda, one that you happen to agree with so everything they say you'll accept as true (confirmation bias)


Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Do suggest that a biased org like NBC or CBS is to be trusted?
That actually made me laugh. Compared to what? The CIS? lol Yeah, they can be trusted. At the very least I think they attempt to present unbiased facts and accurate polling data, which is more than I can say for CIS. I know the old right wing canard, the media is biased, etc, etc. And I find that amusing how you all see facts as being biased against you so you turn to an agenda-driven group like the CIS for your "facts." However, I will again restate the fact that began this argument, but in several different ways in the (vain) hope that it might sink in and with some additional material because I find this amusing.

1. The legitimate polls are not all wrong. The majority of the American people support a pathway to citizenship (immigration reform).

2. Your views are not those of the majority, rather they are the minority.

3. Most Americans simply don't agree with you.

Most Americans' opinion > your opinion

4. Less Americans agree with you than disagree with you.

5. Americans are not getting "angrier" about this (at least not in the way you want them to be), in fact, the numbers are likely just to get worse for you here on out.

6. Casual observation of people in your immediate orbit or scanning of a news article's comments section does not constitute a proper, accurate scientific measuring of public opinion.

7. A poll that would be considered an outlier (by far) produced by a group with a stated agenda that just by happy coincidence (lol!) happens to support that groups' stated agenda should be considered suspect at the very least by any reasonable human being. It should not be seen as some kind of life preserver by someone reeking of desperation to be in the majority.

8. As long as this issue festers, it will be an albatross around the GOP's neck. It does them absolutely no good and much harm. In no way is the op correct in stating that somehow this will in any way be a benefit to the GOP in the 2016 election. In fact, the issue is important to the Hispanic community (anyone who watches Univision, Telemundo or Azteca America knows this, it's always one of the top stories) and with the Hispanic vote growing as a proportion of the electorate (at the expense of the white vote, which is shrinking as a proportion of the electorate) this will probably contribute mightily to the destruction of the GOP as a national political force (barring the GOP actually taking back the asylum from the inmates and moving the party back towards the center).

9. Because I see today's GOP as little more than a boil on America's backside in dire need of draining, I will enjoy watching this.

10. Immigration reform is going to happen. This is like pulling a band-aid off, do it quick and it'll be easy. Prolong it, and it'll hurt. This is like fighting against gay marriage (another inevitability), it's not a matter of if, it's just a matter of when. You absolutely will not win this fight, you will never have the votes to win this and the longer you fight against it the worse your already extremely slim chances become. The American people aren't behind you on this. You will never get enough elected officials in the right places to change that. All you can do is delay the inevitable at little cost to your opponents (in fact, it makes them stronger) and great cost to yourselves. And again, I will laugh at you watching this unfold, because watching the American far right commit suicide is just funny in my book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Next you will be saying CNBC is trustworthy.
Never watched it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Obama and his chemical engineer. No he didn't say that they all were chemical engineers and I never made that claim.
This doesn't seem to match up with....


Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
I said that he paraded her on stage and represented her as the average illegal. His speech praising her then talking about all the illegals who are denied the opportunity blah blah blah. The speech was designed to garner sympathy for dreamers and illegals. It wasn't just a chat, he had a mission. Why else parade the chemical engineer? A more accurate representation of illegals would be both his Aunt and his Uncle.
....that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top