Reuters: Poll After protest 49-41 Americans agree with the travel ban.

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BRUTALITOPS

on indefiniate mod break
Contributor
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-poll-exclusive-idUSKBN15F2MG

First, this is hilarious the way reuters buries the lead. Go look at the article. Their opening paragraph is how less than one third of americans think it will make them more safe.

But this is the nuts and bolts:

The Jan. 30-31 poll found roughly one in two Americans backed the ban, which also suspends admission of all refugees for 120 days, although there were sharp divisions along party lines.

..

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 49 percent of Americans agreed with the order and 41 percent disagreed. Some 53 percent of Democrats said they "strongly disagree" with Trump's action while 51 percent of Republicans said they "strongly agree."
Click to expand...


If anyone had been watching the news lately you would think hitler had finally taken over, that all of america hated this idea. But nope, even after the protests and wall to wall condemnation coverage, trump comes out ahead on this one.

 
This poll doesn't really surprise me. Fear & hysteria sort of rule the day.

I keep going back to the idea that this ban wouldn't have prevented any attacks that have happened on U.S. soil over the past 20 years or so. I mean, where is the logic?

But there is Islamophobia out there, and there is hysteria about terrorism, and Trump plays all of that like a fiddle he's carried around w/ him his whole life.
 
Thing1 said:
This poll doesn't really surprise me. Fear & hysteria sort of rule the day.

I keep going back to the idea that this ban wouldn't have prevented any attacks that have happened on U.S. soil over the past 20 years or so. I mean, where is the logic?

But there is Islamophobia out there, and there is hysteria about terrorism, and Trump plays all of that like a fiddle he's carried around w/ him his whole life.
Click to expand...

ehh. I think a lot of people are saying its only 120 days. If you can wait 2 years you can wait 120 more days.
 
tsuke said:
ehh. I think a lot of people are saying its only 120 days. If you can wait 2 years you can wait 120 more days.
Click to expand...

Have you seen what these people have to go through before they come here? We already have "extreme vetting." And that's the thing - this is a token gesture, which likely will not make us safer.

It stands a better chance of alienating exactly those communities who we need cooperation & intelligence from in order to truly protect America from terrorism. And it certainly doesn't hurt the negative propaganda that extremists use to recruit.
 
Thing1 said:
Have you seen what these people have to go through before they come here? We already have "extreme vetting." And that's the thing - this is a token gesture, which likely will not make us safer.

It stands a better chance of alienating exactly those communities who we need cooperation & intelligence from in order to truly protect America from terrorism. And it certainly doesn't hurt the negative propaganda that extremists use to recruit.
Click to expand...

To paraphrase the great Hillary Clinton after waiting for so long "At this point what difference does 120 days make? "
 
Thing1 said:
This poll doesn't really surprise me. Fear & hysteria sort of rule the day.

I keep going back to the idea that this ban wouldn't have prevented any attacks that have happened on U.S. soil over the past 20 years or so. I mean, where is the logic?

But there is Islamophobia out there, and there is hysteria about terrorism, and Trump plays all of that like a fiddle he's carried around w/ him his whole life.
Click to expand...

Remember when they instituted a 'Muslim ban' under Obama? It was because the FBI caught a refugee/terrorist in Kentucky.
_____________

Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets. One Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays, two U.S. officials said. In 2011, fewer than 10,000 Iraqis were resettled as refugees in the U.S., half the number from the year before, State Department statistics show.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qa...terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131
___________

What's not logical is the notion that just because a refugee hasn't *yet* committed a terrorist act doesn't they won't or have tried.

Finally, 16 years after 9/11, we are being proactive against the Islamic terrorist threat.
 
Darth Omar said:
Remember when they instituted a 'Muslim ban' under Obama? It was because the FBI caught a refugee/terrorist in Kentucky.
_____________

Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets. One Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays, two U.S. officials said. In 2011, fewer than 10,000 Iraqis were resettled as refugees in the U.S., half the number from the year before, State Department statistics show.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qa...terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131
___________

What's not logical is the notion that just because a refugee hasn't *yet* committed a terrorist act doesn't they won't or have tried.

Finally, 16 years after 9/11, we are being proactive against the Islamic terrorist threat.
Click to expand...

There really isn't any logic there whatsoever.

You're restricting liberty based on irrational fear. It really makes no sense. You could take that to any extreme, with a lot of different groups and actions...
 
+ said:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-poll-exclusive-idUSKBN15F2MG

First, this is hilarious the way reuters buries the lead. Go look at the article. Their opening paragraph is how less than one third of americans think it will make them more safe.

But this is the nuts and bolts:



If anyone had been watching the news lately you would think hitler had finally taken over, that all of america hated this idea. But nope, even after the protests and wall to wall condemnation coverage, trump comes out ahead on this one.

Click to expand...

^Lemmings. They were against the polls before they were for them.
 
Thing1 said:
There really isn't any logic there whatsoever.

You're restricting liberty based on irrational fear. It really makes no sense. You could take that to any extreme, with a lot of different groups and actions...
Click to expand...

Liberty? Whose liberty?

Do you think we should resign ourselves to a certain level of Islamic terrorist activities?
 
domer76 said:
(laughing) And that 120 days will accomplish what?
Click to expand...

Good point lol.

I'm not sure you can weed out the bad apples by talking to them for two weeks or five years.

'Are you a terrorist?'

'No, I'm not a terrorist'

'Do you have any papers?'

'No, I don't have any."

'You can come in.'
 
tsuke said:
To paraphrase the great Hillary Clinton after waiting for so long "At this point what difference does 120 days make? "
Click to expand...

I saw it the first time, moron. Stupid fucking attempt at diversion. But, your answer is obvious. "Nothing"
 
Thing1 said:
This poll doesn't really surprise me. Fear & hysteria sort of rule the day.

I keep going back to the idea that this ban wouldn't have prevented any attacks that have happened on U.S. soil over the past 20 years or so. I mean, where is the logic?
Click to expand...

to be fair if we banned saudia arabia before 9/11 you'd be making the same argument.
 
Darth Omar said:
Good point lol.

I'm not sure you can weed out the bad apples by talking to them for two weeks or five years.

'Are you a terrorist?'

'No, I'm not a terrorist'

'Do you have any papers?'

'No, I don't have any."

'You can come in.'
Click to expand...

So, I have two responses from the RWers that say it will accomplish nothing. It's nothing more than red meat thrown to Trump's underinformed base.
 
+ said:
to be fair if we banned saudia arabia before 9/11 you'd be making the same argument.
Click to expand...

So, where do you stop, then? There are terrorist cells all over the world. We could use the same logic w/ almost anyplace out there.

Heck, we could bring back internment camps. You know..."just in case"...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top