Debunking the polling on Obama's Executive Amnesty

Debunking the polling on Obama's Executive Amnesty

Two polls came out earlier this week showing strong support for the Obama Administration's plan to offer an amnesty to at least 1.4 million people. While the polls from Bloomberg and Rasmussen show 64% and 71%, respectively, support the plan, the results were very misleading. During our Thursday webcast, Roy and I took a closer look at these two polls, and here's what we found.

The Bloomberg poll asked 734 likely voters whether they supported Pres. Obama's plan to halt deportations of individuals who were brought into the country before they were 16; are in school, have a high school diploma or were honorably discharged from the military; and have no criminal record. While 64% of respondents said they support the policy, the question never mentioned that the individuals can be up to 30 years old and would get work permits even though more than 6 million Americans the same age with only a high school degree can't find a full-time job or have given up their job search.

The poll also states "no criminal record" while the actual policy only requires no "significant misdemeanors". Responses to other questions in the poll reveal other major flaws; Roy and I discussed all of this during our webcast. (Watch a replay at http://www.NumbersUSA.tv.)

The Rasmussen Poll asked 1,000 likely voters if they support giving work permits to illegal aliens who were brought here before the age of 16. But, like the Bloomberg poll, the question misled respondents by stating "no criminal record". A staggering 71% said they supported work permits for illegal aliens, BUT the poll question gave respondents only two choices -- work permits or deportation. Again, there were several other flaws with this poll that Roy and I discussed in the webcast.

The GOP Senate Leadership isn't taking the Administration's move lightly. Earlier this week, 20 Senators led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley sent a letter to the President asking for answers. The Senators asked for documentation on the legal basis for the new policy, how much implementation and execution of the policy could cost taxpayers, and how they would handle specific scenarios that aren't addressed by the announced policy.

For instance, the written policy only refers to individuals who "came to the United States under the age of sixteen", but supporters of the policy continuously talk about individuals who were brought here "by their parents". So David North from the Center for Immigration Studies decided to call the hotline set up by the Administration to ask for clarification. What did David find? Six different responses from six different operators, and most of the six weren't very confident with their answers.

As Roy said during the webcast, NumbersUSA will continue to stay out on front on this issue. If one or more of your Members of Congress serve on the Senate or House Appropriations Committees, we've posted brand new faxes on your Action Board. There's an amendment to the House version of the DHS Appropriations bill that prevents the Administration from using deferred action or prosecutorial discretion, and we need the appropriators to keep that clause in the bill! We're also urging support of Rep. Lamar Smith's HALT Act (H.R.2497) that would suspend the Administration's authority to issue an Executive Amnesty. Please check your Action Board and stay tuned for more updates!

Views: 594

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Lawlessness, to the point of making Obama more and more resemble a dictator, has become the standard operating procedure for the most calamitous administration in American history. If he gets reelected - which seems almost inconceivable in the circumstances - America is lost.

If he gets re-elected we will be at war....Civil war, revolution, call it what you want but the bullets are going to fly....

I got a poll for ya

As if anybody thought the people in that poll actually support amnesty for illegal aliens. I wonder how many in that poll know an illegal alien can be born within the border of the US and qualify to run for the presidency without ever transferring any allegiance to support and abide by the constitution?

It is not supposed to be that way. It is unconstitutional for the plenary authority of government to 'create' the 'ruling class,' which is what Art. II § I Cls 5 is all about i.e. the qualifications of the presidency. The Founding Fathers knew de Vattel's "natives" or "indigenes" would insure access to the ruling class would remain with the people, while providing for a 'strong check' against foreign influence affecting the ruling class. John Jay, reading de Vattel,  would have seen these terms through the England common law he was familiar with at the time as a natural born subject Citizen. 

ex animo

davidfarrar

Donofrio, on his "natural born citizen" wordpress blog has done a lot of research into the term/phrase by word searching the national archives and found a lot, BUT I TOOK ANOTHER APPROACH , I word searched "Law of Nations" and it is amazing how much I found in support of the Founders and Framers reliance on it which I shall employ in my action in Sept to establish Original Intent.

Interesting side note, US Constitution, Art. I, sect. 8, clause 10: "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;". There are letters and debates as to what exactly "Offences against the Law of Nations;" means. Pre war of Independence and during the Continental and Constitutional Conventions.

Great news.

 

What is your Sept. action?

 

And please keep us informed as to the framer's 'Original Intent.'

 

ex animo

davidfarrar

It may be sooner, but don't hold me to that. Will be an Superior Court of Arizona Special Action for Declaratory Judgment with Jury Demand. "Hamblin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Az. SOS; 2012Az. Presidential Electors for the Az. Dem. Party.

So many people site Vattel Book I at section 212 and never mention the last sentence therein, which is: "I say, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."

So much for the misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment we have going on!

Yes, de Vattel did say that. But I also find it interesting de Vattel found that those born within their own country's borders and of citizen parents, that is: both mother & father both being citizens of the same country, were natives or part of the indigenous population. 

An English-American, versed in English common law and aware of America's other 'native or indigenous' populations,  would probably have used the term "natural born" to represent the white, European indigenous population of America at that time.

It wasn't until 1924, I believe,  when all native American Indians became American citizens that we all could rightfully call ourselves  'natives' or indigenes.

ex animo

davidfarrar

You are Correct Sir, "The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 gave them that right [to vote]. In 1956 the State of Utah became the last State to grant that right.


Many states, including, New Mexicoovertly did not allow Native Americans to vote until 1962. Which is abysmal given that New Mexico has a large Native population"

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by Gary Varvel

ALERT ALERT

Judicial Watch->  Emails Show Dossier-Connected Obama State Dept Officials Set ‘Face-To-Face’ Meeting On ‘Russian Matter’ Shortly Before 2016 Election

Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation on Thursday released 84 pages of documents showing Obama’s State Department was central to pushing the ‘Trump-Russia’ hoax shortly before the 2016 election.

The email exchange between then-Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya Jonathan Winer, a very close associate to Christopher Steele, show them discussing a ‘face-to-face’ meeting in New York on a ‘Russian matter’ in September of 2016.

Via Judicial Watch:

Judicial Watch and The Daily Caller News Foundation today released 84 pages of documents, including a September 2016 email exchange between then-Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya Jonathan Winer, a close associate of dossier author Christopher Steele, discussing a “face-to-face” meeting on a “Russian matter.”

(In June 2016 Nuland permitted a meeting between Steele and the FBI’s legal attaché in Rome. Nuland told CBS News that the State Department knew about the Steele dossier by July 2016.)

According to an op-ed Winer wrote for The Washington Post in 2018, also in September 2016, “Steele and I met in Washington and discussed the information now known as the “dossier… I prepared a two-page summary and shared it with Nuland, who indicated that, like me, she felt that the secretary of state needed to be made aware of this material.”

A September 17, 2016, email exchange between Nuland and Winer – that was classified in the interest of national defense or foreign policy – discusses the political situation in Libya, but also brings up a “Russian matter:”

From: Winer, Jonathan
Sent: September 17, 2016 at 12:40:00 PM EDT
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Libya Update

Would like to discuss this and a Russian matter.

From: Nuland, Victoria J
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 1:31 PM
To: Winer, Jonathan
Subject: Re. Libya Update

In ny face to face?

From: Winer, Jonathan
Sent: September 17, 2016 at 1:56:05 PM EDT
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Libya Update

Yes that was [sic] be good.

From: Nuland, Victoria J
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 1:58 PM
To: Winer, Jonathan
Subject: Re. Libya Update

Good. I’ll reach out when im there Sunday. [Redacted]

If Victoria Nuland’s name sounds familiar it’s because she has been on Judicial Watch’s radar for a long time and in many of TGP’s previous reports.

In December 2018, Judicial Watch released documents revealing that Victoria Nuland was involved in the Obama State Department’s urgent gathering of classified Russia investigation information and disseminating it to members of Congress within hours of Donald Trump taking office.

In a related lawsuit, Judicial Watch is suing the State Department communications between Ambassador Nuland and employees of Fusion GPS, as well as top ranking Department of Justice, FBI, and State Department officials.

“The Obama State Department was central to the effort to target President Trump with the Russia smear,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These new emails further show that senior Obama State Department advanced the Russiagate hoax just before the 2016 presidential election.”

Tom Fitton   @TomFitton
 

BREAKING: Obama State Department was central to the effort to target President @RealDonaldTrump with the Russia smear. New emails show how senior Obama State Department advanced the Russiagate hoax just before the 2016 presidential election.

Embedded video

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service