63 percent back path to citizenship

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Poll after poll show that a majority of Americans favor allowing immigrants living in the U.S. illegally to remain here legally and, further, to apply for citizenship.

An April Associated Press-GfK poll found that 63 percent of Americans favor "providing a legal way for illegal immigrants already in the United States to become U.S. citizens." It found that 34 percent would oppose such a mechanism.

A Quinnipiac poll released earlier this month found 69 percent of registered voters think Republicans and Democrats in Congress won't be able to work together to pass comprehensive immigration reform this year.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20130723/US-Digits/

[mota bhai 2,675]

Sure, they back it but ask them how important it is to them as an issue. Important enough to communicate their feelings to their elected representatives? Usually not.

[JohnR! 5,495]

One thing that has always caught my attention is the misnomer 'path to citizenship' used by everyone - including in immigration forums, such as these - in reference to immigration reform.

Nowhere in the immigration laws of the US is there the presumption that a LPR become a citizen, nor is it a requirement in order to maintain residence in the US. One may, as many do, remain a LPR for one's entire life and never have to fear any sort of retaliation, as a result.

I wonder why no one uses the term 'path to legalization', which is not only appropriate but also the only true statement that can be made in regards to immigration reform.

[Harsh_77 718]

Who did the poll and what about the sample size and detail?

[mota bhai 2,675]

GIYF, Harsh.

[Harsh_77 718]

GIYF, Harsh.

I would want to hear from the OP since he believes these polls are so accurate.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Sure, they back it but ask them how important it is to them as an issue. Important enough to communicate their feelings to their elected representatives? Usually not.

The representatives themselves are as polarized at the constituents that elect them. The Senate keeps trying to jump ahead of the House with major legislation. That is why we end up with such poorly written programs as Obamacare. In the House, the legislation is usually well thought out, yet often extremely polarized. The Senate's job is to temper what the House passes, and load it up with extraneous riders that couldn't become law otherwise. Instead, the Senate is producing these huge omnibus bills, and expects the House to pass them without amendment. Until the President's party regains control of the House, that is just not going to happen, except in piecemeal fashion, which the President's own Senate seems to reject, no matter how sensible, or popular those measures may be. In essence, we are lucky when anything passes both houses, and makes it to the President's desk.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I would want to hear from the OP since he believes these polls are so accurate.

The link is there. Thanks for playing.

[Harsh_77 718]

The link is there. Thanks for playing.

Ppl are getting smarter and they know who is playing.... have heard about these poll numbers lean the way they want it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Who did the poll and what about the sample size and detail?

Click on the link in the OP. It has the links to the polls quoted. Not that you could invalidate their results based on the sampling size and detail.

This reminds me of the biased poll nonsense that we heard in the run-up to the election last November. Turned out that the results by and large validated those polls that were supposedly biased while invalidating those that were supposedly spot on - Fox, Rasmussen. et al..

Edited July 23, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[Teddy B 17,252]

Who did the poll and what about the sample size and detail?

The poll was done by AA.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

The daily Rasmussen updates (only if Romney was leading, of course) were hilarious.

[Harsh_77 718]

Click on the link in the OP. It has the links to the polls quoted. Not that you could invalidate their results based on the sampling size and detail.

This reminds me of the biased poll nonsense that we heard in the run-up to the election last November. Turned out that the results by and large validated those polls that were supposedly biased while invalidating those that were supposedly spot on - Fox, Rasmussen. et al..

Whichever poll as long as they are not done without any bias and good sample size they not going to be accurate.

I never said Fox polls were better than AP most of the news outlets are not doing unbiased reporting anymore.

[GandD 5,966]

Sure, they back it but ask them how important it is to them as an issue. Important enough to communicate their feelings to their elected representatives? Usually not.

I've never communicated any issue to any representative. I guess I suck at life.

Click on the link in the OP. It has the links to the polls quoted. Not that you could invalidate their results based on the sampling size and detail.

This reminds me of the biased poll nonsense that we heard in the run-up to the election last November. Turned out that the results by and large validated those polls that were supposedly biased while invalidating those that were supposedly spot on - Fox, Rasmussen. et al..

I watched a bit of Fox election night. That was so awesome. Some of those guys really didn't see it coming. Ah, they were so heartbroken. I'd say Megan Kelly handled it the best.

[Harsh_77 718]

The poll was done by AA.

Do you think it was unbiased sample and poll numbers are accurate?