Poll: 63% of Americans favor letting illegal immigrants become citizens if they pass a background check and learn English

[Lance27 19]

As little as your average Joe knows about immigration matters...

You don't need to know all about the USCIS to have a valid opinion on this. All you need is a sense of what's right and what's wrong.

If someone has been here for a long time, lives here, is raising a family here, works here, participates in our communities, isn't a criminal ... then kicking them out, or even saying we want to kick them out, is wrong.

PWNED

but no, remember ALL illegals are criminals and drugdealers

And have TB... no wait, some whiteboy from georgia was the one with the TB, my bad.

[Lance27 19]

Im not justifying people comming accross illigally but these people all wanted a better life and most people born and raised in the US and who have never been exposed to the world around them take their lifestyles, freedoms, rights they receive for granted.

As someone mentioned before I would agree if these people were to leave and comeback legally and pay backtaxes and fines and were put on a path to Permanent residency and then eventually Citizenship.

As little as your average Joe knows about immigration matters...

You don't need to know all about the USCIS to have a valid opinion on this. All you need is a sense of what's right and what's wrong.

If someone has been here for a long time, lives here, is raising a family here, works here, participates in our communities, isn't a criminal ... then kicking them out, or even saying we want to kick them out, is wrong.

I strongly disagree. You are justifying the end game, based upon unlawful activity. Just because they are doing the right things now, does not give an illegal alien any credibility whatsoever. They are not entitled to be in this country. Period. What is so difficult about this concept?

Edited June 13, 2007 by Lance27

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If we're being honest here - the fact of the matter is those people who have been here for years have beaten the system. Is that fair? Probably not.

Successive governments have failed utterly to deal with this issue - to the point where it can be said that they are complicit in it. You can't justify breaking the law - but its equally unjustifiable for politicians to sit back and do sweet FA about it.

As I see it - an amnesty of some sort is inevitable, certainly for people who've been here for a long time. Again is that fair? Probably not. But it is the reality IMO.

[William33 110]

Im not justifying people comming accross illigally but these people all wanted a better life and most people born and raised in the US and who have never been exposed to the world around them take their lifestyles, freedoms, rights they receive for granted.

As someone mentioned before I would agree if these people were to leave and comeback legally and pay backtaxes and fines and were put on a path to Permanent residency and then eventually Citizenship.

Now that's an original idea. I support that also.

If we begin to consider this on a case by case basis, we will remain in the current debacle on this issue.

We either need to deport any illegal alien, irrespective of anything else, or throw in the towel. I suspect the towel.

We have become soft on illegal immigration. Too bad legal immigration is and will remain, difficult. Counterintuitive, no?

[Caladan 19]

Those criticizing the legitimacy of three separate polls, would, I'm sure, take the polls with the same skeptical grain of salt had the polls supported their own positions.

[William33 110]

Those criticizing the legitimacy of three separate polls, would, I'm sure, take the polls with the same skeptical grain of salt had the polls supported their own positions.

Without a doubt. I feel strongly that poll validity requires a larger representation of the population. For example, 5-10 million. Anything short of that is not valid.

[Caladan 19]

I call shenanigans. There's variations in how the poll questions are asked, which is why it's good to look at more than one poll on the same topic, but the problem isn't sample size.

[William33 110]

I call shenanigans. There's variations in how the poll questions are asked, which is why it's good to look at more than one poll on the same topic, but the problem isn't sample size.

We have yet to see the poll questions and variances. With all of these variables in mind, logical debate is not really possible. As usual, we resort to personal opinion.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Those criticizing the legitimacy of three separate polls, would, I'm sure, take the polls with the same skeptical grain of salt had the polls supported their own positions.

Without a doubt. I feel strongly that poll validity requires a larger representation of the population. For example, 5-10 million. Anything short of that is not valid.

How do you get 5-10 million people to take part in a telephone poll? That's rather a lot of calls don't you think?

Part of the problem with poll samples is that you don't always get complete responses - so to get 5-10 million complete responses you'd have to poll many times that number.

[Caladan 19]

They don't poll 5-10 million people for presidential polls.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

They don't poll 5-10 million people for presidential polls.

No one does - its infeasible.

[William33 110]

They don't poll 5-10 million people for presidential polls.

Maybe they should...Perhaps the ignorant people would not vote based on the short sighted innacurate data.

Edited June 13, 2007 by William33

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

William,

You are mistaking other posters understanding of the statistical analysis techniques used in polling, for personal opinion.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sampling techniques vary greatly - but in the main they're pretty reliable. Most opinion polls are still conducted by phone rather than mail or the internet.

As Caladan says the issue is with the design of the poll, not the size of the sample. Most of these findings can be best verified by repetition - by looking at other polls looking at the same topic. If there is bias in the design of the survey, its not really going to be revealed merely by upping the number of respondents. Participation is a big problem with these sorts of things - hence if you want to get even 100 responses you'll find yourself having to quiz a lot more people than that.

Edited June 13, 2007 by erekose

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

As little as your average Joe knows about immigration matters...

You don't need to know all about the USCIS to have a valid opinion on this. All you need is a sense of what's right and what's wrong.

If someone has been here for a long time, lives here, is raising a family here, works here, participates in our communities, isn't a criminal ... then kicking them out, or even saying we want to kick them out, is wrong.

Chances are, the person you described has committed more than one felony. Nothing violent but a felony nonetheless for which any American or legal resident would do hard time. The illegal won't. He'll be rewarded with a validation of his pizzing on our laws year after year. Or how about the fella that illegally made some good money and got to enjoy it for 10 years before they were onto him. Just let him keep it since he hasn't done anything else wrong and seeing that he's gotten so used to living it large? That would be right in your world? Gotta ask: What color is your sky?

Edited June 13, 2007 by ET-US2004