Posted on 06/19/2012 7:19:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Will Barack Obama get a bump from taking executive action on immigration policy? A new poll from Bloomberg doesn't directly inform on that point, but the change itself gets nearly two-thirds support among likely voters polled. That, however, comes with a couple of huge caveats:
President Barack Obama is winning the opening round in the battle over immigration, according to a Bloomberg poll released today, putting Republicans on the defensive with his decision to end the deportations of some illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children[.]
Sixty-four percent of likely voters surveyed after Obama’s June 15 announcement said they agreed with the policy, while 30 percent said they disagreed. Independents backed the decision by better than a two-to-one margin.
First, the sample document from Bloomberg is conspicuously bare. Not only does it not include any partisan affiliation data (even though Bloomberg promotes the findings among independents), it doesn't have any demographic data at all. It doesn't list what other questions were asked, the order in which they were asked, nor does it speak to any bump in approval for Obama coming from the change in policy. As a polling document, it's useless.
Furthermore, we have other consistent data to check. For instance, Gallup’s tracking polls would have already shown a significant bump in the rolling averages if this issue really moves the needle as Team Obama hopes. As of this morning, Obama’s approval in the three-day cycle that included Friday and the two days following the announcement sits at 46/47. The addition of Sunday’s data added a point to his approval and deducted two from his disapproval, which means Obama got some small bump over the weekend … but hardly a game-changer. The seven-day rolling average on the head-to-head race went from Romney up over Obama 46/45 to a 46/46 tie.
At Rasmussen, there was even less impact. The daily tracking poll on head-to-head matchup showed no change at all yesterday after a weekend where the policy change dominated, with Romney still up 47/44 over Obama. Obama’s approval rating also stayed the same at 46/53 from the day before, which was a drop from Friday’s results of 48/51. Even the SEIU/Daily Kos poll on the election only shows a small bump upward for Obama among the very Hispanic voters this courted, going from 52/32 to 61/32, a move of only nine points … in June … for the one big gimme Obama can produce for this voting bloc.
The effects of this move will be minimal and short term, I argue in my column for The Week today, mainly because immigration isn’t a big issue with most voters, and this change has only a temporary impact. They fired this gun far too early:
If the next jobs report comes back looking weak, the question of adding so many new workers to the mix will begin to get asked by more and more people. That will trump any benefit Obama gets from the rule change, because people are far more interested in jobs and the economy than in immigration reform. This change only provides Obama with a short-term boost and a short-term distraction from the main focus on this election — and it comes about four months too early to help.
Why not wait for October? By then, Rubio’s efforts might have eclipsed Obama’s opportunity. But then again, given Republican skepticism about approaching normalization policy ahead of border security, the risk seems rather low. Romney adviser John Sununu argued in The Boston Globe that the White House is on the verge of panic over its inability to deal with the economy and Romney, and that panic has now begun to drive Obama’s policy decisions. In this case, it not only drove the decision but also the timing, and stripped Obama of yet another potential game-changer down the stretch of the general election. By October, the economy will have buried this moment along with Obama’s gay-marriage evolution to ancient and only slightly curious factoids of political history.
Charles Krauthammer is correct to praise Romney for bypassing the fight over the immigration policy change:
“This is essentially a punt and I think Romney is wise to do it,” Krauthammer said. “First of all, this isn’t a presidential issue — it’s a congressional issue. This is an almost unprecedented grab of power by the executive from the Congress by essentially saying it’s not going to enforce a law. And I think it’s the Congress that ought to protest, and ought to be offended at the least — including Democrats in Congress — over appropriation of their power by the executive.”
But he also said the battle is a no-win scenario for Romney because it shifts the discussion, and had Romney attempted to take it on in his “Face the Nation” interview on Sunday, it might have backfired.
“But as to the politics of this, for Romney it’s a losing proposition to get in a fight,” Krauthammer said. “There is a clever trap by Obama. It’s a way to lure, first of all, Romney away from talking about the main issue — economics. Any day that Romney is talking about anything other than economics is a day Obama wins.”
As the polls show, the economy is what moves the needle with voters. The immigration change is just the latest attempt at a distraction, and it’s already falling flat.
I was looking for the internals of this poll this morning and noticed they were nowhere to be found. Always a red flag concerning a polls validity.
Poll question: Do you agree that immigrants brought to America by their parents should not be deported or are you a racist?
I call BS on this poll too.
The city I have lived in all my life, Malden, MA is now 23.4% Non-Citizens. For some reason this is being celebrated as how diverse we are. Here’s how diversity is working. My neighborhood has been an Italian enclave for almost 100 years and we celebrate the Feast of Saint Rocco every August with a three day feast. Haitians “bought” the church the feast was run out of when the Arch-Diocese wrongfully closed it. The new tenants; 90% of which do not live in the city, have made it known that our “Idolitry” offends them. They would like us to move.
They are only fooling themselves.
64% said they would not deport a four-year old valedectorian on the podium crying in their cap and gown, or somesuch...
Morrissey is conflating support for the immigration reform and final voting intentions and concluding that the fact that since overall candidate support hasn’t moved (much) that therefore the polls showing people support Obama’s new immigration policy must be flawed.
His logic is poor. Just because people think Obama is correct on this one policy does not mean that they will shift their voting intentions. I think Obama is right about this, but I will vote for Romney because I don’t think this is the most important issue we face as a nation.
I said it before and I will say it again. Republicans should ask the people of America if they think the children of embezzlers should be allowed to keep the ill-gotten gains of their parents?
I mean, the multimillionaire lifestyle is all they know; they have never had to really work and make a budget and now you want to throw these innocent kids into a lifestyle they simply do not understand. How cruel can the American laws be to these poor 30 year-old “kids.”
Americans were once mopre or less united by a 'dont tread on me' attitude against government authority.
Now the motto is 'what'll you do for me' spoken in a hundred languages, none understanding the other.
And the despots are now secure in their jobs. Everything is going according to plan.
Where the he!! did they take this poll, Brownsville, TX?
Pure, unmitigated bullshit from that freak-of-nature Nanny Bloomberg.
Adios Yankee Doodle
Adios Last great hope of humanity
Adios Shining City Upon a Hill
In a recent column, Dick Morris urges Romney to pick Rubio for VP to offset Emperor Obama’s kiddie amnesty panderploy. (I think I just coined a new word!)
While Morris makes an interesting purely POLITICAL point, he conveniently OVERLOOKS the CONSTITUTIONAL question about Rubio’s eligibility.
Though Rubio has waffled on a few issues lately, I respect his general conservatism, which almost certainly flows from his parents having fled the nightmare of Castro’s Marxist island prison.
But therein lies the problem: Rubio’s PARENTS do not meet the necessary requirement of “natural born” for which Obama is today being challenged in a Florida court. In fact, Larry Klayman, attorney for the DEMOCRAT plaintiff in that case, made a glancing reference to the ineligibility of both Rubio and Bobby Jindal in his presentation to Judge Lewis on 6/18.
Look folks, either we HAVE a Constitution or we DO NOT. If Rubio, the son of parents who fled one form of ONE MAN TYRANNY, offers for or is tapped for VP, will he not be furthering the accelerating destruction of the very document the Founders left us to prevent our becoming a nation of men as opposed to a nation of LAWS, the Constitution being the primary exemplar?
And if the Hispanics here – legally and otherwise – help Obama to a second term on the basis that the rule of law and the Constitution are not important, they have only to look to Cuba to see where THAT will lead. They will have helped turn “here” into “there” and will no longer have a “here” to which to flee the tyranny.
Since it’s becoming increasingly clear that most of the morons on Capitol Hill don’t give a damn about any of these “details”, it appears it’s once again – as ALWAYS — up to “we the people.”
In case you haven’t noticed, we’re in the process of CHOOSING SIDES in America.
Which side are YOU on??
Yep, I agree. The poll about tax cut extension was BS, too..
More BS. We don’t believe a word not one-stinking word.
I call BS on their 64% result. Missing internals could explain the result.
Somehow, I can’t help but think the poll findings would be different if the questions were frame as such:
1. Do you support competing with young, newly legalized immigrants for scarce jobs and in-state college tuition?
2. Do you support the idea competing with newly legalized immigrants for health care under the Affordable Care Act?
3. Do you still favor this change in immigration policy even though there is no definitive way to verify the age of its beneciaries?
Stopping there.
Nothing more needed.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
