New Rasmussen Poll Reveals Silent Majority Approves Of Immigration Ban

Tyler Durden's picture

While vocal, and often violent, disaffected Hillary protesters may get a lot of media attention, a new Rasmussen poll out today reveals that the silent majority of Americans, men and women who don't have time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to work to provide for their families, support Trump's temporary immigration ban from 7 mostly-Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa.  In fact, per the new poll, 57% of likely U.S. voters actually approve of the ban while only 33% were opposed.  

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided.

 

Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and 11% are undecided.

 

This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on visitors from these seven countries.

Immigration Ban

 

Like most issues, support for the immigration ban was heavily split along party lines with 82% of Republicans supporting the executive order versus only 34% of Democrats and 53% of Independents.

The refugee ban is supported by 82% of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Democrats are opposed by a 53% to 34% margin. The numbers are nearly identical for the temporary ban on visas from these seven terrorist-plagued nations.

 

Men and women are in general agreement on both measures. Younger voters are slightly less supportive than their elders are.

 

Blacks oppose both bans more than whites and other majority voters do.

As we pointed out earlier (see "Is A Constitutional Crisis Imminent In The Wake Of Trump's Immigration Ban?"), the ACLU, flush with $24 million in donations from just this weekend alone, has vowed to fight Trump's immigration ban all the way to the Supreme Court on grounds that it targets people of a certain religion, in direct violation of the First Amendment. 

That said, many legal scholars have asserted that Trump's immigration ban will stand up against Constitutional tests, with GWU professor Jonathan Turley saying the ban can't be viewed as a "Muslim ban" given the "vast majority of Muslims around the world are not affected by the limitations placed on these seven countries.”

Still, some observers said the courts ultimately might uphold Trump’s order. Its alleged anti-Muslim thrust “is not clear to me,” said Eugene Volokh, a professor at UCLA School of Law. Judges might interpret the order as targeting people from countries where “jihadist sentiments” are common, he said. The president generally has broad authority to exclude non-citizens from coming into the country, Volokh said.

 

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, predicted the courts would not interpret the order as a religious ban. “It is not on its face a Muslim ban,” he said. “That dog simply won’t hunt. No judge can look at the order and analyze it as a Muslim ban because the vast majority of Muslims around the world are not affected by the limitations placed on these seven countries.”

But while the ACLU is looking for a Supreme Court battle, Trump continues to fight in the court of public opinion, which, at least according to Rasmussen, is a fight he's winning. 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Croesus's picture

Damn right we do.

Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

Why are we letting these people in????  Its not as if they are coming here to become Americans, in the 1776 sense of the word.  They just want to haul their lifestyle over here, and inflict it upon the rest of us.  Sharia law is inconsistent with Liberty and Freedom.  If thats what they want, they can stay in the shithole from which they came.

localsavage's picture

They want to join the free shit Army and the snowflakes want to let them.

FreezeThese's picture
FreezeThese (not verified) localsavage Jan 30, 2017 9:40 PM

Wtf good is a poll last week tho

philipat's picture

The Dems are working very hard to make themselves unelectable so let them get on with it....

DownWithYogaPants's picture

These protests / riots are quite obviously being funded by Darth Soros.   I think the IRS needs to pay him a visit.  I suspect he's deducting the costs of this political activity off of his taxes as a "charity" / donation

mofreedom's picture

But why is it every time Schmucky's vagina bleeds that the REPUBES have to feel its pain?

Send the spineless hairballs back crying to mothers twat.

Why do we have a McClown still?

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) mofreedom Jan 30, 2017 9:53 PM

And the left still wonders why Trump won.

Death by a thousand cuts, to themselves every time they attack the man who wants to actually fix things for all of us.

FreedomGuy's picture

You know how would be shocked by this poll? The same people who said Hillary would win in a landslide.

847328_3527's picture

Woof Shitzer still talks in his sleep saying Trump has less then a 1.7% chance of winning.

lol

readyforit's picture

.. now known as the "fuck you Army"

Whoa Dammit's picture

Why is it not a big deal that thousands of American citizens missed flights because of the paid protestors ? Where are the MSM sob stories about that ? I'm sure there are a few.

Mr Pink's picture

It is ok for Americans to be inconvenienced but Muzzies? It's war!

Jack Napier's picture

Probably because the organized leaders of the protests and the MSM are paid by the same people.

813kml's picture

I think that most would rather stay home if Uncle Scam hadn't been bombing the fuck out of their homelands for the last 15 years...

Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

I am all for stopping the bombing.  Its not as if its made us any safer.  Why/When did liberal democrats become warmongers BTW??  Funny how all of those anti-war liberals were silenced when Obama got into office.  So much for being anti-war.

chiquita's picture

You would think that the liberals would make the connection--if the damned war ended as Obama had promised or if he and Hillary as Sec/State had done a better job of negotiating things over there, we wouldn't be dealing with this refugee crisis or the need to ban these people looking for a place to go.  The US wasn't the only country bombing over there, but under Obama, we did a huge amount of damage.  Where were these bleeding hearts then?  Where was that Cindy Sheehan woman that was so ubiquitous with her anti-war protesting during the Bush administration?  Did Obama send her on an 8 year vacation?

847328_3527's picture

the Libtards and media have not said squat who started this entire shitdstorm...Bush-Obama and Hillary who have been murdering innocent people over there for 15 years.

Where's the outrage?

That's one more reason the actual number of protesters is relatively small but vocal. Most people see the hypocrisy and support Trump.

All their protests cannot supplant common sense.

chubbar's picture

The stupid cocksuckers on the left have not yet figured out what their actions do. When these fuckers shout down conservatives, when they threaten them or intimidate them or beat them down, THEY DON'T ACTUALLY CHANGE ANYONES MIND.

All they do is strengthen the resolve of the people who are smart enough to stay silent when they know that their opinions fall on deaf ears. That is why the polls were wrong and unable to correctly measure the people who were going to vote for Trump. It's also the reason they are failing to understand how many people are supporting Trump and everything he's been doing since he took office.

Fuck these little snowflake cunts and the main stream media who are supporting them. They still aren't going to change anything, fucktards.

Trump just fired that little bitch who decided that the rule of law be damned, it is really just about how she feels the law should be enforced. Good for Trump, fire the rest of those pantywaists.

SoDamnMad's picture

An awful lot of damage has already been done by Obama with little of no vetting of many he allowed in. What really pissed me off was Obama denied Christians (and those similar like Yazidi) who were most at risk while favoring Muslims.  That was a sort of uncomprehensible discrimination. 

balolalo's picture

FUCK THE POLLS

LOVE THE POLLS

FUCK THE POLLS

LOVE THE POLLS

rinse. repeat.

 

 

lil dirtball's picture

>they actually go to work to provide for their families

Farcical. They go to work for the merchants to provide for the merchants and useless .gov 'workers'. The fact that they are allowed to keep a few shekels for themselves is moot outside of allowing them to eat and buy fake piss for their urine tests.

And - every day they 'go to work' is a another day this swirling bowl gets perpetuated. If they merely stayed home with the other 95M 'unemployed' and did nothing but for themselves, this shitshow would come to a grinding halt in days and real negotiations for change could be had, starting with telling them to fuck their 'Privacy Statements' and ending the complete saturation of surveillance of the domestic population.

But no, lets place our bets on an unscrupulous Orange Julius FTW - on poor odds, no less - instead of actually doing it ourselves.

~

"It's propaganda. It softens your brain while you read."

"Mmmm ... sounds sublime."

"You're soaking in it!"

Normalcy Bias's picture

WHAT?! The Silent Majority supports not admitting immigrants that can't be vetted from highly terrorist-active countries?!

Why, they're a bunch of RAYCISS XENOPHOBES! They probably hate puppies, too!

Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

STOP USING COMMON SENSE ON ME!!!

847328_3527's picture

"common sense"?

...sounds racist!

Where's my teddy bear?!

HRH Feant's picture
HRH Feant (not verified) Croesus Jan 30, 2017 10:02 PM

Yes, we do support banning both Muslims and unscreened refugees. Our own government officials told us last year that they were unable to fully screen applicants! Evidence of the incompetence of the UNHCR has been growing in Europe for years and the result in Europe, and the US, is nothing but more killing sprees by gun or by IED or by a vehicle.

People are waking up to the reality that the government has not been doing jack fucking shit to protect us for decades! This is all about the different hands sucking off the DC tits to see what they get while the only thing the common person gets is a fucking tax bill from the goddamned IRS and a go-to-hell-fuck-off-and-die letter if they miss one mortgage payment or one property tax bill!

People are fed up. I don't know anyone that has time to go protest in a city: one the parking fees cost a fortune. Two, they can't afford to take off time from work or their business to just hang out on the fucking street for hours and cause trouble. Three, they have to do everything from make dinner to laundry to grocery shopping along with trying to sleep at least 4 hours a night.

Fuck the goddamned commie leftists. I am sick to fucking death of them and their bullshit protests. Get a job. Get a life. And don't tell me I have to pay for your bullshit fucking fantasies of kumbaya bullshit with my tax dollars.

Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

+1000!!  I too am sick of the so called "do-gooder" liberal.  If you want to pay for some lame ass to sit on his fat ass, then open up your own damn wallet and stay out of mine.

chiquita's picture

Not all these immigrants just sit on their asses, collect welfare, or get H1-Bs so they can get tech jobs...  I've had a bunch of people tell me about how our government hands out money in some form of multi-year subsidy to immigrants who open small businesses, such as your corner 7-11/mini mart, Subway, gas station, or Burger King/Wendys/etc.  These subsidies or whatever they are have a time limit, but the deal is the holder signs it and the business over to a relative that comes over so it stays in the family and they keep doing that as long as the business is viable.  If you go anywhere in parts of the Eastern US, all the mini-marts are owned by Indians.  Most of the gas stations in South Jersey are owned by Sihks.  I don't eat fast food, but I found it questionable when the local Burger King near where I used to live was bought out by Indians--aren't cows sacred?  Apparently these subsidy deals are not available to native born Americans--or at least this was how it was explained to me, which seems like something that should be looked into by the new administration.  Could be its something the government subsidizes that costs the business owner something up front and it's too costly for the average small investor.  Some of these immigrants come over with pooled funding so they can afford it.  Then once they have their businesses up and running, they can keep it going with their own cheap labor and they can keep the subsidy going by shifting the ownership.  I'm sure someone here would know what this is.  Never sounded fair to me or anyone discussing it.

GUS100CORRINA's picture

ACLU is a GOD hating Communist Organization full of DESPOTS with a REPROBATE MIND. 

These people are a CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER to the Sovereignty of the USA.

They need to be dismantled how ever that occurs. What American in their right mind can give one penny to this corrupt, GOD Hating and immoral organization.

Below is supporting text.

 ========

THE ACLU'S SHOCKING LEGACY

Published: 08/25/2005 at 1:00 AM

Editor’s note: Be sure to get your copy of Alan Sears’ powerful new book, “The ACLU vs. America: Exposing the Agenda to Redefine Moral Values.” 

One of the great myths of the 20th – and now 21st – century is the belief that the American Civil Liberties Union was an organization that had a noble beginning, but somehow strayed off course.

That myth is untrue. The ACLU set a course to destroy America – her freedom and her values – right from the start. 

From its very beginning, the ACLU had strong socialist and communist ties. As early as 1931, the U.S. Congress was alarmed by the ACLU’s devotion to communism. A report by the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities stated

The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly, but it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect the communists.

Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman founded the ACLU in 1920 along with three other organizations dedicated to the most leftist of causes. The histories of these two individuals belie their claims of patriotism and respect for the Constitution.

Baldwin openly sought the utter destruction of American society. Fifteen years after the founding of the ACLU, Baldwin wrote:

I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself … I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.

Earl Browder, the general secretary of the Communist Party of the United States, admitted that the ACLU served as a “transmission belt” for the party. Baldwin agreed, claiming, “I don’t regret being a part of the communist tactic which increased the effectiveness of a good cause.”

Baldwin was a devoted follower of the anarchist Emma Goldman (or “Red Emma” as she was called), who was eventually deported to the Soviet Union in 1919 for her communist activities. Goldman was a consistent promoter of anarchism, radical education, “free love” and birth control. According to an online exhibit of Goldman’s papers, her career “served as inspiration for Roger Baldwin, a future founder of the American Civil Liberties Union.”

Eastman was a zealous feminist, an anti-war activist, and a great admirer of the Soviet revolution. Of her many leftist friends and associates, Eastman held the highest regard for Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. According to Eastman, “We [feminists] must all be followers of Margaret Sanger.”

Of course, Sanger was a passionate advocate of eugenics – the attempt to improve the human race through selective breeding. Abortion was a primary means to this “improvement,” leading Sanger to write, “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

Baldwin also was a great admirer of the Planned Parenthood founder. He heaped praise on Sanger: “She was a frail, beautiful, unassuming woman … She always had a quiet insistence on the rightness of what she was doing.”

This adoration of Sanger set the tone for the tragic history of the ACLU concerning the issue of abortion. To this day, the group fights for the most extreme of pro-abortion positions, including support for partial-birth abortion and opposition to parental consent for minors.

But the radical agenda hardly ends there. In his wedding vows, Baldwin called marriage as between one man and one woman “a grim mockery of essential freedom.” He added, “The highest relationship between a man and a woman is that which welcomes and understands each other’s loves.”

The result is that today the ACLU is a leading advocate of same-sex “marriage,” and has expressed support for polygamy and polyamory (“open” marriage) as well. The ACLU Policy Guide reads:

The ACLU believes that criminal and civil laws prohibiting or penalizing the practice of plural marriage [polygamy or polyamory] violate constitutional protections of freedom of expression and association, freedom of religion, and privacy for personal relationships among consenting adults.

 

 

While many accept the ACLU as a mainstream organization, their history tells a drastically different story. Organizations such as the Alliance Defense Fund are dedicated to exposing the myth that the ACLU is working hard for the First Amendment rights of Americans. Instead of being an organization that simply took a “wrong turn,” the ACLU has devoted itself from the very beginning to the devastation of America’s most cherished traditions, values, and laws.

Son of Loki's picture

I'm so sore from celebrating...win after win as the left wingers go nuts. The DNC can't keep up with Trump.

As soon as Sessions get in they'll be a few hundred ovacant positions in the doj and more job creation for American patriots ...

 

Yes we can!

LetThemEatRand's picture

We support it because it is common sense.  

IridiumRebel's picture

In the 19th Century we needed to populate a continent. Now we do not.
Vet them. Make it tough. Earn your entry.

balolalo's picture

HOW ABOUT???

for every immigrant we take in....

two meth head white boys from west virginia, tennessee or texas must go.

earn your keep.

Uncle Sugar's picture

Big Black Joe knows the deal - good video

Unstable Condition's picture

Easy, drug test for govt handouts. They'll take care of themselves.

Or better yet, anyone who takes govt handouts, including corporations, lose their right to vote or donate to political campaigns for conflict of interest.

chiquita's picture

Maybe we should include taking the right to vote from anyone who goes to work for the government--that's kind of a conflict of interest in a way.  Or maybe put a finer point on it to be if you are employed by the government and you donate to any political party.  I think government employees should be independent or neutral.  At least keep their voting preferences private (like they should be in the workplace).

IridiumRebel's picture

As a recovering alcoholic/drug addict ten years sober you can fuck right off with that shit. Both work the system and take funds but one was born here and has a natural right to stay. I'm all for people becoming naturalized. That's why we must secure the border; more so to keep drugs and drug dealers out.

250/252 suicide bombings in 2015 were Islamic terrorists. Tennessee meth boy only really damages himself. A terror cell causes major damage in many forms.

LyLo's picture

"Blacks oppose both bans more than whites and other majority voters do."

Whites and other majority voters.  OTHER MAJORITY VOTERS.

Did I miss a memo?

tarabel's picture

 

 

Of course they do-- they're the heart of the Democratic coalition. Has nothing to do with them being black but with being Democrats.

But I'll bet they support it less than the other more-insane groups within the Democratic mob (not coalition).

 

billwilson2's picture

More fake news.

Spread fear, more fear and more fear .. and people will react with fear.

 

 

stant's picture

Silent majority is armed to the teeth, expecting a fight

Winston Churchill's picture

Going to get it as well,just make sure you're not just an armchair warrior against the snowflakes.

stant's picture

Not looking forward to it, starvation kills the most

Dr. Bonzo's picture

Is there anything less controversial than a country has laws and has a right to enforce its laws as it sees fit? After 8-years of the Great Black Hope wiping his posterior with the Constitution I suppose a lot of wishful-thinking progressives thought the rest of us were going to quietly drop our heads in resignation and let them continue to do as they please.

Happy to disappoint.

TalkToLind's picture

What is wrong with you goyim? So what if your cities gets trashed. So what if your wives and daughters get raped. So what if OTR trucks are hijacked and their merchandise looted. You are going to like the idea of an invading force of refugees flowing into your country because that's what the TEEVEE told you to do!