WASHINGTON (Breitbart)
- New polling data from Reuters shows a surge in support for a
far-reaching temporary ban on any Muslim entry to the United States.
In
the wake of the terrorist attack in Orlando, 50 percent of likely
voters now support a temporary halt on Muslim entry into the United
States. Just 42 percent of likely voters oppose a temporary ban.
That
suggested policy is a much harder line than the temporary ban on Muslim
immigration, or the long-term ban on immigration from countries with a
history of radical Islam, that have been proposed by GOP candidate
Donald Trump.
The finding represents a 22-point swing since the
beginning of the month. At the end of May, just 40 percent of likely
voters supported a halt, while 54 percent opposed one.
The
Reuters survey, it should be noted, is based on a rolling average over
the last 5 days. Even though Tuesday’s average shows a surge in support
for a ban, most of the interviews on the question were conducted before
the Orlando terrorist attacks. This suggests that support for the ban
will rising over the coming days as more interviews conducted after news
of the attack are included in the rolling average.
In the
survey, voters were asked whether or not they agreed with this
statement: “The United States should temporarily stop all Muslims from
entering the United States.”
Since Reuters first started asking
this question in early May, voter sentiment as been fairly evenly
divided on the proposal. The week before the terrorist attack, however,
public attitudes started to shift against the temporary ban. In addition
to the expected opposition from leading Democrats, many leading
Republicans, including House Speaker Paul Ryan, had argued against a
ban. That trend has been reversed in the wake of the Orlando attack.
In
a campaign speech in the immediate aftermath of the Orlando attack,
presumptive GOP nominee Trump reiterated his call for a temporary ban,
but modified it by saying that immigration should be curbed from
countries with a history is Islamic radicalism.
He also focused
his criticism more directly on the Obama Administration’s lax
enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws. He specifically slammed a
proposal by presumptive Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton to greatly
expand the number of Muslim immigrants admitted into the country.
PolitiFact,
a news site that ordinarily tries to rebuff conservative attacks on the
left, admitted that Clinton’s proposal would dramatically increase the
number of Muslim immigrants and refugees admitted into the US.
Politifact noted, though, that the screening process to accept refugees
ordinarily takes 18-24 months, suggesting that the US would be able to
maintain national security under Clinton’s proposal.
The site did
not mention, however, that the Obama Administration has recently cut
the screening time for refugees from the Middle East to just 3 months.
If
support for an outright temporary ban on all Muslim immigration is
surging, one can imagine voters would overwhelmingly support efforts to
at least increase screening of immigrant hopefuls. Even many of those
voters who oppose a complete ban would likely not support expanding
Muslim immigration in the wake of the Orlando attacks.
British
politician Harold MacMillan was reportedly once asked what could blow
his government’s plans off course. “Events, my dear boy, events,” he is
alleged to have anwered.
The same is true of political campaigns.
No comments:
Post a Comment