Poll: Voters oppose abolishing ICE
Source: Politico
A new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll shows that most voters oppose eliminating Immigration and Customs Enforcement the homeland security agency some liberal Democrats have called for abolishing.
Only 1 in 4 voters in the poll, 25 percent, believe the federal government should get rid of ICE. The majority, 54 percent, think the government should keep ICE. Twenty-one percent of voters are undecided.
But a plurality of Democratic voters do support abolishing ICE, the poll shows. Among Democrats, 43 percent say the government should get rid of ICE, while only 34 percent say it should keep ICE. Majorities of Republicans (79 percent) and independents (54 percent) want the government to keep ICE.
Calls to abolish ICE have been amplified over the past two weeks since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a liberal challenger, defeated House Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley in a Democratic primary for Crowleys New York City-based seat. Ocasio-Cortez campaigned on the issue, and has said that ICE represents the draconian enforcement that has happened since 2003 that routinely violates our civil rights, because, frankly, it was designed with that structure in mind.
Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/11/immigration-ice-abolish-poll-708703
ck4829
(35,094 posts)raging moderate
(4,311 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 11, 2018, 06:03 PM - Edit history (1)
Many Americans think that people who want to abolish ICE are trying to make the US borders be totally open. They think that abolishing ICE would mean abolishing national borders. There is a fundamental misunderstanding here, being fanned by right-wing propaganda sources. There are people who would support a more moderate border patrol acting with better discretion, self-control, and adherence to the US Constitution, if we can overwhelm the propaganda sources, to convince them that we do support some sort of control over our borders. I certainly do. I don't want the psychopaths who are chasing refugees to be able to pursue them across the border to murder them somewhere in the US. Actually, I can imagine that there could be a legitimate role for something like ICE, IF they were reined in considerably, restructured and retrained, and possibly with some changes in management and personnel. Maybe they could keep the name, if that would satisfy some of the loonies.
FSogol
(45,555 posts)It can be broken back into better working parts.
lancelyons
(988 posts)I agree.. thats the misunderstanding out there. However democrats need to be careful.
Abolishing ICE by itself should not be the message. It should be changing ICE into what they where meant to do. Go after terrorists and not be the personal army of Trump / GOP to go after immigrants.
Pelosi also needs to stop talking about other democrats as inconsequential.
"In an interview with Rolling Stone published Sunday, Pelosi said those calling for a new generation of leadership, such as Ryan and Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Massachusetts, were "inconsequential," adding that "they don't have a following in our caucus. None."
if she cant unite she needs to shut her trap.. this is some of our own problems. We argue and divide on small things like the word democratic or democrat in describing our party.
The GOP stays together on a pedophile.
We have to get better at his or we will lose our country.
MichMan
(11,999 posts)We can talk all we want about it the role of ICE vs the Border Patrol and that it needs to be reformed not abolished. Most people see images of protesters with "Abolish ICE" banners and come up with their own conclusions
DeminPennswoods
(15,290 posts)until they did.
Renew Deal
(81,883 posts)So most people think that it means getting rid of them with no replacement equaling more crime. Thats why the Abolish ICE position doesnt work. Its the same reason republicans said they wanted to repeal and replace. Repealing alone is a bad idea and people dont support it.
Response to brooklynite (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
FSogol
(45,555 posts)brooklynite
(94,792 posts)FSogol
(45,555 posts)brooklynite
(94,792 posts)Your sarcasm points to you opposition of separating children and parents. My question is: how will eliminating ICE address this situation, since it derives from the leadership in the White House, not from ICE or any angency that might replace it.
FSogol
(45,555 posts)It requires some major revamping, but that will have to start with removing Trumpy, Sessions, and company.
Abolishing ICE is a simplistic and loser of an issue for us.
Vinca
(50,318 posts)We should promote changing the policies behind ICE instead.