From “A closer look at Americans’ views on ICE” by Aaron Blake at CNN Politics: “The White House and Congress have begun what appear to be earnest negotiations over reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the aftermath of Alex Pretti’s killing in Minneapolis…And a couple new surveys conducted both before and after Pretti’s death add some interesting data points to the debate…It’s well-established by now that Americans have largely turned against ICE, with about 6 in 10 disapproving of it and saying it’s gone “too far” or been “too tough.”…But a Fox News poll and a Pew Research Center poll dig a little deeper on a few key points…1. Independents don’t agree with Trump on local police helping ICE..For one, the Fox poll released this week suggests an argument made by Trump and others – that local officials are to blame for the chaos because of their lack of cooperation with ICE – is unlikely to fly with Americans…Trump warned Wednesday that Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey was “playing with fire” by not using local police to enforce federal immigration laws…White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz have “shamefully blocked local and state police from cooperating with ICE, actively inhibiting efforts to arrest violent criminals.”…Vice President JD Vance added last week: “If we have a little cooperation from local and state officials, I think the chaos would go way down in this community.” But Americans aren’t sure this is what’s called for…The Fox poll asked registered voters whether they favored or opposed “requiring local governments to cooperate with ICE.”…Voters were about evenly split, with 49% in favor and 50% opposed. But independents opposed this idea by a wide margin, 64%-34%…(And that’s to say nothing of the fact that Minneapolis police are actually legally barred from doing what Trump wants.)…”
Blake continues, “2. Americans seem to misunderstand the scope of ICE’s actions…There is one aspect of Trump’s messaging that does appear to be breaking through, though…The Fox poll shows a majority of registered voters think that ICE’s actions reflect Trump’s promises to target people with criminal records either “almost always” (29%) or “most of the time” (25%)…That suggests that most Americans think this is indeed mostly about criminals…But it’s not – or at least, not anymore…The most recent data from the Deportation Data Project at the University of California Berkeley shows that the vast majority of non-citizens arrested by ICE had no criminal convictions, as of data through mid-October. (The percentage of non-criminals targeted has generally increased over Trump’s second term.)…Many others had pending charges. But a New York Times analysis last month found that major enforcement operations focused on specific areas tended to key on people who hadn’t even faced charges. In Washington, DC, 84% had never been charged with a crime. That percentage was 57% in Los Angeles; 63% in Massachusetts; and 66% in Illinois…We don’t have data on Minneapolis yet, but it stands to reason that the numbers look somewhat similar there…The difference between Americans’ perception of the immigration crackdown and what the statistics bear out suggests their already- negative opinions of ICE could worsen further…After all, Americans’ support for deportations drops significantly when the person in question hasn’t committed a crime.”
Blake adds, “3. Americans are good with recording ICE; they don’t like ICE wearing masks…Pew, meanwhile, tested how people feel about some of the things they’re seeing from both federal agents and the protesters in Minneapolis…Americans, by and large, seem to be okay with many of the protesters’ tactics. About three-quarters (74%) said it’s acceptable to record video of agents making arrests. And 59% said it’s even okay to share information on where arrests are happening, which protesters often signal through whistles…As for ICE’s tactics, Americans don’t like them as much…Nearly three-quarters (72%) said it’s unacceptable to use a person’s looks or the language they speak as a reason to check their immigration status. (Some videos from Minneapolis show agents mentioning the accent of the person they’re stopping.) And Americans say 61%-38% that it’s unacceptable for immigration agents to wear face covering to hide their identities on the job…The latter issue is one area where Democrats are demanding reform in the current negotiations. Trump and administration officials have said it’s necessary to avoid the agents being doxxed…Expect that to be one of the major flashpoints in this debate.” More here.
Alex Nguyễn reports that “Texas Democrat Flips State Senate District That Trump Won by 17 Points” at Mother Jones: “A Democrat and union leader won a special election on Saturday to represent a Texas state Senate district that Donald Trump carried by 17 points in 2024… GOP Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick called the result, a 57-43 victory for Taylor Rehmet, “a wake-up call for Republicans across Texas” in an early Sunday post on X. Republicans currently hold every statewide elected office in Texas…“Our voters cannot take anything for granted,” Patrick continued, calling out low voter turnout in special elections…Rehmet, an Air Force veteran and the leader of his local machinist’s union, spent $242,174—nearly 10 times less than Wambsganss—according to campaign finance reports reviewed by Fort Worth Report…“It’s clear as day that this disastrous Republican agenda is hurting working families in Texas and across the country, which is why voters in red, blue, and purple districts are putting their faith in candidates like Taylor Rehmet,” Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement. “This overperformance is a warning sign to Republicans across the country.”…According to the Texas Tribune, Patrick gave $300,000 to the campaign of Rehmet’s opponent, Leigh Wambsganss, through his PAC, Texas Senate Leadership Fund. Trump also posted multiple get-out-the-vote messages on behalf of Wambsganss on Truth Social in the days leading up to the election… Rehmet, an Air Force veteran and the leader of his local machinist’s union, spent $242,174—nearly 10 times less than Wambsganss—according to campaign finance reports reviewed by Fort Worth Report… “It’s clear as day that this disastrous Republican agenda is hurting working families in Texas and across the country, which is why voters in red, blue, and purple districts are putting their faith in candidates like Taylor Rehmet,” Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement. “This overperformance is a warning sign to Republicans across the country.” More here.



https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/141/1/499/8314051?login=false
“We estimate that from the mid-2000s to 2022, exposure to the opioid epidemic continuously increased the Republican vote share in House, presidential, and gubernatorial elections. By the 2022 House elections, a one-standard-deviation increase in our measure of exposure led to a 4.5 percentage point increase in the Republican vote share. From 2012 until 2022, this increase in the House vote share translated into Republicans winning additional seats.”
There are arguments one can win in a poll (often with questionable wording) with no context or debate. And then there are arguments one can win in actually contested elections.
(This is apart from the myriad other problems with poll sampling/weighing and national vs local election impact.)
One can ask 10 specific questions that one would assume would mean that people are pro-open borders. People may oppose all tactics required for actual immigration enforcement. But then they will turn and vote for the party that opposes open borders.
It is clear that Democrats are making assumptions and many are actually pushing for the no enforcement at all result.
Democrats are opposed to the expansion of a national police force in charge of interior enforcement and also opposed to local police cooperating in interior immigration enforcement. The message is clear: no interior enforcement.
If Americans think only criminals should be deported and Democrats insist that immigration is not a per se crime, then that should frame every debate. But when the debate is framed this way what happens is mass immigration and then a backlash.
That 59% of the public that thinks it is “okay to share information on where arrests are happening, which protesters often signal through whistles” is a reflection of a generalized breakdown of bipartisan respect for the rule of law.
Activists want to make an analogy (if not a direct comparison) between the Civil War and Civil Rights eras and the open borders goal. But immigration is not slavery. And helping to evade arrest is not civil disobedience.
Seeing helping to evade arrest as a legitimate action only flows from the view that all immigration enforcement is illegitimate.
This is also why doxxing of law enforcement is seen as legitimate when it clearly is problematic.
Sanctuary policy against federal law is also seen as legitimate because of the hyperbolic analogy between slavery and immigration.
The people who during the Civil Rights era called for federal enforcement in the states against racism are now delegitimizing the federal government.
It is only in this context that a slogan such as abolish ICE can reappear and prosper.
Republicans of course don’t care about actual enforcement, as long as political debate ultimately takes place within the framework of being in favor or against immigration can a party with few accomplishments manage to continue distracting public opinion.
The immigration debate mostly motivates white wokes and white reactionaries.
This is how you get white activists killed by Hispanic ICE agents.
Meanwhile the working class is still waiting to see what either party will do about the economy.