A MAJORITY of Americans now agree with banning all non-citizen Muslims from the United States, according to a new poll coming less than four months after Donald Trump first proposed the policy.
A YouGov/Huffington Post poll published this week found that 51 percent of Americans now support the ban, up from 45 percent in December. The same poll also found strong support for Sen. Ted Cruz’s proposal to “patrol and secure” Muslim neighborhoods, with 45 percent of Americans in favor.
The poll was conducted through web interviews with 1,000 Americans from YouGov’s “opt-in internet panel using sample matching” and “weighted using propensity scores based on gender, age, race, education, political ideology, geographic region, and voter registration.” (YouGov has also conducted polls for the New York Times and CBS; high-profile statistician Nate Silver has written about its methodology here.)
The rhetoric about Muslims and undocumented immigrants during this election cycle has raised fears of an increasingly toxic political culture in the country. Throughout the election campaign, Republican politicians have expressed openly bigoted views about minority communities in the United States, in many cases to widespread public approval. Trump’s campaign kicked off with his characterization of undocumented Mexican immigrants as “rapists,” and has seemingly gained steam with every discriminatory remark made since.
While opinions on these issues often split along partisan lines, a majority of Americans now support policies like Trump’s, which would be both unconstitutional and discriminatory. Exit polling in some states shows nearly 80 percent of GOP primary voters in support of Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from the United States. Whether or not Trump is elected and able to implement the ban, such figures are a troubling reflection of what policies Americans would countenance if offered the chance.
“Even if Trump loses, we still lose,” says Haroon Moghul, a fellow at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. “He’s pulled much of America beyond the Constitution, and made it OK to advocate for bigotry again. He didn’t create this, but he’s taking years of hateful rhetoric to their inevitable conclusion.”
“Eight years ago, we congratulated ourselves on how we were allegedly the only country that could elect an Obama. Now we’re a country that would’ve banned his father from entering the country.”
Top photo: Donald Trump, left, accepts his Muhammad Ali award from Ali at Muhammad Ali’s Celebrity Fight Night XIII in Phoenix, Ariz., March 24, 2007.
Read your article…. It is important to note that the survey results are based on those Americans who are not familiar with Islam. Some other surveys conducted by the same org shows the following results:
Do you personally happen to work with anyone who is Muslim? Yes = 16%, No = 74%, Not sure = 10%
Do you personally happen to have any friends who are Muslim? Yes = 23%, No = 68%, Not sure = 9%
Have you ever been inside a mosque? Yes = 10%, No = 87%, Not sure = 3%
You’re a lying ignorant fool to say that a temp ban on Muslim immigration is unconstitutional. notable law professor — Jan C. Ting of Temple University:
“No kind of immigration restriction is unconstitutional,” Ting told TheDC. “The U.S. government can exclude a foreign national on any basis.”
Foreigners, who are not on American soil, do not have constitutional rights. The courts have upheld this view for over 100 years.
“The statutes are clear: immigration is different from all other aspects of the law,” Ting said. “The Supreme Court has ruled we can enact laws against foreign nationals that would not be permissible to apply to citizens. The courts historically have no role in these decisions.”
A temp ban on Muslims is not racist: 1.) Muslim is not a race. 2.) Muslim’s are a threat to our national security and it is just as constitutionally legal to temporarily ban them (Trump) as it is to admit 100,000 of them into the United States before your term ends (Obama).
Even if it was “racist” it would still be constitutionally legal. Stop spreading lies.
That assertion that most Americans would be in favour of a ban of muslims from the USA is certainly a lie because if it were true, it would mean that most Americans, instead of electing him as their president, would have banned Barack Hussein Obama whose first name is from a muslim origin and whose first school was a coranic school ( madrassa) in Djakarta when he was a child . That assertion is a lie .
Hussain, you are such a liar!
March 29, 2016 – 01:49 PM EDT from THE HILL
Poll: Majority of Republicans support path to citizenship
What a load of bull. Why are spreading these lies and frightening poeple?? Did you run out of issues to report on accurately so you decided to dream up this garbage?? Everyone should just Google the polls on American opinion on Muslims in America and you find that this writer is a liar. The majority of Americans do support the Muslims in America. There is enough fear and hatred here, there is no need to create it. Shame on you Hussain!
The real enemy for this majority is their brain- the enemy within.
Do NOT show a photo of the great Muhammad Ali with Trump. They could be more opposite. This is as poor an example of editing I’ve ever seen.
Ali has come out SPECIFICALLY against Trump. Shame on Intercept.
Did Pierre Omidyar give you a nice bonus for writing this Murtaza? I can understand why. Gotta keep those ebay labor costs nice and low. Making immigration into a civil rights issue instead of an economic warfare is the smartest thing the establishment has done. The NYT article on the effects of Arizona’s maligned immigration laws shows what happens when you limit it. Wages at the bottom rise. Public sector costs go down. But you never hear about this. This is 100% corporate propaganda.
Well, yes, that is the idea, at least in a symbolic if not retroactive way.
Beyond that, there’s the question of the Establishment Clause. Sure, U.S. immigration law has, in the past, banned entry to people with certain medical, political or criminal histories. It has banned Communists, homosexuals, felons and whatnot; it has set immigration quotas by nationality or ethnicity in the past. But a religious test? That would be something new, and probably won’t survive a court review.
Obama’s father was not a very good man. Why take in potential scoundrels? What about Denmark now? They are in the process of passing a bill nicknamed “fit in or get out”. You are in a way a fine example of a liberal sexist who looks the other way when women in Europe are raped! Your article is dishonest, misleading and even rather dangerous. Wake up man.
I wonder what would have happened had the American Indians passed a “fit in or get out” bill when they started to see aliens coming on their shores and taking away their land!
Yes, they might still be thriving. Is this really your argument AGAINST passing such a bill? We might fare differently than the Native Americans? Hilarious.
I think we should draw a small but significant distinction between banning immigration of all Muslims vs. banning immigration of Muslims from Muslim countries. Because if someone is well integrated in Sweden or Germany, has been raised in accordance with the idea that it’s legal for people to draw Muhammad cartoons without going to jail (or worse), that’s a different situation from someone who grew up watching people get stoned for adultery.
What about visitors to the U.S.? Would they be allowed? If so, don’t you think they pose the same threat as those who want to immigrate?
And how would you define a Muslim country?
Would it be based on the population of Muslims or its constitution being Islamic or secular?
If population, would you then allow Muslims from India, knowing that while its population is mostly non-Muslim, its Muslim population is greater than most Muslim countries — perhaps third largest Muslim population in the world?
If by constitution, then Bangladesh is officially a secular country. Would the Bangladeshi Muslims be allowed in?
How would you determine if a Muslim has been integrated?
Would you have a list of questions that a Muslim would have to answer? Show us your complete list of questions?
Would those questions be asked of every Muslim wishing to visit/immigrate to the U.S., or everyone (non-Muslims included)?
How would you determine if a person is Muslim? Would you ask every potential visitor and immigrant from the non-Muslim countries if they are Muslim, or would you force other non-Muslim countries to keep a database of who’s a Muslim and share it with the U.S.?
Or, would you force the non-Muslim countries to indicate if a person is a Muslim on their passports, like some Muslim countries do?
If so, how would it be any different than what some Muslim countries do?
How would you know if a person is lying about their religion or lying in the questionnaire I have asked you to prepare to determine if a person is a Muslim and has been integrated?
And what about non-Muslims from Muslim countries wanting to visit/immigrate to, the U.S.? Would they be allowed to come to the U.S.? How would you know for sure they are non-Muslims?
I love it!!! you ask the questions I like to ask when I see large amounts ofBS.
“someone who grew up watching people get stoned for adultery.”
Are you aware that only two “Muslim” countries practice such punishment? And I suspect that not all those citizens are in favor of those practices.
For goodness sake’s at least get your facts straight. Trump prudently is suggesting that we take a break on Muslim immigration until we can determine which are and which are not hostile to the USA. Do you let everyone who comes to your door come in? If not then you are just as bad as Trump! This is so adolescent I am a amazed that a published writer is so short sighted. Do you want America to be challenged as Sweden now is?
And Sweden is challenged how?
Holy cow! You should really educate yourself before you post, Robert Roy. Try to read the news for once.
This is a great idea, but is inconsistently applied and politicized.
Thousands of Americans are killed in gun violence every year. In many cases, more than one person is killed, which may be classified as mass murders.
Americans killed by those who call themselves Muslims are a very small percentage of the murders that take place in the U.S. every year.
Using Trump’s logic, ALL guns must be outlawed until the Congress can figure out why there’s so much gun violence in the U.S.
Using Cruz’s logic, ALL neighborhoods must be patrolled to make sure no one is killing anyone using a gun.
Why is a life taken by a Muslim more sacred than the life taken by a non-Muslim?
Every life is sacred, and killing one person is akin to killing the entire humanity as we all have the same essence.
The sadness and outrage over a non-Muslim killing another human being should be the same as the outrage over a Muslim killing another human being, and should get the same amount of coverage in the media and outrage by the leaders.
Suddenly, without warning, America’s political system has morphed into three major parties: the Trumpists, the Berners and the Wall Streetians. At last, more choices!
Public opinion has become so mighty a regulator of conduct, not because it has grown wiser, but because of the greater ease of ascertaining, focusing, and directing it. There is nothing to indicate a gain in intelligence at all answering to its enlargement of authority. Now, as ever, the judgments the average man passes upon the conduct of his fellow are casual, inconsistent, and thoughtless. Edward A Ross, 1907.
THERE’S A MUSLIM UNDER YOUR BED!!!
If the douche nozzle occupying the White House actually gave a damn about America and Americans and if he weren’t so interested in his “legacy” of being the Muslim that toppled America…we would not need to worry about Islam and Sharia law coming to America but the more “We The People” resist the more he doubles down on his Muslim B.S. the guy was never and never will be capable of being the President of the United States…
There have been 3,380 deaths by terrorists in America since 9-11, which includes those lost in the attack. There have been over 408,000 deaths by guns during the same time frame. You are over 1,000 times more likely to get killed by an American with a gun that a terrorist running amok. We can’t talk about gun control because the NRA has people in this country so afraid of ISIS that they think arming every person in this country will make us safer. I grew up hunting and still own guns, but I don’t think we should keep allowing everyone in this country to own them is a good idea. There needs to be an intelligent discussion about gun control, which will never happen because too many wanna be thugs/cowboys still can’t grow up.
American Muslims should be protected, but they should also take the initiative to lead the charge to defang Islam instead of just lying about Islam being peaceful.
The entire theme of Islamic theology is violent. When you lie to us about this fact and Mohammed’s war mongering, then you lose all credibility. Americans may have short attention spans, but we can read your scriptures for ourselves now.
We know when you’re lying, and you’ve been lying to use about Islam for the last 1400 years.
Well, when I read the bible, I wouldn’t say that the christian theology is any less violent. And BTW just as in christianity, there are many different schools and branches in Islam so it’s highly insulting that u condemn all muslims.
The Muslims cannot lie about Islam because the sources (of varying degrees of authenticity) it is based upon are available everywhere. We are not hiding anything and it is impossible to hide the sources.
Muslims’ actions are also well-known and we are not doing anything in secret.
The religion of Islam has a single primary source, the Quran, which sets its framework.
And it’s widely available throughout the world in its original Arabic language and translations in a lot of languages.
When Islam’s primary source is examined within the context of its own text, it becomes clear that its ultimate objective is peace through unity and integration with the Cosmic Consciousness (aka God) that encompasses and permeates all existence.
Warfare is allowed in the Quran under very strict conditions: It must be in self-defense in response to an attack and must not exceed the normal and well-accepted bounds.
Islamic Law adds conditions, such as the presence of a just ruler, and only a just ruler can declare war after consultation with people’s representatives, which is akin to U.S. Congress authorizing a war.
Muslims have acted in very diverse ways throughout history.
But since we have the Quran as The Criterion to determine if an action is Islamic or not, it’s not that difficult to critically examine a Muslim’s action and see if it is Islamic or un-Islamic.
Judging by the Quran, we know that there have been Muslims who have acted against the Quran so we can easily state that they carried out un-Islamic actions.
Islam is not monolithic and has many currents within it.
Some are bad to evil, the rest are from fair to good to excellent.
The excellent ones are those that focus of grooming the self so that it reflects the higher consciousness, whose qualities include selflessness, generosity, humility, forgiveness, love, peace, justice, not doing to others what one doesn’t want done unto one, lack of desire for power and control, detachment from the transience, etc.
So you are basically saying that all Muslims should interpret their religion they way you do….in your bigoted, biased , Muslim hating way. Excellent plan. Now go play with your Donald Trump blowup doll.
“This is a message from [Prophet] Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion [in religion] is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.
No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.
If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.
Their Churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.
No one of the nation (of Muslims) is to disobey this covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).”
Thank you!!
Wow! Your country is going to hell in a handbasket! Leaders of the Free World, eh?
Love from Down Under
Josef Stalin said “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.” And who knows if he ever really said it, but you get the point.
Those who answer the poll related questions decide nothing. Those that develop the questions asked during the polls and select who is questioned decide everything.
Even if this poll really does reflect the feelings of the masses, and 51% means 49% do not see it that way, we would be naive to not consider that decades of fear mongering propaganda that calls for us to make sure we look under our covers every night for a Muslim may have biased public opinion. The bias is of great benefit to those that would have us focus on anything but the real enemy we face, those that have purchased our government and media along with everything which comes with the buy.
To make the fear the Muslim obsession a real winner for the fear and war mongering benefactors their toadied media as clearly instructed never delves into the root cause of the terror problem, just like the British never did relating to whom they felt was a terrorist in George Washington and his men.
Our citizenry is blinded to the number of Middle Eastern democracies we have covertly over thrown and inserted in their place the cruelest of depots. We are blinded to the real destruction of the nation’s we have practically bombed and continue to bomb into oblivion. Our compliant media as instructed softens the harsh reality with assuaging terms like collateral damage.
When Madeleine Albright said “although regrettable it was worth it in that our sanctions in Iraq resulted in the deaths of 500,000 children” she made it clear what kind of a nation we have really become. If you lined up those 500,000 children holding their hands together just before they died their innocent faces would stretch out for 284 miles, and if they happened to be lined up on an American freeway it would take over 4.7 hours to pass by all of them, that is what we have become.
May be Democrats, Black Americans, White Americans, Hispanic Americans and every minority who are American voters will wake up when they see or actually are conscious that money for free housing, free healthcare, free education and every other public assistance program for illegal aliens, is coming out of their paycheck. At this point Americans, away from the Southern border don’t think they will be ever impacted financially…but in actual fact, through illegal parents, children, that almost everything for illegal aliens is all FREE!
Building a wall that is recognized around the Vatican, or the West bank in Israel or the 13 thousand mile wall in China has helped societies to exclude unfriendly entities; then surprisingly Saudi Arabia is itself building the colossal wall against any invasion. This is the same with the WALL that Donald Trump needs to stretch for a thousand miles, ending the illegal alien invaders easy access to our country, bring to in paramount quantities–drugs. For over 30 years we have been given the usual lip service, from the political parties about putting in a fence? What have got ‘Business as Usual” which means nothing–NOTHING? The political parties don’t even seen care, even though are spending other peoples money. The mind cannot even touch the amount of money spent on illegal immigrants/migrants, but its eating away at our taxes, social security and the those within our country who live below the poverty line.
The frontier, the delineation line doesn’t even exist, as I have driven to the Arizona side and in many sectors, just miles of open border where anybody or groups of people can move. On main highways are giant signs telling people not to venture into the wilderness areas as inhabited by drug caravans. You cannot stop as the drug cartels have taken over OUR LAND. Can there be anything more disgraceful. There are huge warehouses where the US Border Patrol have interdicted cases of narcotics, waiting to be destroyed.
And the drug keeps coming in and there are only 15.000 US Border Patrol agents to safeguard our country from the drugs, illegal aliens, and today terrorists assisted by gangs. Even the police departments in such counties as Maricopa have limited resources, to fight growing menace to our sovereign nation.
Just remember that the only nominee for president, who will build the thousand mile wall, is Donald Trump. Cruz has promised but his Special interests who have paid for his campaign, is not going to allow him that opportunity. Whatever Cruz has promised is not going to happen and that goes for John Hasick, Hillary Clinton, or Bernie Sanders. The majority of the promises that they have offered will fade away like mist. There wealthy donors would never allow them to place a wall, not even more fencing at the Southern border. There is a huge demand for cheap labor or illegal Democratic voters.
Many employers have been all too quick to trade-in American workers for cheap foreign substitutes. It’s about time American businesses reinvest in the country and the people that made them cost-effective. The American Jobs First Act uses a variety of approaches to make it less alluring to abandon Americans. For example, the legislation cracks down on the often abused H-1B visa system by requiring employers to pay foreign workers higher wages than their American equivalents. This takes the “cheap” out of cheap foreign labor, and ensures the system works as initially intended.
Under any of the final nominees in the Presidency–NOTHING will be done to stop the illegal alien’s incursion into our country as corporate and manufacturing demand cheap labor. Cruz cannot be excused for not capping H1-B visas, so Americans must give up their jobs to professional foreigners so the Businesses people can make more profits and drop wages across this nation. Both GOP Insider contenders had originally backed the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) adding to the theft of jobs with North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and companies to more foreign countries as Japan, China, India, and a nest of more. However, within a month Cruz did denounce voting on agreement, which would have effected immigration and the Import Export bank.
Excited States !
Shame, another new low.
One realizes that the really Big Money of the Koch brothers and George Soros (knew they would be allied in many endeavors) are directed at halting or dumping Trump, but easier said than done given the state of sane Americans today (not referring to those who believe it is politically incorrect to discuss trade and its negative impact on American workers, etc., etc.).
Anyone not completely ignorant understands that the religious extremists of Islam, those suicide bombers and mass killers, are all Sunnis.
So, in that regard, normal people would be prone to support a ban on Sunnis until that time that the CIA and DIA can function adequately (highly doubtful since their main real mission appears to be massive embezzlement of public funds).
Trump or Bernie, but one or the other — ABC!
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/03/marshall-auerback-donald-trump-understands-the-nexus-between-trade-and-immigration.html
I believe President Obama’s dad was Anglican, but then became an atheist.
Let’s try to stick with the facts, please!
Let’s say Muslims are banned from entering the US. The net effect of that will be that Muslims who already live in the US will have additional legitimate grievances: family separation, etc. That can’t be good, and the consequences are predictable. Then what? Round up all Muslims, even citizens, and put them in concentration camps? That’s a very plausible slippery slope.
I think most people probably skipped over the part in brackets:
If so, I would have to agree, based on the Hippocratic principle of “First do no harm”. Governing is not a race to the finish line, so why not stop and figure things out?
It has been evident for some time that Congress does not have a clue. Even the representatives admit that they don’t have the security clearance required to access information about what is going on. The presidential candidates obviously know even less. And the Supreme Court is currently deadlocked 4-4 on all cases.
So the US can be compared to a car with a blindfolded driver. Under those conditions, perhaps it makes sense to take one’s foot off the accelerator. So I believe the public is merely exercising good judgment. Why not start a national search to find out what is going on, and then reassess if the country is headed in the right direction?
So you’ve finally stepped out from behind the curtain, eh? Good points.
What’s Going On … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEp7QrOBxyQ
If you want to wait until the government figures out what’s going on, you better pack a comfy chair. I doubt they’ll ever figure out, much less admit, that they have caused this debacle.
Yes, it’s interesting to see how propaganda infiltrates the mind. Interesting article here -https://jackblueblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/neo-liberal-humanism-and-donald-trump/
One or two polls does not = the majority of the country agrees with Trump.
Remember the 2008 crash and how the ratings agencies had a role? There is not much difference between a ratings agency and a polling agency…. they both serve the same master.
Question everything…. every fucking poll, every fucking journalist, everything.
I do not believe most people like Trump. Around 30% appear to like the guy. And even if he gets elected who cares… no one POTUS has ever destroyed the country. Stop panicking about the guy… it’s almost as bad as the panic about terrorism.
The story did not say it did.
Nonsense. A ratings agency and a poll conducted for YouGov/Huffington Post have essentially no similarities.
This has been backed up by at least one other poll I saw reported on The Hill.
Pretty terrifying stuff. Support for “enhanced interrogation” and straight up waterboarding are similarly on the rise. A few thoughts:
a) Trump’s unfavorables are shit right now and the man is an imbecile, but do not get complacent and think he’s doomed. With this example – albeit no doubt aided by the larger environment – he has shown an ability to get polls to move.
b) Has anyone actually counterpointed Trump? Certainly not from the Republican side – Cruz is hopping in the anti-Muslim bigotry train as well. Even “moderate” John Kasich didn’t seem to have a word to say when Trump was talking about targeting the families of terrorists.
c) The Democrats were pretty sensible on the Muslim ban question. Might be nice if someone, particularly Bernie, were to make a statement regarding torture and international human rights. Clinton was also good on the Muslim ban question….but keep an eye on her if this polling holds up.
d) For the past few years, writers on the left – including the one of this piece – have focused disdain on people like Maajid Nawaz or “new atheists” like Sam Harris. A lot of this has struck me as straightforwardly protecting the religion, as if that was the priority. If you think these people are the real thing to focus on, you’re a goddamn moron.
Don’t let any person or thing terrify you, Joe. You wife and kids will still love you if he gets elected and your life will not change much.
Pseudointellectuals like Sam Harris put a respectable face on bigotry, paving the way for the unrespectable face (Trump). Critics of Harris (and others like him) can speak for themselves, but I am immensely grateful for their defence of liberal values and human rights.
See, I think this is backwards. Maajid is the smarter guy between them on this issue, and has improved Harris’s general outlook (while I find the caricature that exists of him in some circles to be ridiculous, he has said some dumb things). Their general take that the whataboutism, the political correctness, the stifling of substantive religious criticism and even citation of polling results as secret bigotry, the occasional alliance with Islamist groups like CAGE, and so on – even while usually being well-intentioned – has left the apolitical types with no real framework for understanding or explaining Islamism from a liberal angle. The usual response of Huffington Post tier establishment left sites to just about any terrorist attack is to mention that white men commit a lot of mass shootings (gee, you don’t say) and to worry about some random d-bag on Twitter who said something bigoted. As such, the people who filled this void on Islamism were people like legit bigots like Glenn Beck, Pam Gellar, etc.
It’s not as if the main driver of these poll numbers is because of latent racism which got coincidently active after 9/11 – people saw buildings blowing up and people saying they did it because of Islam, people are fully capable of reading the news on any of these issues, and are pretty justifiably concerned. People hear generalizations about “extremism” from the president and a series of topic changes (and yes, western foreign policy is atrocious for a barrel of reasons) from the left, and the dialogue which actually addresses the issues of their concern is Trump-tier fear-mongering and bigotry. Which, in these situations, is always an easy sell anyway.
I agreed with Ali Rizvi’s tweet: Liberal failure to take on Islamism from position of moral strength/honesty has enabled Trump to do it [from] a position of xenophobic bigotry.
Harris’s problem is with Islam, not Islamism – hence ‘the reality of Islam’ and ‘Islam is not a religion of peace’. This supposedly liberal critique of Islam has been tremendously influential. On a daily basis I read and hear people who know nothing about the religion mindlessly intoning the sort of phrases I just quoted. The notion that political correctness has led to the current state of affairs is laughable. Pubic discourse is absolutely awash with anti-Muslim sentiment and there is no restraint on those who express such views. If the writings of Murtaza Hussain, Glenn Greenwald or other critics have had some restraining impact on public opinion or governmental actions then that is something I welcome. Unfortunately, however, the reality is otherwise: the contention that we need some ‘liberal’ root and branch critique of Islam is increasingly popular, and this way of thinking will only lead us further down the current path of fear, violence and displacement.
“Harris’s problem is with Islam, not Islamism…”
—————
It used to be fashionable for some to say that they were against a made-up entity, called Islamism (whose definition is kept fluid), but not against Islam.
Not anymore.
They are more honest now.
Which is a good thing.
Since all the suicide bombers have been Sunnis (or Salafist Sunnis, or Wahabi Sunnis, etc.) I certainly support a ban on Sunni suicide bombers.
People are scrambling to embrace ignorance and hate, but when has more divisiveness lead anywhere good?
Not a good sign
@Shahrazad –
You said it, it’s not a good sign at all. From the article:
“Whether or not Trump is elected and able to implement the ban, such figures are a troubling reflection of what policies Americans would countenance if offered the chance.”
And that is most definitely troubling. And with the mentality we’re seeing coming out at rallys, the violence that is condoned, quite troubling indeed.
51 percent of the population supports one of Trump’s signature proposals; at least 52 percent of the population regards Hillary as dishonest and untrustworthy. Trending up probably on both numbers, I’d guess.
That does not bode well.
That depends on your perspective…
Uh-Oh…