ADVERTISEMENT

Opinion Americans prefer Trump on immigration. Just not his actual policies.

Americans overwhelmingly trust Donald Trump more than President Biden on immigration, polls show. This might be unsurprising, since the southern border is overwhelmed and Trump has made immigration the centerpiece of all his presidential campaigns.

But it’s also kind of astonishing. Most of what Trump actually plans to do about immigration in a second term is unpopular.

Myths and misinformation about immigrants (whether legal or undocumented) abound, including whether they’re more likely to commit crimes (they’re not). Or whether immigrants hurt the economy (they don’t; they are net-positive contributors to the economy and federal budgets). Such misunderstandings are one reason I write about immigration: If Americans had better information, they might be more likely to see immigration’s benefits for America’s finances, national security and moral standing in the world.



But even I recognize that’s a tall order. Voters are busy; learning the ins and outs of the immigration system requires bandwidth most people lack. You know what should be an easier lift for those of us in the media, though? Simply telling Americans what Trump’s immigration policies are, and then asking them to evaluate whether those policies match the views Americans already hold.


We already have a good sense of Trump’s likely immigration agenda from recent speeches, previous administration actions and Project 2025 documents (co-written by Trump aides and widely viewed as the policy playbook for a second Trump term). On lots of major policies, polling is not in his favor. For example:
1. Terminating legal status for so-called dreamers.

Polling shows that most Americans — even most Republicans and Trump supporters! — believe undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children should be allowed to remain here and apply for permanent legal status.


Trump has sometimes said that he has a “great heart” for these particular immigrants, nicknamed “dreamers.” But always pay more attention to what politicians do than to what they say.
As president, Trump repeatedly tried to end the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which temporarily shields dreamers from deportation and allows them to work. His efforts were stopped by the Supreme Court — before his final high-court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, was confirmed. DACA is expected to return to the Supreme Court soon.

In the meantime, Trump in a second term would effectively end the program administratively, by prohibiting government employees from reviewing and processing renewal applications, according to Project 2025.

2. Family separations.
The Trump administration program systematically took asylum-seeking children from their parents, with no tracking process that would allow them to be reunited. The policy was widely condemned, even by members of his own party.


In fact, it was historically unpopular, faring worse in polls than any major bill of the past 30 years, as George Washington University professor Chris Warshaw has shown.

Even today, our country has not made all these families whole, and the moral stain remains. Nonetheless, Trump has recently defended the policy and refuses to rule out reviving it.

3. Militarized mass-detention camps.
Trump wants to deploy the military to round up migrants and place them in detention camps and has publicly pledged to use the Alien Enemies Act for this purpose. This wartime measure, part of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, was previously invoked for mass imprisonment of Japanese Americans and Japanese nationals during World War II.
One recent survey addressed a version of this policy (Agree/disagree: “Illegal immigrants should be arrested and put in detention camps while awaiting deportation hearings”). Respondents were divided, with neither “agree” nor “disagree” claiming a majority. This question wording left out some important details of the design, so perhaps more specific language would be useful in assessing levels of support (or moral revulsion).


Clark end of game

Missed FT potentially by design aside......boy would that have been an extremely rough f***ing way for her to end her career.

Standing and waiting for the ball, resigning herself to being locked down by her defenders and not making the extra effort to get open, or at the very f***ing least have it be stolen WHILE she was working hard to get open, and then standing there watching Stuelke get stuck on that turnover that led to the last 3 by UConn.

I could also point out that she should have conceded the layup rather than daring Muhl(?) to shoot that 3.

Hopefully she can take that coaching/criticism if our staff even mentions it, or at the very least make those mental adjustments so that the end of that UConn game isn't also the lasting images of her in a loss to to South Carolina, because we WILL f***ing lose if she can't step it up off the ball in late game situations against South Carolina (assuming it even comes to that).................

How many times have you seen....

Free throws decide a game in the last 5-10 seconds. It actually happens A LOT. I could probably go through the men's and women's college games played this year and find a couple hundred examples. Fouls are called all the time in the final 10 seconds. An egregious moving screen removing the primary defender from the play is not different than fouling the ball handler. Both affect the game.

Iran is getting ready to attach us?


The US is on high alert and actively preparing for a “significant” attack within the next week by Iran targeting Israeli or American assets in the region in response to Monday’s Israeli strike in Damascus that killed top Iranian commanders, a senior administration official tells CNN.

Senior US officials currently believe that an attack by Iran is “inevitable” – a view shared by their Israeli counterparts, that official said. The two governments are furiously working to get in position ahead of what is to come, as they anticipate that Iran’s attack could unfold in a number of different ways – and that both US and Israeli assets and personnel are at risk of being targeted.
  • Haha
Reactions: WrapItUpB

The Lickliter years were bad....but we have 3 proven Big Ten players coming back in 2024/25

in Peyton Sandfort, Josh Dix and Owen Freeman.
Yes, Dembele, Pr Sandfort and Harding have potential, but each have been sub 10 per game role players this past season.
Right now, its like we are positioned to be a bottom feeder next season unless Fran somehow flips the roster with 4-5 proven transfer portal players. If he doesn't, either out of spite, or inability to land any of these guys, he is likely facing his final season at Iowa.
I don't see the fan base putting up with it another year.

*** GAME THREAD: 1-Seed Iowa WBB vs 3-Seed UConn (NCAA Final Four) ***

WHO: 3-seed UConn Huskies (32-5 overall, 18-0 Big East)
WHEN: 8:30 PM CT (Friday, April 5)
WHERE: Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse (Cleveland, Ohio)
TV: ESPN
RADIO: Hawkeye Radio Network
ONLINE: https://www.espn.com/watch/
MOBILE: https://www.espn.com/watch/
FOLLOW: @IowaAwesome | @IowaWBB | @IowaonBTN

PREVIEW: https://iowa.rivals.com/news/final-four-preview-iowa-wbb-vs-3-seed-uconn
JACOBI: https://iowa.rivals.com/news/it-s-only-caitlin-vs-paige-in-the-headlines

Unfortunately, as reported, Molly Davis is officially OUT for tonight. Doesn't bode well for Sunday either. What a shame.

Starters have yet to be posted.

By noise the fans are decidedly more pro-Iowa, but there's plenty of UConn fans and plenty of empty seats as the SC and NCSU faithful with early bedtimes clear out.

How are y'all feeling? What are your gameday superstitions you're leaning on?

I get pissed at fans constantly whining about the officiating...

But man, the officiating in women’s basketball is absolutely brutal. I never paid attention to the sport before, but as much as the women have risen to the task, the officiating hasn’t and it needs to be addressed if the sport is going to continue to grow.

Indiana @ Iowa last year

Remember that one? Iowa led by 1, but Indiana had the final possession. And with 1.7 seconds to go, Iowa was called for a questionable foul on an Indiana shooter who clearly traveled before launching a shot. Indiana made both FTs to take the lead, and it appeared Iowa was doomed to defeat by a last-second call.

But as the TV announcer said, "There's only 1.7 seconds left, but all things are possible when Caitlin Clark has the ball."

Iowa called a timeout and inbounded the ball from midcourt with 1.7 seconds to play. Clark came off two screens, grabbed a bad pass, pivoted and fired. The off-balance 3-pointer went through as time expired.

Just thought I'd mention it.

Celebrate the win, but one glaring weakness

Saw a stat on X sometime near the end of the 3rd quarter that we were 9/18 on layups. It's been a nagging problem since the B1G tournament. If we can't hit the bunnies Sunday and go cold from 3, it's going to be a long afternoon. Heard on a Hawkeye podcast (I think it was Kachine Alexander) that if a slump lasts more than a few games, it's a trend and we're at trend territory with missing layups. Not sure if we're afraid of contact or expecting fouls to be called, but those have to go in at a higher rate than 50%.

The panic moment that almost lost the game

With about 50 seconds left and Iowa up by 4, a series of bizarre errors happened that almost cost us the game. I'm glad we were able to overcome it, but I want to break down what happened.

First error is on Bluder. Stuelke probably should have been taken out for another guard, because she's not a great FT shooter or passer. Uconn needed either a quick steal or foul, so I feel she is a liability on this play.

Second error is on Stuelke. She tries to hand the ball off to Kate without using her body to shield the ball. Their big pokes the ball away and creates a loose ball.

Third error now gets made by Kate Martin. In a panic, she is afraid of over-and-back being called and tries to pass the ball back to someone instead of just repossessing and going into the backcourt. Backcourt violation likely would not have been called since the ball was poked, but even if it does get called you're able to reset your defense.

Fourth mistake is on the team. Instead of just fouling to set up our d, we let the posession chaotically play out and Stuelke sinks into the paint leaving us vulernable to the kickout 3. They make it, and now we're only up by 1.

I about had a heart attack, glad we pulled it out after this.

Missing Molly Davis

Affolter has been great in Molly Davis' absence, but last night was a clear example of what Molly's loss means. That TO fest in the first half would have been contained if Molly were available to help CC handle the ball. And Molly likely would have saved the Hawkeyes most of the late TOs that nearly cost the Hawkeyes the game.

And then Molly always has a knack for hitting clutch threes and even driving the lane. Make no mistake: Affolter has been crucial, but to have had Molly in there to handle the ball last night would have made things a whole lot easier, yet I don't think her name was even mentioned on the broadcast, and that's a shame.
  • Like
Reactions: hawkosx and mphawk
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT