These are two different polls. So basically, if you don't agree with the information or feel it's not correct, then you conclude it's not true? Same with climate change, I presume? What should I listen to? Breitbart? Drudge report? I don't know the exact methodology of the polling, but I presume they asked a particular question and got a particular answer.
You do realize that polling a small geograpahical area does not represent the country? And that your other two links do not support the statement that "75% of Republicans support banning Muslims from the country"?
No they don't. They mention a temporary halt to Muslim immigration, though - do you think banning all muslims (including American citizens that are Muslim) is the same as a temporary halt to Muslims immigrating to the country?
You might ask some of those Muslim citizens if THEY think it is the same....
The response to my original question was basically "oh, that's not true". I'm just providing very easy evidence that there's plenty out there to corroborate the first poll results. Unless you believe that nothing is true unless you believe it to be true and then it's pretty much impossible on any subject to provide any evidence that's at all convincing.
You do understand that if you carefully choose the right group that a poll will show anything you wish it to? Bet if you stay to the western side of SC and out of any city over 10,000 you could raise the figure to at least 5 of 10. And if you cherry picked only the ones you wish to hear from it could go as high as 10 out of 10.
And if you limited it to Democrats found in the same locale you'd get the same results. Or, if you set the parameters to Republicans that are not Christians, 0 of 10 - did it occur to you that you're checking predominately radical Christians that vote Republican? Maybe the problem is Christianity, not conservatism.
"A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 67% of Likely Republican Voters favor a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the United States until the federal government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here."
"A new poll shows that 50 percent of all American voters support a temporary ban on Muslims traveling to the U.S. — an idea originally proposed by GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump. " (Temporary, then, until proper vetting as proposed by Trump)
"The Texas Tribune/University of Texas poll finds that 53 percent of Texas’ registered voters claim to “somewhat” or “strongly support” Trump’s proposal to ban non-U.S. citizen Muslims from entering the country. " (Temporary, then, until proper vetting as proposed by Trump)
So all three were about a temporary ban on Muslim immigration and travel only - those that are American citizens are welcome to stay. A very far cry from what you claimed - did you read the articles before posting that all Muslims were to be banned and deported?
Yes, temporary ban. You're right though, this was badly worded and ill-conceived. I asked Hubpages to take it down as misleading. I've posted another forum topic that is way more specific and hopefully fair. My apologies.
Liberal trolls ! Is right , all bans proposed by Trump ARE temporary , THAT HAS BEEN CLEARLY STATED FROM THE BEGINNING . The more I learn about these extreme liberals , the more I realize THEY are the ones who should be banned !
LIBERALS ARE NEVER INTERESTED IN ANY CURES , THIER ONLY INTEREST IS PERSONAL ATTENTION !
It's 75% of Republicans in South Carolina want Muslims banned from the country.
And is it so far-fetched to think that many Republicans would like to see homosexuals banned from the country? Some evangelicals talk about exterminating them. And the Republican platform contains lots of anti-LBGQT language. I guess I could assert that Republicans hate gay people, but perhaps it's more fair to say that they generally do not want them to have equal rights under the law.
So, there are people who support banning muslims. I know people who support it. I understand their position. I respect it, just don't agree with it.
Think about it. Say we end up with massive, wanton violence by independent terrorist cells and lone malcontents. What do you think will happen to our civil liberties and our freedom? In order to maintain order, in such a scenario our society will have to go into virtual marshall law.
I can't turn my back on my values but I can see their point. Their fears are not unwarranted or unfounded.
When America military throws up red flags all around the world and Funds it and guns ISSI. To create the wars they want in order to own the World. Nothing to do about humanity aids or Muslim attacks on the US.
Nope, you're right. I misread the original data. The CBS exit poll was in South Carolina where 75% of respondents supported banning Muslims from the country entirely. They're nuts in SC. Still, pretty scary.
The poll results about homosexuals though was among Trump supporters. So, my bad there. Definitely too quick to see what I wanted to see.
That said, the results still suggest a very disturbing trend.
Irrational religious bigots are found everywhere, including here on Hubpages. So, I thought it would be nice, for a change, to invite comments about the positive contributions made to the American tapestry by fellow...
Even though I'm not Muslim however, I can't help but wonder if it is fair to hold all Muslims accountable for the deeds of other Muslims ( especially those extremist groups). Would'nt it be absurd to blame every living...
Hi friendsThe Florida Church should not burn Quran; it is no service to humanityhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiMFHVqG-eYQuran/Islam/Muhammad are pro-life and do not support the fanatics and Terrorists; they serve...
I changed from question to forum to allow commenters to have more space to express their opinions. I initiated the question, and now forum, to discuss reactions to Michelle Obama's statement at the DNC. Her...