https://www.axios.com/2024/10/22/trump-mass-deportation-immigrant-camps
Only 56% of Americans said that undocumented immigrants should be given a path to citizenship.
https://www.axios.com/2024/10/22/trump-mass-deportation-immigrant-camps
Only 56% of Americans said that undocumented immigrants should be given a path to citizenship.
wait is this just polling US Christians? Did they go to a bunch of churches what is this breakdown lol. Its "methodology" section just names a Stanford-linked research company but doesn't actually say anything about their criteria here. The number is lower for "unaffiliated" but there's no breakdown of how many of each of these groups proportionally were asked what.
it is lmao, this whole report is constantly relating things to "christian nationalism" and its affects on politics. what trash. And there's no class (or even income) or living environment (urban, rural, suburban, gated fcking community) breakdown or anything, and definitely includes no homeless and lumpen areas, is so fixated on religion, and the 18-29 age group is vanishingly small compared to olders --- and they totally avoid breaking down the generational percentages on a few questions including this one. This whole report is garbage, I read the actual report and it doesn't clarify itself for shit, its selection process just blindly assures that it is 'representative'(enough to say "percentage of americans") when they're just emailing people from USPS databases with an additional 315 opt-in which is its own selection type (5000 people no less, to extrapolate to the whole country in all its differing segments for which their breakdown is barely existent except for Christianity types and intersections).
And it is all so obtuse in its focus and bent on this "christian nationalism," and questions are either vague as to be pointless or weirdly aggressively leading to try to bend it toward that frame and then burying the contextual construction of the series of questions built around it, and their component subquestions, in different places in the text or in separate graphs (with some of the worst graphs I've ever seen, why did they do it this way?). And what little cohesion there was in the report this article removes by separating one part, which is broken down into meaningful demographics and extrapolated even less than the other sections even in the report itself, along these same bizarre obtuse lines. I really don't trust this 5000 person religious-focused obtuse garbage to be able to say as it does "percent of americans." This is fucking awful.
EDIT: