“Hitler wanted children raised in Government sponsored communities too,”
Hence my keep my mouth shut stance. I KNOW I’ll get tons of hate.
“ So does loving your lot in life include staying in your own country and not stealing a new life in another Country? Or are you an open borders supporter?”
Like Brave New World; make the citizens not desire other things and you won’t have problems. They were conditioned to dislike certain climates, areas and jobs. If someone is conditioned to stick to their position and location then there wouldn’t be a problem. If you need mountains then you won’t move to a plains area or a big city where you can’t see much, if you need a bustling city then you aren’t going to go to the country side. If you need hot climates then the snowy mountains don’t interest you. No matter how much you see on TV or read about, the desire to go there won’t be inside the person and the border problem goes away.
But again, talk like this and you get HATE from everyone.
“ the information is only as good as those who compile it”
Given that I was one of the ones who helped compile the data for Pew I am not just relying on third hand info. I got to see the raw data.
“ Based on statistics and polling Hillary Clinton had a 98% chance of winning the election, did it work out that way?”
The national polls were right, from a certain point of view. A Legal (Electoral win) can not be determined accurately from national polls, the stats taken WERE for popular vote… (And with a margin of error of 3 points and Clinton did win by 2 — the polls were accurate). State-polls are more likely to reflect the electoral. And in several states they stopped polling one week before the election; missing the last swing of undecided to picked a side less than a week before the voting date. Plus, the election polls also had the problem that it had a higher than reflective number of college-educated people answering and they didn’t correct for this at the time. So the polls also were just weighted improperly.
Plus if the polls are not from exit polls then you have less accurate results because people may intend to vote but get lazy on the day, or find themselves having to work and can’t get the time to or the child care to go out to the voting center, or get there too late and the doors have closed, or the undecided that didn’t answer actually vote, etc. (After all, the US has one of the lowest voter turnout of any developed country in the world).
Not to mention, not everyone is polled, the pie slice of those polled can vary depending on time of day or those that choose/have the time to answer.
Another problem is some voters chose not to answer or answer contrary to what they actually voted specifically to alter the results and get less people to the polls as some people don’t go vote if they think they have already one or are losing badly (The mentality of; why bother, one vote won’t matter or why bother, my candidate is already winning anyways).
GP (General Population) surveys don’t even verify if the person polled is a registered voter. And not all registered voters actually vote (The RV — registered voter population therefore is not reflective of outcome either). So you only really have the polls that deal with LV (Likely voters) and those are HARD to reflect an accurate result. And statistics don’t just have a margin of error but a confidence level as well. And of course, people change their minds. They may answer, yes they will vote, and end up not (maybe just to look civically responsible to the pollster), or they say undecided and make a decision, or they say they will vote one way and something comes up on an issue and they change their vote.
Method of polling can also alter the result. Live/phone interviews tend to be slightly different from online polls (And may include a non-response bias that we can’t currently calculate as the numbers who actually take polls via phone have dropped). Online polls can also reflect what people consider contradictory results from what is expected (Like how I would never say to someone’s face that I love Brave New World or to a die hard liberal that I was a USMC (am — once a Marine, always a Marine) and NRA; many people wouldn’t say they hold certain views to a stranger.
And the most important key; Pew Surveys results are NOT forecasters. They are to get into people’s head-space. To represent ALL citizens and the public will. Elections rarely do that as most don’t vote or vote for the lesser of the evils so a win is NOT reflective of the public will. Which is why they deal in mostly GP stats. Nonvoters pay taxes and have a stake in the system (be it education or public transportation or health care or security) and are just as affected by any policy regardless if they actively select the officials or not. (Which is why, even before a woman could legally vote, if she owned land through inheritance in the old west, a unmarried/widowed woman could vote in local issues pertaining to where she lived)
As for the rest: I never said I supported immigration. Just that your opinion that most conservatives/Republicans don’t like amnesty programs and such doesn’t match the statistics complied. I just pointed out some of the historical points that create the mindset of the general population that other countries didn’t have. Canada is selective because they have public healthcare. They also weren’t as open as the US in the past. They base entry on who should be allowed in, NOT on who should be kept out. They have, not always but for a very long time, had “prohibited classes”. AND the countrymen of those countries are the most receptive to immigrants — compared to other western societies who are more distrusting of “the other”
Canada and Australia are signatories to BOTH the 61 protocol and the 57 convention of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
I personally would prefer the future to eliminate the desire altogether, and institute a worldwide population control to reduce poverty (fines or removal of the child if more than 2 children) and other social engineering. If we want to go into space we have to learn NOW how to control populations because on a generational space craft the entire craft is put in danger if these rules are not followed. It would be much easier if the population had 50 years of already practicing these rules, not to mention the planet can’t take much more even if we don’t have future space travel on our agenda. I would prefer not to have our future be like Terra Nova, which is where we are headed in a century.