If Democrats took a more immigration restrictionist stance, would it help them?

[Red Wall]

No.

So much for Republicans being anti immigrant. They are mostly fine with keeping current levels of LEGAL immigration. They are only anti illegals.

[pikachu]

No.

So much for Republicans being anti immigrant. They are mostly fine with keeping current levels of LEGAL immigration. They are only anti illegals.

Eh...I think it's apparent from the last few years that immigration is a more salient issue for people who are against than people who are neutral or expansionist. E.g. look at these exit polls from 2018 in California and Texas - people who had immigration as their top issue voted heavily Republican and that tracks well with the Republicans who care most about immigration having an overall negative attitude against it.



But going to a tangent, imo that shows an issue with making immigration restriction a major of your platform. The type of people who are going to be most excited about that end up being xenophobes, and unless you're a really skilled politician, it's going to be hard being able to hold that position while also not bleeding support with Latinos and Asians. Trump managed to do that in 2020, but he pretty much shut up about immigration this cycle while also having developed real credibility with anti-immigration voters through both his rhetoric in 2016 and actions while in government. Idk if anyone else can do that.

[TML]

If your theory were true, then people like Joe Donnelly, Claire McCaskill, and Heidi Heitkamp should have won reelection in 2018 by adopting this kind of stance on immigration.

They vastly outperformed Clinton and Biden, I'm not sure what your point really is? If the democrats could get those margins in IN, MO and ND we'd have an electoral landslide, as well as control the senate.

In 2018, Sherrod Brown & Jon Tester did not take very restrictive immigration stances and won their races, whereas Donnelly, McCaskill, & Heitkamp did take such stances and lost. This shows that pandering to right-wing voters by taking on restrictive immigration stances does not earn winning tickets to reelection.

[Intell]

If your theory were true, then people like Joe Donnelly, Claire McCaskill, and Heidi Heitkamp should have won reelection in 2018 by adopting this kind of stance on immigration.

They vastly outperformed Clinton and Biden, I'm not sure what your point really is? If the democrats could get those margins in IN, MO and ND we'd have an electoral landslide, as well as control the senate.

In 2018, Sherrod Brown & Jon Tester did not take very restrictive immigration stances and won their races, whereas Donnelly, McCaskill, & Heitkamp did take such stances and lost. This shows that pandering to right-wing voters by taking on restrictive immigration stances does not earn winning tickets to reelection.

Jon Tester has a fairly restrictive immigration stance. Sherrod Brown also did not campaign on loving illegals or on immigration, as national democrats do.

[Devout Centrist]

I see everyone has forgotten what happened in 2012. Perhaps it doesn't fit the narrative?

[Real Texan Politics]

Could help them win union voters but at the expense of the current democrat establishment.

[Former President tack50]

No.

Tbh I wonder how do the numbers look like for the US population at large or for independents (obviously there is going to be a big spike, but Democrats would vote for both a pro-immigration and for an anti-immigration candidate)

I will also say that if the past 6 years or so of politics have told me anything is that the anti-immigration position usually wins against the thoughts of most pundits and pollsters. Then again things in the US might be different, though Trump's 2016 election suggests otherwise, but maybe things have changed in the past 4 years.

It is very easy for me to see a dynamic similar to that with abortion, where pro-immigration people can easily vote for a candidate who is neutral or even anti-immigration; but the reverse is not true and for most anti-immigration people, restricting immigration is a red line.

Also, wtf happened over the past 4 years?

Back in 2006 Republicans and Democrats had similar attitudes on immigration, and even as late as 2015 the differences weren't all that big.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

No.

Tbh I wonder how do the numbers look like for the US population at large or for independents (obviously there is going to be a big spike, but Democrats would vote for both a pro-immigration and for an anti-immigration candidate)

I will also say that if the past 6 years or so of politics have told me anything is that the anti-immigration position usually wins against the thoughts of most pundits and pollsters. Then again things in the US might be different, though Trump's 2016 election suggests otherwise, but maybe things have changed in the past 4 years.

It is very easy for me to see a dynamic similar to that with abortion, where pro-immigration people can easily vote for a candidate who is neutral or even anti-immigration; but the reverse is not true and for most anti-immigration people, restricting immigration is a red line.

Also, wtf happened over the past 4 years?

Back in 2006 Republicans and Democrats had similar attitudes on immigration, and even as late as 2015 the differences weren't all that big.

DJT Happened, Openness to Immigration became a core part of the democratic parties identity.