NBC/WSJ Poll: 57 Percent Oppose Trump's Muslim Proposal


Nearly 6-in-10 Americans oppose Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s proposal to bar Muslims from entering the United States, but Republicans are evenly divided, according to a new national NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

57% of all adults disagree with Trump’s proposal, versus only 25% who agree.

Among Republicans it is 42% in favor and only 36% opposed.

But among Republican primary voters it is more evenly divided. With 39% actually opposed. 38% support.

Among Democrats 75% oppose.

Among Independents 55% disagree with Trump.



The director of National Security, Clapper, Carter all agree with Trump. Trump’s words may not have come out right and others may try to shoehorn what he said. Trump definitely made it clear that until we have a proper vetting process, Muslims should be blocked.

As it is, one of the killers in San Bernadino was not properly vetted and Americans died.

Shocking List: 11 Public Figures Who Agree With Trump’s Muslim Ban Plan

  1. President Jimmy Carter
  2. The Supreme Court
  3. Congress — The Wall Street Journal reported that Congress long ago enacted legislation that gives the president at least some of the powers Trump would need to enact his plan. Title 8, Section 1182 of the U.S. Code says in part, "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate



So the best decision is a popularity contest? :tsktsk:


While you’re keeping score don’t forget Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, the most recent Republican Vice President, Dick Cheney, as well as several of Trump’s opponents in the primary – including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, have condemned the proposed ban.



In terms of Trump’s Presidential aspirations in a general election contest, and depending on how much weight voters give to his ban, a 57%-25% split in opposition/support and 55% of independents in opposition doesn’t appear to be all that popular. And Trump would have to actually be elected in order to try implementing his decision.


I don’t really put a lot of faith in polls. and this is NBC.


What percentage of American agree that the San Bernadino killer should have been let into the country without any questions?

That is the kind of poll I would be interested in seeing.


Sy Noe.

The question people were “favoring” or “opposing” did not honestly and contextually concern all of what Donald Trump put forth.

Here is the question the NBC “poll” asked (with emphasis mine):

Do you favor or oppose Donald Trump’s proposal to bar Muslims from entering the U.S.?

As I mentioned on another post:

I am not here to support or defend Donald Trump or his recent comments concerning Islam.

But whatever you think about Donald Trump, he deserves to have what he said be stated be in full and truthful context.

Due to the reaction from his recent Islam comments, I went on the web and watched Mr. Trump’s comments for myself.

What Donald Trump said, and what (an article) stated . . . were NOT the same thing! At least in the full context.

Donald Trump said (emphasis and ** mine) . . .

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States, until our country’s representatives can figure out what the he** is going on."

Concerning the OP regarding the article we were discussing on that thread, it is relevant here too as this NBC “poll” makes the same error.

I think it is evident that . . . .

. . . . **What Donald Trump said, and what this poll stated . . . were NOT the same thing! At least in the full context. **

(So I will quote that here too.)

Back to borrowing from my own post . . . .

Here is what the article in the prior thread mentioned . . . .

And on Monday, he made his most extreme proposal yet: The United States should bar all Muslims from entering the country.

This was a partial truth.

And given the degree of angst with the American people after seeing what went on in Paris, then our Country experiencing the San Bernardino attacks, . . . . to omit the “until” was inappropriate.

The “until” suggests a “pause” (not a permanent ban).

A “pause” time period for the Government to “figure out” what’s going on and could be a matter of days. It may be less time for a Muslim leader. It might be a phone call “pause” for THAT person to come into the US. It might be longer for others.

Nobody knows because nobody asked Mr. Trump before attacking him. . . .

. . . . President Jimmy Carter suspended visas for Iranian citizens in 1980 as well (admittedly not “all Muslims”).

Carter’s suspension was temporary . . . . UNTIL the Government could “figure out” what was going on. And I don’t recall anyone running around crying “foul” concerning President Carter’s actions back then.

What’s changed? The DIVIDING of our country.

Again, What Donald Trump said, and what this poll stated . . . were NOT the same thing! At least in the full context.

The “poll” was divisive for Americans in my opinion.

Here again is the NBC “poll” . . . .

Do you favor or oppose Donald Trump’s proposal to bar Muslims from entering the U.S.?

The “poll” is virtually useless for true information about the actual event.

The “poll” may serve as “propaganda” or an example of a “polling foible”.

But that’s about the only “conclusion” one can come to from such a “poll”.

Did this bogus “poll” lack transparency purposefully or accidentally?

I have no idea. Hopefully not on purpose.

But I would not draw any conclusions from it.

God bless.


PS. It also said: “The rest of the poll will be released Sunday and Monday.” Unless there is some good reason to think there will be more substance than this, their “release” will be irrelevant concerning truth preservation.


Correction to my prior post.

I mentioned the: “NBC poll”. I should have said: “NBC/WSJ Poll”.

Everything else in the post I stand by.



NBC is leading the charge to vilify and knock down any Republican nominee. This is to be expected. Using an NBC poll to demonstrate anything factual is a joke. We still have almost a year until any election takes place. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump is the only person who can garner so much main stream media attention and it looks as though the Donald is beating the spin doctors at their own game. Lets all put our thinking caps on and pay attention to what is happening in our country. We have everything to gain from learning more about our own system of government, the constitution and the separated powers of the three branches of government. I am hearing of people who have never voted in their lives talking about getting out to vote and that’s a good thing. Mr. Trump has awakened the sleeping giant - the silent majority.:thumbsup:


Yikes… those numbers are frighteningly low…


Conservative John Bolton, former United States Ambassador to the United Nations slammed Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from coming to the U.S., calling it “completely wrong.”



Sy Noe.

I mentioned it is inappropriate to criticize Donald Trump (or anyone else) by severing their words from the context.

I specifically cited the duplicity of the “poll” mentioning that the “poll” asked . . .

Do you favor or oppose Donald Trump’s proposal to bar Muslims from entering the U.S.?

When in fact Donald Trump REALLY said . . . .

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States, until our country’s representatives can figure out what the he** is going on."

I assume you agree with my point don’t you??

Also concerning your post 12 quote concerning Mr. Bolton, it is irrelevant what Mr. Bolton thinks about Mr. Trump when my whole point was to critique what a person is saying and not a straw man.

By the way, concerning your post 12, you correctly said (my emphasis) . . .

Conservative John Bolton, former United States Ambassador to the United Nations slammed Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from coming to the U.S., calling it “completely wrong.”

Bear with me here Sy Noe because I think, in a back-handed manner, the quote you offered MAKES my point.


Because not only did your quote correctly characterize the “until” of Mr. Trump’s proposal (you correctly said: “Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims”), but also the Boston Globe CORRECTLY cited Mr. Trump’s quotes in the Boston Globe ARTICLE (here) stating (emphasis mine) . . .

A former United States Ambassador to the United Nations slammed Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from coming to the U.S., calling it “completely wrong.”

Yet in the interview itself the Boston Globe interviewers **did NOT ask this question to Bolton! **

The “Globe” ASKED Bolton the broader question about a Muslim ban, with NO MENTION of a temporary situation!

The Globe on-air question to Bolton, was different than what was printed.
(Go back and listen to it at about 10 minutes or so. I did. And the Globe IN THE ACTUAL INTERVIEW, did NOT cite the “until” nature of Donald Trump’s statement).

The Globe REPORTED this DIFFERENT (in writing) than what they had ASKED Bolton about (on air).

This is the exact same problem I mentioned with “the poll”.

Now you might say: “Well Bolton is a smart guy. He KNOWS what Trump said.”

And with that you might be right (or you might be wrong).

But this situation is still inappropriate.

Why? Because the radio listening audience or the internet readers of the Boston Globe MAY NOT know these differences.

I think this was sloppy reporting in this case by the Globe.

Look. I’m not defending (or attacking) Mr. Trump here.

And what Mr. Bolton states may or may not be be irrelevant as to how I as a voter weigh these issues.

What other “conservatives” or “liberals” say or write may or may also not be relevant too.

I try to focus on ideas. Not a personality or “party line”.

So appealing to “Conservative" John Bolton isn’t necessarily persuasive to me. I am much more interested in the ideas than the person or how a given person is “painted” into a liberal or conservative ideology.

Actually, I think you may have missed my whole point.

My point was NOT to put forth some “conservative” political position here on this thread.

My point was also not to see how many articulate and possibly influential people agree or disagree with “Trump” either (however influential Mr. Bolton as a person may or may not be).

“Hmmm. Let’s see. 15 guys agree with Trump.
38 guys (including Bolton) disagree.”


My point was just the flaw in the poll, and the need to respect the principle of truth and take the honest context of a point (no matter WHO makes the point) then criticize (or laud) the honest point. That’s all.

Critique ideas and evaluate those ideas fairly.

But don’t beat up on a “straw-man”.

I think this “poll” beat up on a straw-man.


:shrug: Thats the DUH question avoided by carefully worded polls and threads which avoid the real issue.

California has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. Yet Farook and Malik used legally acquired weapons with appropriate background checks. Despite trips to countries with histories of radicalizing young men and frequent communications with what the security state describes as people on the FBI’s radar because of their connections to terrorism, remained under their radar while he and his wife acquired paramilitary training and, along with a group of a half dozen or so other “Middle Eastern” men built bombs in the middle of a residential neighborhood. The Department of Homeland Security’s “See something, say something” program failed because saying something, as DHS requests in pamphlets and public service announcements, often gets one tagged as racist or Islamophobic let alone the real fear innocents go through under the radical jihadist. The massacre of 14 people (plus 21 wounded) in San Bernardino, California, by American Muslim Syed Rizwan Farook and his Pakistani wife, Tashfeen Malik, peeled back the veneer of massive government fraud and deception. The so-called war on terror, the surveillance state, the security state and oppressive gun laws are nothing more than feckless distractions designed to give the illusion of safety while your liberties are stolen from you one by one. Every so often an event occurs that lays bare the fraud of government better than anything that can be written or said. We saw such an event last week.


:smiley: Completely logical, should I ask for a personalized dog collar and bowl with my name on it?

And Trump, ha, more of the same thing but what people have tapped into is the complete fraud called the US government and its on-going agenda since Desert Storm. Its not per-say the democrats it is a on-going agenda which is daily becoming clearer. The neo-cons are drunk on the punch at the moment and require coffee so they can speak rational. :wink:

Wait, wait, lets have an emotionally rife left and right same unfounded raw emotion conversation surely that will help the problem.

The best one liner of a false dilemma I heard this week was the odds of myself getting blown up by a IED was about the same as a fatal shark attack. :rotfl:

Are we swimming with sharks and is that in infested waters and recommended?

We reached a new level of lost here. Merry Christmas!


One thing for sure, Trump is not going to be the answer to the government in general having a different agenda than your average citizen, or the sheer incompetence of government in general.
It would not have taken any deep intelligence or investigative genius to identify this woman as a potential ISIS supporter. It wasn’t incompetence. The government policy was to avoid the kind of simple research that would have exposed this.
Trump’s solution is frankly moronic and unworkable. It is only in comparison with the status quo that Trump takes on the attributes of someone with something to say worth listening to.


I wonder how people felt about Jimmy Carter banning Iranians.


The Iranian community in Los Angeles is now the second biggest Iranian city outside of Tehran.
I think that Jimmy Carter’s ban was ultimately unworkable too, and of no lasting effect.

To concentrate on banning the 10 to 15 percent of Muslims who are Islamists, and who have supremacist views of political Islam is a much sounder policy than anything that any American politician has latched on to date.

A sound Republican policy might be to deter all immigrants from anywhere who seek to fundamentally change America, as Islamists want to do, and attract immigrants from everywhere who want to live out the American dream of freedom and possibility.


Well, the point to my comment is that people are calling Trump a NAZI over this, when it was the Democrats (surprise, surprise) who banned Iranians, put Japanese Americans in internment camps and persecuted German-speaking people.

It’s these ignorant, ill-informed comparisons that bother me.

Oh, and I personally think in a lot of cases this isn’t about protecting any dignity or rights of Muslims (even if it makes some liberals feel really, really good); it’s about going after Trump because he’s annoying and/or should have been done a long time ago.

It’s the classic model of First World progressivsim where a minority group/“victims” are being used as cannon fodder to promote a “higher” political purpose, and here that is the destruction of Trump’s campaign.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.