They feel the same about the homeless. Literally every west coast subreddit, ostensibly full of "liberals" will upvote comments like "It would be much cheaper to just house them all in tents in the desert."
Like they want to do fucking Manzanar for homeless people.
The maddening part is that it's still cheaper to put them into houses but that would require you to admit they're human.
The cruelty is required to scare others into submission.
"good serfs work for peanuts, otherwise you could end up like The Bad People" 
and give up our reserve army of labor? how will we keep wages down?
and discipline anyone that gets too uppity?!
You fool, you haven't considered the property values!
Yeah, it's disturbing to see the uptick in anti-homeless rhetoric. You hear them being called "zombies" and "not people".
And the Democrats, while not in favor of the camps, will gladly support them once the law has been passed
Because that's how government works!
militarized camps
holding facilities
sanctuary districts
This is probably it 
I think they may just feel like "militarized" is problematic. They already don't have a problem with kids in cages, especially after the Biden admin changed the name and painted pretty murals on the facilities.
It's called bipartisanship sweaty maybe if you redfash tankies learned about it you'd build power more successfully 
Historically, 79% of Republicans = 100% of Republican senators, and 22% of Democrats = ~80% of Democratic senators, so it sounds like this is on track to get Patriot Act numbers in Congress.
"Almost half of American adult children polled think we should use brown people as slaves and force them to live in cages."
I always love when dems suddenly lose the concept of statistics or the concept of polling.
"Only 27% of the country voted for republicans last election so that means that 73% of the country supports democrats."
Somewhere on reddit, some dork is arguing that 5,352 people is not a good enough sample size.
it literally isn't a good sample size, especially for their selection process in the breakdown of a place as diverse and varied in peoples and living conditions and environments like the US and its 350 million people. It's a religious-focused NGO for "christian nationalism in politics", has vanishingly few young people, does terrible breakdowns in the full report and tells us nothing about class or income, self-selects for those who are on consistent addresses in USPS lines with internet access who would be arsed to do these surveys (as well as has hundreds of self-selected opt-ins), the report is trash by a non-profit for "finding the intersection of religion and politics for clergy and the public"
No, it's actually an excellent sample size. This study is absolutely worrying because it was conducted well.
https://www.checkmarket.com/sample-size-calculator/
This is a sample size calculator,
Punching in 350M for population size, 2% margin of error, and 95% Confidence interval we get a necessary sample size of at least 2401, this study had a sample size of 5352
As for their margin of error, using the above population and confidence interval values but adding in 5352 for the actual sample size we get a calculated margin of error of 1.34%
This study is valid and its findings should worry everyone.
It's a perfectly good sample size, you're absolutely right, but @anarcho_blinkenist@hexbear.net raises good questions about whether it's an appropriately random sample.
Edit: They use weighting to put things closer to what the general population actually looks like, but here's what their unweighted numbers are:
Okay I see the criticism, but would the more honest title:
approximately 47% of Americans aged 30 and older believe immigrants should be put in militarized camps
really have changed the conclusions and implications?
It's fucking disgusting no matter how you look at it.
I suppose that number might go down to 30% at best if 18-29 year olds were properly sampled.
Ok I guess I'm a dummy lol. I was more just blowing off steam. I'm having a shitty mental health existence right now. Sorry.
Nope. You're original comment was correct. See my response to anarcho blinkinest
yeah I'm in favor of putting immigrants in militarized camps - the kind where we give them military weapons and military training to defend themselves against the evil KKKracker menace
Well according to 
they already have "AK-47 Supers" that not even the US military could get their hands on, so we're already half way there! 
"AK-47 Supers"
Where's your god now ammosexuals who 
over an ar-15 being called "assault rifle 15"?
Starting to feel like I just don't belong here
why should you leave, they're the ones that suck
for me it's because I love trains and hate driving, and even the most pedestrian-friendly American cities are still car-centric
If I knew how to computer I would spend the rest of the day making office space emojis
Every day I wish there was a place that was willing to take me so I could gtfo of this place
The population of rome eventually emptied out to 1% of it's peak population during the roman empire's long decline. People either died or left. If and when it's possible, leaving is better.
Me, living in the only place within 40 miles of my workplace I can afford. 
The "undocumented" part is mostly there as an ass-cover imo. Am I the only one perceiving a growing hostility towards even legal immigrants?
What do you think the push for denaturalization is for? They're not interested in the mask.
The fact that this headline even exists, that it's presented almost casually, is proof that barbarism is the future.
I can understand dems being down with the fascism, but look at my independents dawg.
Most "independents" are "libertarians" and never Trump Republicans so it makes sense
Dems see this and go well we must put more kids in cages then
I've met probably a dozen people who call themselves independent and when you get to know them they are indistinguishable from Maga dudes. I think it's a way for people who don't like being called racist/homophobic/ etc but fully support those policies to distance themselves.
this was posted before, it's a 5000 person survey by a non-profit for "finding the intersection of religion in society for clergy and the public" (hence the weird religious breakdown), which they got by just emailing people on a USPS list with a few hundred self-selected opt-ins on top. Which also inherently excludes a bunch of people, like those who've moved a lot or recently, any and all homeless, lumpenized people and people in distant or ad-hoc or delapidated communities with vague USPS lines and addresses, those who don't have internet access, those in prisons, and those who don't check their email, and those who wouldn't be arsed with these kinds of surveys by religion-in-politics non-profits, and countless other groups. Inherently. The study also has no breakdowns for class or income, if they live in rural, urban, or suburban environs, or even generation breakdowns for most of the questions including this one (but does for some others, weirdly); and the 18-29 age group is vanishingly small compared to the others; and just a bunch of god awful things. Which is shocking to be taken at face value, this trash 5000 person "christian nationalism" survey as "percent of Americans" like the survey says. And then you get such god awful trash takes like in this thread of "if only I'd organized harder" absolutely anti-marxist nonsense, nihilist trash.
can we see the over all breakdown not by made up American political groups media outlets always categorize people into. The only reason to split it by political party is to make right-wingers seem more important or popular than they actually are.
22% lmao. I know we know liberals are fash but goddamn that's so fucked lol
Facism is here-er
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
