@ISIDEWITHQuestionselectionsStarted 8yrs agoActive 5hrs ago

Should foreigners, currently residing in the United States, have the right to vote?

A foreigner is defined a person who is not a citizen of the United States. Federal law has prohibited noncitizens from voting in federal election since the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act was passed in 1996. Punishment includes fines, imprisonment, inadmissibility, and deportation. Exempt from punishment is any noncitizen who, at the time of voting, had two natural or adoptive U.S. citizen parents, who began permanently living in the United States before turning 16 years old, and who reasonably believed that they were a citizen of the United States. Federal law…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings x  State Senate District 3 (California)

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 11.2k State Senate District 3 voters.

45%
Yes
55%
No
25%
Yes
47%
No
10%
Yes, anyone who pays taxes should have the right to vote
9%
No, only legal citizens should be allowed to vote
5%
Yes, but only after living in the country for 5 years
3%
Yes, but only after living in the country for 10 years
1%
Yes, but they should only be allowed to vote in local elections
0%
Yes, but they should not be allowed to vote in local elections
0%
Yes, but only if they are European Union citizens

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 11.2k State Senate District 3 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 11.2k State Senate District 3 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from State Senate District 3 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @92GX939 from Texas  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, if they gain citizenship

 @9TNZW72 from Minnesota  answered…3mos3MO

For many people this topic is race dependent on peoples answers. It simply isn't though.

It's as easy as this. If you are a legal citizen of the Unites States - whether you are White, Black, Asian, Mexican, Hmong, ETC - you should be eligible to vote.

But if you are illegal - whether you are White, Black, Asian, Mexican, Hmong, ETC - you should not be able to vote.

 @9D3RPBQfrom Guam  answered…1yr1Y

Everyone regardless of who they are have the right to vote!

 @9DBJLCG from Missouri  answered…1yr1Y

If you pay taxes, you should have the right to vote

 @9D6QJCZ from Tennessee  answered…1yr1Y

As long as they plan to stay in the country. Obviously you can go on vacation out of the country for some time, however if you are gonna vote and leave the country, it's a waste

 @9MMRBXS from Missouri  answered…7mos7MO

Absolutely not. That is the worst idea. Obviously they will vote for anything to do with dealing with border opening and that will make America a very unsafe country. That would open the doors to so many terrorist. They would also vote for anything to do with getting money from the government since there not from here there not going to care about what happens with the economy here.

 @9D6DY3S from Alabama  answered…1yr1Y

I feel like someone who has gone through the legal process of getting a green card and whose is a legal immigrant should and pays taxes should have the legal right to vote.

 @8CT22VJ from New York  answered…4yrs4Y

They should be deported

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Donald Trump nominates Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General

Former President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General of the United States, should he reclaim the presidency in the upcoming election.Bondi, a prominent figure in Republican politics, served as Florida's Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. She gained national attention for her legal battles on issues such as health care reform, consumer protection, and opioid abuse litigation. Known for her steadfast support of Trump during his presidency, Bondi also served as a key adviser during his first impeachment trial, where she defended his administration against accusations of abuse of power.In a statement released by his campaign, Trump praised Bondi’s “unwavering commitment to justice” and her “track record of standing up for everyday Americans against the abuses of Washington’s elites.”“Pam Bondi has been a fearless advocate for the people, and she embodies the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law that are sorely needed to restore trust in our justice system,” Trump said. “She is the right person to lead the Department of Justice into a new era of integrity and excellence.”While Bondi’s nomination has been met with applause from conservative circles, it has also reignited criticism from Democrats and ethics watchdogs. Her acceptance of a $25,000 donation from the Trump Foundation in 2013, which coincided with her decision not to pursue an investigation into Trump University, has drawn scrutiny in the past and resurfaced following the announcement.Democratic leaders have already voiced opposition, questioning Bondi’s ability to lead the Department of Justice independently. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called the nomination “a political power play” and urged a focus on “restoring integrity, not entrenching partisanship.”

▲  2317 replies

Active 2 days ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1023 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2 days2D

Elizabeth Warren Walks Back Murder Comments

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.“No one's condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.” Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”"We'll say it over and over," Warren said on MSNBC’S “The ReidOut.” " Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands."In a statement to POLITICO, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren's comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.“I don't really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There's great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There's no reason for them beyond the streets.”

▲  1614 replies