Poll: Democrats Prefer Defending Ukrainians over American Border

TOPSHOT - A Border Patrol officer sits inside his car as he guards the US/Mexico border fe
File Photo: ARIANA DREHSLER/AFP/Getty Images

Almost two-thirds of Democrats believe that defending distant Ukraine from the Russian invasion is more important than defending America’s border, communities, and workplaces from illegal migrants, according to a survey by Rasmussen Reports.

Fifty-seven percent of Democrats say “Defending Ukraine against Russian invasion” is “more important to America’s national interest” than the alternative of “defending the U.S. border against illegal immigration.”  The February 23-24 survey included 1,000 likely voters.

In contrast, just 31 percent of Democrats favored defending the U.S. border, which is needed by their fellow citizens as they try to win good wages from employers, and as they try to buy decent housing near good schools.

Ideological liberals were even more likely to favor the defense of Ukraine over the American border, by 67 percent to 17 percent, or four to one.

February 23-24 survey of 1,000 likely voters, from Rasmussen Report.

February 23-24 survey of 1,000 likely voters, from Rasmussen Reports.

But GOP supporters favored defending the American border over Ukraine by four to one, or 74 percent to 18 percent. Ideological conservatives reported a similar 75 percent to 17 percent split.

Swing-voters strongly backed the defense of U.S. borders by 56 percent to 33 percent.

Latino and Asian voters picked the U.S. border defense over Ukraine by 63 percent to 28 percent.

The poll also showed an economic divide.

Just 31 percent of people who earn between $50,000 and $100,000 favored the defense of Ukraine, while 59 percent favored the defense of their own border.

However, wealthier Americans split evenly: 46 percent for Ukraine 50 percent for the U.S. border.

The survey result matches other polls showing how ideological liberals are less willing to ally with ordinary Americans than with distant foreigners. This ideological preference for “telescopic charity” is very different from conservatives, who simultaneously sympathize with distant victims but also prioritize circles of people closer to home — first family, then relatives, neighbors, same-county residents, and then fellow nationals. But this reluctance to defend their national border is tied to progressives’ eagerness to use immigrants to help them win political supremacy over ordinary Americans.

Since at least 1990, the federal government has tried to extract people from poor countries so they can serve U.S. investors as cheap workers, government-aided consumers, and high-density renters in the U.S. economy. That economic strategy has no stopping point, and it is harmful to ordinary Americans because it cuts their career opportunities and their wages while it also raises their housing costs.

The federal government’s wealth-shifting extraction migration policy is very unpopular, according to a wide variety of media-ignored polls. The polls show deep and broad opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates.

The opposition is growinganti-establishmentmultiracialcross-sexnon-racistclass-basedbipartisanrationalpersistent, and recognizes the solidarity that Americans owe to one another:


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.