Can Caroline Horn get anything right? (CBS News, immigration)

COVID-19 Response

Like everyone else, we urge you to wash your hands and engage in social distancing.

Unlike everyone else, we urge you to also help with this smart plan to get more tests, ventilators, and PPE. Everyone can do that plan right now, at home, in just 15 minutes.

If enough people help with the plan we can save lives. Take time out now and help get more desperately-needed supplies.

Caroline Horn of CBS News offers "Are pro-immigration reform Republicans hurting their 2016 chances?" ( ). It's not clear whether she's intentionally trying to deceive her readers or whether she's just a sloppy reporter, but let's take a look.

She writes:

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is leading the Senate efforts to pass legislation. Former Gov. Jeb Bush, R-Fla., told a conference of conservative activists immigration reform was crucial to U.S. economic growth. The signs all point to a GOP ready to embrace immigration reform and renew outreach efforts to the Hispanic community. The only problem? No one seems to have convinced the party's base.

Let's turn that around: "The bulk of the GOP opposes comprehensive immigration reform. The only problem? No one seems to have convinced the party's leaders." Horn is emphasizing the tail, I'm emphasizing the dog. Which do you think is the better formulation?

Horn then refers to Rep. Steve King as a "staunch immigration foe", when that's not true: he doesn't oppose all forms of immigration.

Horn later says:

Polling suggests this outreach has paid off. A recent CBS News/New York Times poll found 83 percent of Republicans say they would support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants if certain conditions are met.

The 83% is actually of all respondents, and it was in answer to this misleadingly-worded question [1]:

Would you favor or oppose providing a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the U.S. if they met certain requirements, like paying fines and back taxes, passing criminal background checks and learning English?

That question doesn't specify how many illegal aliens would be involved, and some or many respondents might have thought the question was referring to only a subset of the millions of illegal aliens in the U.S.

Horn continues:

Republican leaders' political calculation is that they won't win support from the nation's growing Hispanic population without addressing the anti-immigrant language and policies that alienated this growing voting bloc. During the 2012 presidential campaign, Republican nominee Mitt Romney's talk of "self-deportation" contributed to his dismal showing among Hispanics on Election Day. He garnered just 27 percent of their vote.

Wanting to enforce our immigration laws isn't "anti immigrant", and based on their voting patterns over the past few decades Hispanics have never supported the GOP in large numbers. In fact, their GOP vote share declined in the election after the 1986 amnesty.

Horn then refers to amnesty as a "compassionate approach to immigration", when the opposite is the case. See false compassion.

Please take a moment and write @CNHorn with your thoughts.

[1] nytimes . com/interactive/2013/05/01/us/politics/02poll-nytimes-cbs.html