There is little reason to put much stock in polls these days. Depending on the outcome the pollsters desire, questions can be formulated to produce the desired results. Moreover, pollsters have been known to skew the sample size in order to influence the results. However, there are times when poll results are interesting and can speak in generalities.
The Washington Times reported that Hillary Clinton is clearly the favorite among Mexicans according to a survey released on Friday on attitudes surrounding the US presidential race that sampled six countries — Mexico, Canada, Russia, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. The Mexican survey indicated that Hillary Clinton was preferred by 96 percent to four percent for Donald Trump.
In the united States, Hispanics preferred Hillary Clinton by 60 percent while Donald Trump was preferred by 40 percent. According to The Washington Times, “An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in mid-October showed Mrs. Clinton with a 50-point lead over Mr. Trump among Hispanic likely voters, 67 percent to 17 percent, in a four-way race.”
This should not be surprising since Clinton and Trump are total opposites when it comes to immigration, particularly illegal alien invasion. Clinton is a proponent of open borders, welcoming every Tom, Dick and Jose that decides to cross the border by any means. Trump, on the other hand, proposes to secure the border to stop illegal alien invasion, vowing to have Mexico pay for the border wall. It’s no wonder Mexicans would prefer Clinton over Trump. Illegal alien invaders cross our borders, avail themselves of social programs reserved for citizens, compete with Americans for jobs, and send money back to their families in their home country, which stimulates the home country economy. Once these illegal alien invaders earn the money they want, they cross back over the border, returning home to not have to work again.
Many of these individuals are not “dreamers,” nor do they desire to assimilate by becoming US citizens. To truly understand the illegal alien invasion issue, watch the DVD series, “They Come to America,” by Dennis Michael Lynch.
It isn’t difficult to understand why Hillary Clinton is popular with Mexicans and Hispanics, discounting her stance on open borders and “free” admission to the united States like a pass to an amusement park. Mexico and Central American countries have governments that are rife with corruption and criminality. Their home countries are run by drug cartels who own the government. When they come here, it is difficult to assimilate. So, they support the policies that are familiar to them, which include corruption and lawlessness. Hillary Clinton is the epitome of that. Her activities are familiar to them because her activities closely mimic those in charge of Mexico and other Central American nations. Yet, these people cannot see they are supporting the same corrupt, criminal policies they claim to have initiated their leaving their own nation.
Surveys found that respondents in Mexico, Canada, Germany, France and the United Kingdom, Hillary Clinton was preferred by 60 percent to Trump’s 24 percent. Twenty-six percent declared neither candidate would get any support. This should come as no surprise either since Hillary Clinton is an advocate for globalism and the eradication of sovereignty, which these other nations – supposedly our allies – have been supporting for years now. All one has to do is look at Europe with its European Union to see those nations’ governments support for “globalism.” Naturally, these nations would not support Trump who calls for maintaining sovereignty and opposes globalism and global government.
The nations of Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Canada support Hillary Clinton because she is part of the club of globalism, unfettered illegal alien invasion and importation of refugees. These nations could care less if the united States is left standing or not. Yet, who did France and the United Kingdom yell for when Germany attacked their collective assets, not once but twice? Yep, they called for the united States to help them. And, we did. It didn’t stop with the World Wars either. France had to have help in Vietnam and Mali. The united States, again, came to their aid — twice. How quickly memories fade. The governments of these nations could care less whether the united States exists as a nation now because of the actions of the US government over the last decade or so. Who can blame them? But, the people in these nations would support a lawless, corrupt criminal instead of someone who does not have a lawless corrupt criminal background. In other words, they would support the status quo. No wonder Europe is in such a mess right now.
Where Trump held the lead happened to come from Russia. Forty-eight percent favored Trump to the 15 percent who favored Hillary Clinton. Thirty-six percent would not support either candidate. Here is a tell-tale sign of the damage Obama and Clinton have done. While Clinton accuses Trump of getting cozy with Vladimir Putin, it is the Russian people who are ditching the failed relations between the US and Russia caused by Obama and Clinton. Every chance he gets, Hussein Soetoro has been “poking the bear.” So far, Putin has proved to be one cool customer. However, that could change. Clinton has accused Russia of “hacking” into the united States systems, with Soetoro acting as cheerleader and back up parrot. Neither have any proof of their claims.
Putin is also a staunch sovereign. He works to secure the sovereignty of his nation through national, not global, government. This is where Putin and Clinton part ways; but, it is where Putin and Trump agree. Hussein Soetoro, as well as Clinton, have tried to pull the “community organizing” stunts on Russia and Putin like they did successfully in Europe. It didn’t work because Putin is not a stooge. Because it didn’t work, Hussein Soetoro and Clinton resorted to negative rhetoric and slinging unfounded accusations toward Russia and Putin. Moreover, these two have tried to oust Syria’s Assaad, an ally of Russia, in the most horrid way possible. Assaad requested help from his ally and Putin responded. For all the coolness of Putin against the erratic Obama, Putin is the one who has been put on the defensive. Luckily, Russia has stayed in defensive mode.
Eighty percent of respondents in all nations indicated Clinton would be better for international relations, except for Russia where Clinton only gained 28 percent. In Mexico, Clinton received a 97 percent support where international relations are concerned. Those respondents from Russia supported Trump on international relations to the tune of 72 percent. The Russian people recognize the criminal Obama and the lawless Clinton have meddled to stage coups in Middle Eastern and North Africa nations to cause chaos within the region and instill tyrannical governments. Putin and the Russian people have seen the degradation of Europe since Hussein Soetoro has occupied the Oval Office. Putin and the people of Russia are not stupid — unlike some in the European nations and the united States. They are fully aware that Clinton will build on the foundation set by Obama, adding her own flair to make things worse.
Now, there is no way one can fully trust Putin. However, one can be sure the Russian people see things fairly clearly. It is an absolute certainty one cannot trust Obama and Hillary. Yet, unlike the Russian people, many US citizens cannot see things clearly here at all. With all the saber-rattling being done by Obama, Putin has remained cool. But, Putin knows how Hussein Soetoro operates; therefore, he reacts defensively knowing Soetoro will back down because Soetoro can only control through “inactive bullying” using political correctness.
What this survey tells us in America is other nations would rather have the lawless, corrupt, criminal Hillary Clinton to follow Obama because she will follow along with the global agenda based on how the questions were formulated. And remember, the survey only included 3,500 people — 500 in each of the six countries and 500 US Hispanics. For an accurate survey, it should include at least 1,000 people in each of the six countries and 1,000 US Hispanics. So, take it with a grain of salt; but, think about the issues brought forth earlier in this piece.