What the Polls Reveal -– and the Media Conceal

 If one relied solely on corporate media coverage, one might conclude that President Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts are wildly unpopular, resisted by an outraged public, and politically suicidal for Republicans. 

Night after night, TV viewers see images of angry protesters, breathless commentary about “authoritarian crackdowns,” the familiar ‘Trump is Hitler/Nazi/fascist’ trope, and sympathetic portrayals of activists blocking Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The media narrative is clear: Americans are revolting against deportations.

But polling tells a very different story.

A recent Rasmussen Reports survey shows that nearly two-thirds of Americans support President Trump’s efforts to locate and deport illegal immigrants. That includes a majority of independents, more than a third of Democrats, and almost two-thirds of Hispanic respondents.

Support spans all age groups. Black and White voters show nearly identical approval ratings. This isn't fringe sentiment; it's mainstream opinion. Yet, this reality is almost entirely missing from media coverage.

The disconnect matters because it reveals how much narrative has replaced analysis in today's political journalism. Protests are viewed as substitutes for public opinion, while polling - especially when it contradicts preferred stories - is ignored, downplayed, or dismissed. 

Regarding immigration, the media’s main belief is that enforcement equals cruelty, and opposition equals compassion. They often claimed that Trump put kids in cages, ignoring that the practice existed before Trump and expanded during Obama. They also called Barack Obama the “deporter in chief,”  deporting more illegal aliens than Trump.

But voters are not nearly so simplistic. The Rasmussen data suggest Americans still believe in something unfashionable in elite ruling class circles: laws should be enforced, and national borders should mean something.

Independent voters, who tend to decide elections in competitive districts, approve of enforcement efforts. Hispanic voters, who are often portrayed as uniformly opposed to deportations, support them at surprisingly high levels. Even among Democrats, whose leadership has largely embraced near-open borders, more than a third approve of Trump’s approach. These figures do not reflect a public in revolt.

The reason is simple. Voters see a clear difference between immigration and illegal immigration. They realize that a country that can't or won't enforce its laws stops being a true nation. 

Open borders combined with an expansive welfare state are a recipe for long-term cultural and societal collapse. That insight, absent from cable news panels, remains alive among ordinary Americans.

None of this means Trump or Republicans are invulnerable. Other polls reinforce that point. A January 2026 Wall Street Journal survey shows widespread dissatisfaction with the economy, with many voters blaming the Trump administration despite strong headline economic indicators. 

Inflation and cost-of-living pressures remain high, and Republicans’ usual lead on economic management has diminished. Democrats now hold a slight advantage in generic congressional ballot testing.

But once again, polling reveals nuances the media prefers to ignore.

Voters do not render a single up-or-down verdict on a president. They judge issues individually. Americans can back immigration enforcement while criticizing economic results. 

They can support deportations while worrying about grocery prices. This ability to hold multiple views at once confuses pundits, who see the world in simple binaries, but it reflects how real voters think.

Another poll adds more context. A January CBS News/YouGov survey shows increasing concern about ICE’s tactics, with many respondents saying enforcement feels too harsh or makes communities less safe. Unsurprisingly, this poll received enthusiastic coverage, seen as evidence that Trump’s immigration policy is failing due to public backlash.

That conclusion is false.

The CBS poll does not contradict Rasmussen’s findings. It complements them. Together, they reveal a distinction that voters make, which journalists often overlook - support for enforcement doesn’t mean approving of every enforcement method. Americans can support deporting those in the country illegally while opposing heavy-handed tactics, bureaucratic incompetence, or unnecessary confrontation.

This isn't hypocrisy. It’s discernment. It’s nuance. 

The media’s failure to recognize this distinction fuels endless misinterpretation. Any criticism of ICE is seen as rejecting enforcement itself. Any protest, regardless of size or ideology, is viewed as reflecting national opinion. Polls showing majority support are buried, attacked, or ignored.

The political consequences are real.

For Republicans heading into the 2026 midterms, immigration enforcement isn't a liability -- it's an advantage if managed wisely. The data show widespread public support for enforcement, including among demographic groups Democrats claim as their own. 

Republicans should stand firm on the issue. They must state it clearly: lawful immigration yes; illegal immigration no. Enforce laws with accountability, not chaos.

At the same time, Republicans cannot depend solely on immigration issues. The WSJ polling serves as a warning. Economic anxiety remains potent, and voters are not persuaded by macroeconomic data when their personal finances feel tight. 

CPI and GDP figures offer little comfort at the grocery store. Ignoring inflation or dismissing affordability concerns as media hype would be a political mistake.

The opportunity is in contrast. Democrats have built a coalition based on grievance, protest, and symbolic outrage. Their immigration messaging increasingly focuses on moral grandstanding rather than actual governance. Their economic messaging depends on denial and deflection. Even when they lead in generic ballot polls, their overall party image remains weak and unstable.

Midterms are rarely referendums on ideology. They focus on judgments of competence. Voters ask straightforward questions: Is the country being managed well? Are laws enforced fairly? Is daily life getting easier or more costly? When it comes to immigration, Republicans hold the advantage. On the economy, however, they need to prove themselves.

One lesson runs through all three polls: media visibility doesn’t equate to majority opinion. Loud protests don’t represent silent voters. Viral clips aren’t a substitute for real data. The Rasmussen numbers remind us that beneath the noise, Americans are more pragmatic and less ideological than they are often portrayed.

They support enforcing immigration laws and worry about economic stability. They are capable of holding both views at the same time.

The tragedy of modern political discourse isn't just polarization but distortion - putting stories above facts, emotion over proof. It reveals a country that's less extreme, less hysterical, and more rooted than what the media suggests.

As 2026 nears, Republicans who understand this and speak to voters instead of activists or journalists will be best positioned to succeed. Those who mistake media outrage for public opinion will repeat past mistakes, shrieking themselves into irrelevance.

In politics, as in my world of medicine, misinterpreting the data often results in the wrong diagnosis. And failed treatment with predictable consequences.

Brian C. Joondeph, M.D., is a physician and writer. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/01/what_the_polls_reveal_and_the_media_conceal.html