In your opinion. 
The question now is whether you have the votes to change the status quo. (I wouldn’t count on the “everyone is urging” phrase.) I don’t believe you do, but time will tell. (And polls have been proven to be wrong, also.)
You realize how silly your fixation is on the word “everyone” is, right? Someone can say, “Everyone likes ice cream!” and would you respond, "Oh yeah, not lactose intolerant people!’
Give me a break. You know very well that the term “everyone” in this context does’t refer to 100% of Americans. It means that DACA, as a policy, has very broad support that cuts across parties and political views. But continue beating your dead horse, by all means.
No, not in my opinion. It’s a fact that DACA has wide support.
And if DACA is not going to become law, it is almost certainly not because of a lack of votes, it is very likely because Republican leaders (especially Ryan) may not allow an up-or-down vote on it. Just like how comprehensive immigration reform may well have passed the House several years ago, but the Republican leaders wouldn’t schedule it for a vote.
And if you’re going to argue that polls have been wrong, then I propose putting the accuracy of polls up against the accuracy of your claims. We all know that polls are a far better judge of things than you are.
It’s really lucky that the official name for the group, the neutral, take-no-position name, is “Dreamers,” eh?
The rare example of a congressional bill’s stupid acronym being an effective political tool. Right up there with the PATRIOT Act.
Though I doubt that you get a big difference in polling response if you instead just describe who Dreamers are. The point is that you cannot usually do that description effectively in modern political discourse. So Dreamers is a great feat of metonymy.
(post shortened)
“IF” DACA is not going to become law? What do you mean “if”? Are you suggesting that this bill/law/EO doesn’t have the support of “everyone”, or that it doesn’t have enough votes to become law?
Polls have been proven wrong in the past. Life goes on. Vote totals, OTOH, are a much more reliable indicator of who controls the Houses of Congress and what bills will become law.
See my above comment how silly your literalism is.
But relying on vote totals for predictions on what gets enacted is a self-selecting process. Nearly everything that receives affirmative votes in Congress is enacted; but there are always things that would have received affirmative votes if brought to the floor, but leadership simply won’t schedule votes on it. So your backwards logic of “if it is popular it would be a law already” is wrong.
This is one reason why the Republican government shutdown persisted for so long a few years ago: the Speaker of the House refused to bring a clean funding bill to a vote. He knew that a few Republicans would vote to end the silly shutdown, and so he wouldn’t give them a chance. DACA could well be another example of refusing to bring a popular bill to a vote, fearing that Congress might actually pass a new law.
(post shortened)
I’m not responsible for what an OP wrote. I can only read what they actually wrote.
They didn’t write anything. They typed it. Who thinks people write things on the computer? Like with a pen? How silly!