* Fox 32…
A new poll from the group M3, sponsored by a conservative organization called Law and Order PAC, found that 70% of residents oppose President Donald Trump sending in the Army, while 65% oppose sending in the National Guard.
Oops.
…Adding… And, as Jake rightly notes, these oppositional numbers were high despite a very slanted question…
Question: “4. Recently, President Trump deployed National Guard troops to help local law enforcement make Washington D.C. safer. Since the Federal Government has stepped in, arrests are up and crime is down. But armed troops are visible, walking the streets, which critics argue is authoritarian. Please tell us whether you support the following ideas to help reduce violent crime in Chicago.”
* Methodology…
M3 Strategies surveyed 668 General Election voters in Chicago, Illinois from August 26th - August 27th. The survey has a margin of error of 3.79%. Respondents were randomly selected from a pool of individuals who voted in the 2024 General Election and all responses were generated via MMS to web survey.
* However, this is not a reliable result…
The results were notable when broken down by demographic. According to the poll, Hispanics were the group most likely to support military intervention. Forty percent supported sending in the Army, while 47% supported the National Guard.
An even higher percentage — 49% — supported more intervention from federal immigration enforcement officials.
Why do I say that?…
The poll surveyed 668 Chicago voters. Of the respondents, 42.5% were white, 31% were Black and 12.3% were Hispanic, according to M3.
So that means only 82 Latino voters were surveyed. No way is that a reliable subset number. The MoE is astronomical. Plus, let’s see what happens to those numbers after ICE deals with the crazy chaos of Chicago’s Mexican Independence Day celebration.
* Meanwhile…
The Trump administration is making plans for an immigration crackdown in Chicago that would involve 200 homeland security officials and the use of a naval base outside the city as a staging area, according to internal documents obtained by The New York Times.
The request to use a Naval Station in Illinois, drafted in recent days by the Homeland Security Department, suggested that the Trump administration was planning a sustained operation, potentially for the month of September. The request, should it be granted by the Defense Department, would be a notable example of the nation’s military resources being used for civilian law enforcement by an administration that has increasingly blurred the line between them. […]
The draft request for use of Naval Station Great Lakes near Chicago describes “30 days of operations in the Chicago Metropolitan area.” One U.S. official, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said that the Homeland Security Department had discussed using the base for immigration enforcement with the military. […]
A group of advance members from the homeland security team would arrive on Sep. 2, the document says. The request seeks space for 250 department personnel plus a “Tactical Operations Center” and an “Incident Command Post,” as well as bathrooms, laundry, parking for 140 vehicles and storage space for medical supplies and weapons like rubber bullets and tear gas.
More here and here.
- 28th Ward - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 8:41 am:
People really need to realize that the National Guard IS the Army. It’s the Army National Guard. Same uniforms, same training, same PT standards, same everything as active-duty Army! The only difference outside it being part time is that the National Guard also has a State mission but can obviously be called into active service on federal Title 10 authority. The National Guard isn’t some random separate branch of the military. Say it with me: The Illinois Army National Guard or the Illinois Air National Guard. Not “National Guard”.
- Candy Dogood - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 8:43 am:
I think I would have scratched my head a bit before releasing this result, but maybe that’s the answer they were hoping for?
I bet that’s the answer they were hoping for.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 8:43 am:
It’s almost as if they are trying to provoke a public reaction that will lead to a martial law situation in Chicago. I hope I’m wrong.
- Excitable Boy - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 8:46 am:
You mean most people don’t want to see our military patrolling our streets as though we live in some third world dictatorship?
Shocking.
- hisgirlfriday - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:03 am:
Block Club Chicago is reporting the National Guard will be staying at the Naval base during the fed invasion of Chicago in Sept.
https://blockclubchicago.org/2025/08/28/armor
ed-vehicles-fleet-of-ice-agents-chicago-bound-f
or-post-labor-day-crackdown-reports/
The article doesn’t say though which state’s National Guard will be there. Is Trump bringing in guardsmen from other states? Or are there Illinois call-ups?
- Remember the Alamo II - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:16 am:
In other news, water is wet and the grass is green.
- Amalia - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:26 am:
of course people here don’t want him to send in his play army. however, everyone wants the gridlock of the car parades to be solved. still betting they won’t be involved in doing that.
- Drury’s Missing Clock - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:41 am:
M3 is usually fairly solid on city polling, but I could see this being a bit off for the reasons you stated + DC disapproval being slightly higher (80-85%)
- Radically Moderate - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:48 am:
As a retiree of the Illinois Army National Guard, with two Middle East deployments, this is a mission I would have a hard time carrying out. I see it as a manufactured crisis, and a critical waste of soldiers time and resources. Sure, Chicago has issues. However, it isn’t Baghdad or Aleppo. It doesn’t make sense. Then again, not much makes sense about the current current regime.
- SWIL_Voter - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:51 am:
“ however, everyone wants the gridlock of the car parades to be solved”
I want six pack abs but I don’t know how a military occupation of my town is going to help me with that
- JS Mill - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:52 am:
=I hope I’m wrong.=
History tells us you are not.
All one has to do is go back and read history, literally.
His massive increase in ICE and the paramilitarization of that force is the first clue. Never has an American president created a force like that and used it so aggressively. They dropped most of the standards for that force including age to get the misfit wannabes hired and trained.
Creating a “reason” to send in the troops is another key element.
National socialism aside, this is what happened in Germany and Italy in the 1920’s and 1930″s and it is text book.
I fear history will repeat itself.
- Dirty Red - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:54 am:
= Black, White, Hispanic =
662,668 people identify outside these narrow lanes in the Census, and that does not include multi-racial.
Perspective:
801,195 Black or African American.
819,518 Hispanic or Latino.
986,280 White.
Not including 24% of the recorded city population from the poll, or lumping them in with the three choices, says more about the poll than the electorate.
- Pundent - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:55 am:
Consider that the National Guard members serve part time and most have full time careers. They selflessly pledge their service to support our recovery from crises and catastrophe and to fortify our military during times of need. They did not volunteer for, nor should they be used, for political propaganda. It is simply un-American.
- Chicago Voter - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:55 am:
I think that many of those who support the Guard coming to Chicago don’t realize the cost of this made for TV distraction. If Trump was serious about combatting crime, he wouldn’t be cutting funds for anti-violence programs and sending the Guard to the actual cities that have much higher crime rates. But those are red cities/states so that ain’t happenin.
The high cost of this deployment should rather go to hiring more police officers and a number of other proven programs that actually fight crime.
- Crispy - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:06 am:
I’m not a lawyer, but analyses I’ve read by actual lawyers all seem to say that there is currently no legal basis for the administration to deploy the National Guard in Chicago (unlike in D.C., where the federal government has ultimate authority, or L.A., where there was at least the pretext of protesters damaging federal property and allegedly attacking federal employees). The governor has said that “action will be met with a response.” Is there any indication what legal measures, if any, the city and state are looking at here, other than local charges levied at Guard members if they violate people’s rights?
- JS Mill - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:11 am:
=but analyses I’ve read by actual lawyers all seem to say that there is currently no legal basis for the administration to deploy the National Guard in Chicago=
That does not matter to this president or his band of misfits. They will manufacture one if the decide they want to.
This is most likely a lead up to the midterm elections.
- Pundent - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:12 am:
= L.A., where there was at least the pretext of protesters damaging federal property and allegedly attacking federal employees)=
Much like LA I believe ICE will be used to create the pretext. Swarming the city with masked agents is a sure fire way to create a protest.
- Steve - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:18 am:
-administration was planning a sustained operation, potentially for the month of September-
Of all the months to do this when CPS takes attendance for ADA funding?? When undocumented kids are afraid to go to school: their parents might not send them.
- Torco Sign - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:25 am:
@Crispy They’re waiting for protesters outside the base to threaten troops (and threaten will be liberally interpreted), and if that doesn’t work, for the slightest bit of viral moment at the Mexican Independence Day festivities.
- Google Is Your Friend - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:29 am:
==- Chicago Voter - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 9:55 am:==
The National Guard is costing one million dollars per day in DC
https://politicalwire.com/2025/08/28/national-guard-in-d-c-costs-1-million-a-day/
- Homebody - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:40 am:
I feel very confident in saying that at least 75% of the people who say they are “in favor” will change their mind when soldiers show up in their neighborhoods. Like so many other policies that exist just to scratch the fear center of the brain, they sound good to some people in theory when directed at a hypothetical “other” but those people suddenly switch positions when it actually impacts themselves directly.
It is just leopards eating faces, all the way down.
- Big Dipper - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 10:41 am:
==M3 is usually fairly solid on city polling==
After they hid that they were working for Vallas while releasing polls favorable to him I don’t trust them at all.
- Irreverent - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 11:16 am:
>According to the poll, Hispanics were the group most likely to support military intervention
Lining up to feed themselves and their families to the leopards.
>I think that many of those who support the Guard coming to Chicago don’t realize the cost of this made for TV distraction.
Performative cruelty is the one and only thing these people are willing to spend money on.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 11:22 am:
70% and 65% opposed … With THIS prompt
“4. Recently, President Trump deployed National Guard troops to help local law enforcement make Washington D.C. safer. Since the Federal Government has stepped in, arrests are up and crime is down.
But armed troops are visible, walking the streets, which critics argue is authoritarian.
Please tell us whether you support the following ideas to help reduce violent crime in Chicago.”
- walker - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 11:24 am:
I feel sorry for the troops who are ordered to waste their valuable time and training for this fiasco. They deserve more respect.
We should greet the troops with some Chicago pizza.
- Crispy - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 11:44 am:
@JS Mill and @Pundent, yes, the midterms are the end game, and I’m sure the goal is to use ICE to create the pretext, as you say; and there aren’t enough banned words in the world to describe the perfidy of that plan.
Still, anything that can be done to resist, legally, and attempt to uphold the rule of law, has to be done.
I really hope that this month is an unusually peaceful one in Chicago, and that anyone seeking to create an incident goes away disappointed at the end of September, if not sooner.
- RNUG - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 11:59 am:
== Never has an American president created a force like that and used it so aggressively. ==
Forget the entire creation of DHS after 9/11 and the various restrictions / abused of civil rights and liberties?
- Norseman - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 12:03 pm:
JS Mill and Pundent are on it. As for legality, the Trump DOJ and the MAGA SCOTUS have a little synergy going that has proved effective for them in so many cases. I’m not saying it’s right, the MAGA Supreme Court strategy has been quite effective.
- RNUG - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 12:05 pm:
National Guard … members of the Guard come from all walks of life, including current police forces. Pulling active police officers off for Guard duty may not help reduce crime.
Personally, I would rather see the Feds get more involved in assisting local DAs in pursuing Federal firearms violations in areas of high gang activity. Think that would be more productive in reducing violence.
- Roadrager - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 12:07 pm:
==Of all the months to do this when CPS takes attendance for ADA funding?? When undocumented kids are afraid to go to school: their parents might not send them.==
For Republicans, this is what is known as a “bonus.”
- Rich Miller - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 12:22 pm:
===members of the Guard come from all walks of life, including current police forces===
Yep.
- Dotnonymous x - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 12:24 pm:
- It’s almost as if they are trying to provoke a public reaction that will lead to a martial law situation in Chicago. I hope I’m wrong. -
You’re not wrong.
- JS Mill - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 12:36 pm:
=Forget the entire creation of DHS=
No, I did not forget that. I stand by my statement.
- Norseman - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 1:01 pm:
=== Forget the entire creation of DHS after 9/11 and the various restrictions / abused of civil rights and liberties? ===
Yes, we’ve had problems. But we just said goodbye to a president who was pushing for improvement and replaced him with a narcissist who is taking us to the 1950’s (also taking lessons from 1930’s).
- M3 Strategies - Matt - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 1:30 pm:
We stand by every question, the results, and the significance of the results. What other pollster puts its neck out there by releasing primary and general election polls regularly, then nails the results?
1. Sub Groups in cross-tabs rarely, if ever, have large sample sizes. Pollsters always display cross tabs of subgroups, unless the subgroup represents less than 10% of the total sample. By the editor’s logic, no pollster should ever release cross-tabs unless the total survey sample is >n~3,000. Where is the criticism when we release cross-tabs by age with a total sample of n~400, for example?
2. I don’t know who Jake Lewis is, but that question is in no way biased. Pollsters often give the respondents some basic information about the question at hand. If anything, by mentioning Trump’s name in the question, the results would skew AGAINST supporting Federal help (considering Trump only received ~20% of the vote in Chicago in 2024).
3. There is way too much negativity on this blog. Be nicer.
4. Have a wonderful Labor Day Weekend!
- low level - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 1:33 pm:
I’m curious as to how this may impact legislative races next year. Could reaction against Guard deployment mean more gains by Dems?
- Rich Miller - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 1:41 pm:
===By the editor’s logic, no pollster should ever release cross-tabs===
Not blaming you for releasing the crosstabs, but I’m just pointing out the number is basically useless in a news story.
===that question is in no way biased===
Hilarious.
- Excitable Boy - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 1:57 pm:
- There is way too much negativity on this blog. Be nicer -
Bite us.
- Jake Lewis - Friday, Aug 29, 25 @ 2:23 pm:
===that question is in no way biased===
look inward.