| Apr 22, 2007 @ 4:08 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
Gentlegiant127
Posts: 1,037
|
What I really wanted to say in the title was, which presidential candidate in 2008 do you think would be the most serious about stopping illegal immigration who also does not support amnesty(letting illegals reamain in the country and become citizens, instead of requiring them to go back to their country of origin and going to the back of the line and applying legally)? Of course there wasn't room for a title that long so I had to shorten it. You might say, well illegal immigration can never be 100% stopped, there will always be some that sneak in, and I'd agree with that. We can't 100% stop it, but we can cut it way way down from where it is now, from a flood, to a trickle with the right policies. Then you might ask, well, what is the alternative to amnesty if you're opposed to letting illegals stay, you're not suggesting we deport them all are you? No, I'm not. The alternative to amnesty that I think is the best is to simply stop employers from illegally employing illegal aliens, and prevent illegal aliens from getting welfare(I believe welfare should be reserved for those in the country legally). We do that, and most illegals will self-deport, the minority who don't can then be deported over time.
I'd like to keep this on topic here about the various candidates for 2008 and which of them would do the best job at stopping illegal immigration, not have it go off on a tangent about some other issue(such as iraq) which candidates are addressing.
Past voting records I think are very important here. For example, if a candidate has a very poor past record on the issue of illegal immigration(doing little or nothing to try to stop it while in office), and this is a person you've chosen who you think would be most serious about stopping it, you'd have some explaining to do. I'd hope people could do a little homework on this, and not just pop in and say Candidate X because they like him/her the best even though that candidate isn't serious about stopping illegal immigration. Talk about in as much detail as you can about why you think your choice for 2008 would do the best job of all in stopping ilelgal immigration. If you don't care about illegal immigration, thats fine, there are other threads about presidential candidates for 2008 that you can post in on this forum if you'd prefer.
Also, please keep in mind about what happened in 1986, when Regan and the house and senate passed a bill which promised enforcement to stop illegal immigration and granted an amnesty along with it(quite similar to what is being proposed now in 2007 by Bush). The amnesty came but the promised enforcement never really materialized. Most people don't want a repeat of 1986, but it looks like if Bush has his way, pretty much the same thing will happen again(illegals staying and not having to leave and more illegals pouring in afterward with little effort made in stopping them).
I guess I'll start off here by saying I am in favor of legal immigration, I'm simply opposed to illegal immigration. I'm torn between 3 different candidates who all seem serious about stopping illegal immigration, but I am not sure who would do the best job of the 3. The 3 I am looking at are Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul(a very interesting and unique candidate) and Tom Tancredo. Looking at their voting records, they all have good track records when it comes to trying to stop illegal immigration. Sure, I know, these are all republicans. I'd like to be able to pick out one or more democratic candidates and say he/she would be really good at stopping illegal immigration too, but I just don't see anyone like that on the democrat side who also opposes amnesty.
However, that isn't to say democrats who are serious about stopping illegal immigration don't exist because they do, however none of them are running for president in 2008 unfortunately(Ben Nelson is a possibility, but he hasn't made a formal announcement that he will run yet that I know of). Who are some democrats who are serious about stopping illegal immigration you might ask? Some that I know of are Ike Skelton, Mike McIntyre, Stephanie Herseth, Gene Taylor, John Tanner and Lincoln Davis, to name a few. Wish one or more of them would run.
If you're not sure where to find past voting records of various candiadtes on matters related to immigration, one place you can look is http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez2008.html
This site above lists voting records having to do with illegal immigration, but also has voting records having to do with lowering(or raising which the people who run the site view as a negative thing because they feel legal immigration is too high and needs to be lowered) legal immigration as well. I'm sure there are other sites that list voting records having to do with illegal immigration also.
I'm looking forward to some civil, thoughtful and on-topic discussions here. 
|
|
  |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 4:10 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
kjac
Posts: 8,163
|
I'm looking forward to some civil, thoughtful and on-topic discussions here.
Good luck, it'd be a first.
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 4:12 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
Gentlegiant127
Posts: 1,037
|
Yeah, I know what you mean. 
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 4:34 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
CowboyX
Posts: 613
|
Any candidate that wants to win will steer pretty clear of this issue. It is a loser for both Republicans and Democrats.
My bet is you won't hear much talk about this issue during the upcoming campaign.
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 6:11 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
MortisDruss
Posts: 1,123
|
A vote for Mortis is a vote for a closed border, a vote for less clothing on women and a vote for black-clad Stormtroopers on every corner!!!
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 7:50 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
Martin666
Posts: 2,195
|
"I'm looking forward to some civil, thoughtful and on-topic discussions here"
Actually, that's not what you're going to turn this thread into, because everybody almost certainly agrees that the inflow of illegals needs to be stopped. What this is a stealth thread for is pushing your agenda to deport existing illegals, which is a different issue. So I suspect that you're looking for here other people who agree with you that illegals should all be kicked out of the country.
No doubt you'll find a few.
But the plain fact is that the great majority of the american people have already decided that illegals who have been in the country for years working, raising their families, paying their taxes, obeying the law, and are willing to learn english should be allowed a chance to earn their citizenship.
So please, be honest about your agenda...
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 8:28 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
12knots
Posts: 6,400
|
I dont see the problem.
They all die in the end anyway. 
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 8:50 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
Martin666
Posts: 2,195
|
The outlines of the new immigration law have been agreed to by all parties and will debated in congress at the end of May. All major players are on-board with it. It calls for increased security along the borders and a path to citizenship for existing illegals. Many of the high fines mentioned earlier have been eliminated and reduced to make it easier for the illegal aliens to become citizens. There is a touchback requirement: the head of the household must leave the country and then re-enter. Re-entry is guaranteed. It's not a totally done deal yet, but pretty close. Here's the Strive Act summary:
http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/strive_summary.pdf
[Edited on 4/22/2007 8:57 AM]
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 10:28 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
This is very similar to a previous thread.
Illegal immigration is a wedge issue. The political candidates who are proponents of wedge issues don't want them to be solved, because when they remain unsolved they are a perpetual source of campaign contributions, volunteers and voters. Don't believe me, look at South Dakota after the state legislature passed the ban on abortion. While you certainly expected to see opposition to the ban from pro-choice groups, but opposition from national pro-life groups was also reported. Medical malpractice reform is another issue and a very big one in the GA Senate race to defeat Max Cleland. Yet following the election, no malpractice reform bill was passed, even when the Congress passed product liability legislation. Medical malpractice was used strictly to garner the votes and campaign dollars of the state's doctors.
Look very carefully at the overall voting records of Presidential candidates. Some of the biggest breast beaters on illegal immigration have voting records which do not match up to their rhetoric. They vote for free-trade agreements, which do not have labor or environmental protections, they vote against amendments to tighten predatory lending practices by the World Bank, etc. In other words, they support practices that cause the griding poverty that makes America so attractive and their measurable deeds do not match immeasureable speeches.
Look very carefully at the company your candidate keeps. It is an unfortunate offshoot of the debate on this particular issue that some very vocal anti-immigrant groups have relationships with neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups. When you lay down with dogs, you will wake up with fleas. And under the microscope of today's presidential races, the friends of your friends are very important.
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 10:43 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
spongebob777
Posts: 7,904
|
Duncan Hunter is good on borders and trade. I suspect the democrats will lose a good many union members to him.
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 11:04 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
While Duncan Hunter has always had a "good" reputation for his ability to fundraise for his House races, he has faired very poorly in his presidential asperations. He's raised a little over $500K and has spent about half, probably on payroll. He has very little in the way of a national base and there is nothing in his rhetoric, which will separate him from the pack. I would not be surprised that as the Republicans move forward and decide the parameters for the debates in their primaries, if Duncan Hunter doesn't fall off the map completely. This is not a commentary on where he stands on the issues, but rather on his future ability to make people aware of his stands on them.
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 11:56 AM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
JeansToTight
Posts: 345
|
Actually, that's not what you're going to turn this thread into, because everybody almost certainly agrees that the inflow of illegals needs to be stopped. What this is a stealth thread for is pushing your agenda to deport existing illegals, which is a different issue. So I suspect that you're looking for here other people who agree with you that illegals should all be kicked out of the country.
wow .....your a mind reader ?? and you know what peeps are thinking ....or is it what you do >>>>write one thing and mean another.
So ,,,who has anything to say ,,,I would like to know also ,,,,,theres a govanor in CO ...who might make a good one .
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 12:23 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
wow .....your a mind reader ?? and you know what peeps are thinking ....or is it what you do >>>>write one thing and mean another.
As much a reflection of the fact this is not the first thread on this subject as anything else.
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 12:52 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
dixiepixie
Posts: 869
|
I think everyone knows my choice is Tom Tancredo. He has proven with his votes that he is serious about solving this illegal influx crisis and he is the one I trust to not back down from pressures put on him by other politicians or special interest groups.
Mr Tancredo has a large grassroots following of everyday American citizens who believe in this cause.
He doesn't have the financial backing of large special interest and corporate groups and that does limit the funds his campaign has raised. Mostly just a little here and a little there of volunteer spirit and the hard earned dollars of grassroots supporters.
I live near North Carolina's capital city. Maybe he will set up a campaign office nearby. If he does I will volunteer to help.
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 12:59 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
Gentlegiant127
Posts: 1,037
|
Martin, I'll definitely have to disagree with you that most people don't want illegals to leave. The path to citizenship plan is really too close to the plan in 1986 (immigration reform and control act)that happened under Regan that was a dismal failure and only caused a large increase in illegal immigration. The IRCA of 1986 included: Provide for greatly enhanced enforcement against future illegal immigration; Increase the number of green cards for permanent legal workers so foreign workers won’t feel a need to come here illegally; Create a new guest worker program (again to remove the need to come illegally) Require employers to verify the eligibility of their workforce; and Grant legal status to illegal aliens only if they pay a fine, pass a security clearance, stand in line for awhile and show that they are learning English.
So, are you gullible enough to fall for it all over again 21 years later? I'm not. There may be some differences, but its essentially very similar. I believe they want to play us for fools, to think we have forgotten about what happened in 1986 so they can essentially make it look like they are serious about enforcing laws against illegal immigration when they don't want to do that. You can't tell me most people in this country want a repeat of that disaster where people were fooled into believing they'd get real enforcement against illegal immigration in exchange for letting illegals stay in the country(amnesty), but the promised enforcement never happened.
As I said before, you quoted several polls which you say prove most people want illegals to stay in the country, none of which asked the right questions. And no, I wasn't able to find a recent poll which asked that question, and I still say if the people being polled are asked the question of enforcing laws against employers who illegally hire illegals and making sure illegals cannot get on welfare, they will leave on their own, and most people would pick this option over allowing illegals to stay in the country. Until someone runs a poll like this, I'm sure you will disagree with me.
You may be right that most people agree that illegal immigration needs to be stopped, but I believe there are many people unfortunately who have not checked the candiadates voting records on illegal immigration and they believe a certain candidate will be serious about stopping illegal immigration, when in fact their voting record indicates they have no real desire to stop it. That is the main reason I started this thread. To get people to do homework on their candidate of choice on this important issue.
Martin, you can claim conspiracies if you like, but that isn't what this is about. If you'd like to start a thread about presidential candidates in 2008 who believe amnesty(letting illegals remain in the country indefinitely) is the answer, you are surely free to do so. I want this thread to be about candidates who reject that point of view(Bush and McCain's point of view) and who don't fall for the false choices bush keeps talking about, either amnesty(allowing illegals to stay forever)or mass deportations, both of which are bad choices, and instead choose the best choice of enforcing laws against employers who illegally hire illegals and making sure illegals cannot get on welfare, then most will leave on their own without us having to deport them.
[Edited on 4/22/2007 1:21 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 1:13 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
Another trip back to www.opensecrets.org.
Tancredo is running very far behind in fundraising in large part because he is perceived to be a "Johnney One Note." American politicals history is filled with candidates who ran on one issue and they rarely get elected, especially for national office.
In terms of fundraising, which translates into no money for advertising and organization, Tancredo is running 5th, a very distant 5th, behind Mitt Romney, Guiliani, McCain and Sam Brownback. He has raised about $1.2 million. Remarkably, this amount is less than what he raised running for Congressional office, a telling statistic. He has spent over $700K, leaving very little funding to beef up state-based organization and advertising. As the race matures, and a politician's position on a wide variety of offices is studied, Tancredo needs to broaden himself. However, if he has nothing to differentiate himself from the other candidates he falls off the map. My bet is that if fundraising doesn't pick up, Tancredo will not last through the 4th quarter of this year.
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 1:14 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
Gentlegiant127
Posts: 1,037
|
Eastham,
I was not aware there was another thread with the same subject as this one, a thread about "which presidential candidate in 2008 do you think would be the most serious about stopping illegal immigration who also does not support amnesty". If there is a thread like that here already, I apologize, and I should have made use of it, but I was unaware a thread like that already existed. I had seen other threads about presidential candidates for 2008, but none with this specific focus.
You mentioned that candidates don't want illegal immigration solved. And you also mentioned that those who talk abou wanting to stop illegal immigration don't have voting records to back up what they say. With the 3 candidates I mentioned, can you show me why you feel that none of them would be serious about stopping illegal immigration, and that none of them have the voting records to back up their words? Until you can prove that to me, I'll have a hard time believing it, though I'm looking forward to hearing what you have to say.
You mentioned anti-immigrant groups again. An anti-immigrant group implies that that group is opposed to legal immigrants and legal immigration. Sure there are some groups like that out there(unfortunately, groups like that do try to attach themselves to candidates who talk about wanting to solve illegal immigration but that does not at all mean that those candidates agree with those groups), but most groups are simply anti-illegal immigration, not anti-immigrant. I myself am in favor of legal immigration yet I've been wrongly and unfairly called anti-immigrant in the past. If someone calls me anti-illegal immigration, then I would not complain about that.
Also, you mention a lack of funding for some candidates who are serious about stopping illegal immigration, but I believe the debates may be the area where these candidates can really gain some ground in the polls if they play their cards right.
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 1:22 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
What I was speaking about was the overall politics of wedge issues. If illegal immigration were to go away tomorrow, what would Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter do? They have carved a niche for themselves in this area. Some of their belief maybe heart-felt, but a lot is a cynical attempt to separate themselves from the pack and get increased attention their lackluster fundraising will never provide.
The problem always is that this strategy fails in the long haul. Dark horse, one-issue candidates have never done well historically and have done increasingly less well in modern times.
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 1:23 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration?
|
|
dixiepixie
Posts: 869
|
eastham
Tancredo is running very far behind in fundraising in large part because he is perceived to be a "Johnney One Note." American politicals history is filled with candidates who ran on one issue and they rarely get elected, especially for national office.
That sounds abut right. Tancredo and his supporters are more passionate about the one issue though they do care about other issues.
However, the focus issue does not draw major corporate and special interest group donations and that is where the real money is.
GG
Also, you mention a lack of funding for some candidates who are serious about stopping illegal immigration, but I believe the debates may be the area where these candidates can really gain some ground in the polls if they play their cards right
[Edited on 4/22/2007 1:30 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Apr 22, 2007 @ 1:35 PM |
Which candidate do you think would be the best at stopping illegal immigration? |
|
Martin666
Posts: 2,195
|
GG wrote"
"Martin, I'll definitely have to disagree with you that most people don't want illegals to leave. The path to citizenship plan is really too close to the plan in 1986 (immigration reform and control act)that happened under Regan that was a dismal failure and only caused a large increase in illegal immigration."
I agree with you that the 1986 plan failed to secure the border, and the result was a disastrous increase in illegal immigration--basically the 20,000,000 people that we're dealing with now. There's always going to be people coming across that southern border, but if by a combination of human, mechanical, and electronic means we can cut the torrent down to a trickle, we aren't going to have a repeat of 1986. Stricter border control, including more DoD involvement and a major ramping up of border guards, a hard surface road paralleling the border, etc, are among the important measures outlined in the current bill. I posted a link to the STRIVE summary on this thread, and Capo posted a link to the entire bill over on the "20,000,000 immigration" thread.
As to which presidential candidate is going to deal with immigration the best, I suspect that the mainstream candidates from both parties will support what comes out of congress here within the next several months, based on STRIVE. After all, it is a bipartisan bill. I've heard that even the blue dogs are aboard.
It's not a done deal yet, because with the US legislature nothing's a done deal until the president signs it, but apparently the outline is secure and there are just some details to be worked out. I haven't heard of any significant power centers coalescing against it.
Politics is, after all, the art of compromise, not the playground of the ideologically pure.
|
| |
|
|
|
|