Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No doubt that he did get some bad publicity in conservative circles over this, but I think he can fix it with better messaging. His views are not much different from most of us--start with border security, then figure out what to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here. If they are criminals or on welfare, send them back; if they are working, producing, and contributing, leave them be.
The only reason that immigration is even an issue for conservatives is because of the welfare state. If people want to come here to work and live in liberty, conservatives don't have a problem with that. All off us got here via immigration. Even the Indians came over the land bridge from Siberia.
With conservatives like me it is about protecting the American worker, putting respect back into our immigration laws, securing our border, the welfare usage that illegal aliens get through fraud and their U.S. born kids and the added stress it puts on our natural and social resources. We have 23 million Americans out of work. We don't need any of them here. We need the jobs they are holding. It never makes sense to reward lawbreakers either. They take way more out of our tax coffers than they put into it.
Not understanding your comment about how all of our ancestors (but not us who were born here) got here via immigration because most of them came here legally not illegally. So there is not comparison.
Rubio, Jeb and even Cruz I don't trust on this issue. They are willing to compromise just to pander for the Hispanic vote. There should be no compromise on this issue based on the above. Enforce the laws on the books and remove all of the incentives for illegal aliens to remain here and to continue to come here.
Though some, like Rubio's kin, might be "special"….
New ties with Cuba won’t change ‘wet foot, dry foot’ policy
"Under current law Cubans who make it to U.S. soil, by sea or land, are generally allowed to permanently stay in the country under the so-called “wet foot, dry foot” policy. Most other immigrants face deportation if caught trying to sneak into the country."
"Wet foot, dry foot" needs to come to an end along with illegal immigration.
With conservatives like me it is about protecting the American worker, putting respect back into our immigration laws, securing our border, the welfare usage that illegal aliens get through fraud and their U.S. born kids and the added stress it puts on our natural and social resources. We have 23 million Americans out of work. We don't need any of them here. We need the jobs they are holding. It never makes sense to reward lawbreakers either. They take way more out of our tax coffers than they put into it.
Not understanding your comment about how all of our ancestors (but not us who were born here) got here via immigration because most of them came here legally not illegally. So there is not comparison.
Rubio, Jeb and even Cruz I don't trust on this issue. They are willing to compromise just to pander for the Hispanic vote. There should be no compromise on this issue based on the above. Enforce the laws on the books and remove all of the incentives for illegal aliens to remain here and to continue to come here.
If you apply your standard consistently, everyone in the land would be in jail or deported, including you.
Politics is always the art of compromise. If Rubio, much less Cruz, is too far to the left for you on immigration, you will lose your shirt in 2016. You will in effect put a Hillary or Jeb into the WH, and I guarantee that they will not pursue immigration policies that you find favorable.
If you apply your standard consistently, everyone in the land would be in jail or deported, including you.
Politics is always the art of compromise. If Rubio, much less Cruz, is too far to the left for you on immigration, you will lose your shirt in 2016. You will in effect put a Hillary or Jeb into the WH, and I guarantee that they will not pursue immigration policies that you find favorable.
What utter nonsense. Even if that were true when a citizen is found guilty of a federal crime they will go to prison. Illegal aliens get a pass on them when they are caught. Those who are deported because they are "convicted" criminals are deported. The punishment fits the crime in both the citizen and the illegal alien's case.
It's not about "immigration". It's about illegal immigration and it's not too far to the right to expect our immigration laws to be enforced any more than it is to expect our citizens to pay for their crimes when caught either. The only ones who don't want illegal aliens deported are those who profit from them or bleeding heart ethnocentrics and they do not represent the majority of Americans in this country. No election was lost because a politician stood up for the rule of law and the best interests of this country and its citizens and doesn't compromise on either of those.
In conjunction with the above comments, the following may be worth noting.
In 2010, Charlie Crist, stupidly, abandoned the governorship and ran for senator as an independent and the democrats ran a throw-away candidate. In the event, Marco Rubio won with less than 50% of the vote.
I voted for Mr. Rubio, mainly to help the legislative branch make effective checks and balances to the executive branch, which is the Constitution, and I am satisfied with that specific result.
By the way, in 2010 Rick Scott won the governorship with less than 50% of the vote. I voted third party candidate, an economist, not a libertarian, who came across as reasonable.
By the way, in 2014, Charlie Crist, stupidly, sought back the governorship and as a democrat, and Mr. Scott won again, and again with less than 50% of the vote. I voted for Mr. Scott mainly because the libertarian candidate came across as quite childish, I could not fathom Mr. Crist, and the other third-party candidates made no impression on me at all, yet as a whole they seem to have taken a few more votes away from Mr. Crist than from Mr. Scott, and that is Constitutionally meaningful.
Anyway, as mentioned, Mr. Rubio is not even guaranteed a repeat win of his senate seat in 2016, and I personally will base my vote on the circumstances at the time with a view to Constitutional balance.
Overall, I have the impression that Florida's other and senior senator, Bill Nelson, who is a senior member of the Senate finance committee (or some such) but hardly makes a peep in that forum, focuses more attention on Florida issues and Florida's interests in the Union (e.g. flood insurance). So even though I do not like much of his rhetoric, which mainly tows the democrat party line, when we look at his effective focus, he's okay and on top of that he really does give the impression of being a true gentleman; just for example, I received an email letter from Mr. Nelson warning Florida citizens about the car air-bag safety issue a few hours before it hit the national headlines, no other Florida politicians did that, at least to my knowledge.
we may disagree on politics but Nelson is a class act for Florida.
I respectfully disagree with you Bobtn. I certainly wish this were the case. (In fact, I wish that the presidential nominee could choose his or her VP without regard to any political considerations.) But while a large portion of the Democratic Party loves Hillary, I believe that those on the far left are suspicious of her. I suspect (though perphaps I am incorrect) that she will have to chose a minority--most likely Julian Castro--in order to appease them. (As mentioned previously, she could also appease them by chosing a white person who is a Warren type.)
I'm not on the far left; I'm as moderate left as it gets before it becomes the moderate right.
I don't think Hillary is going to run and never have, despite her consistently high poll ratings. if she does decide to run, and becomes the nominee, don't count on a Hispanic as choice to be her V.P. The Democrats don't have to prove they support Hispanic causes. It's already known among that community that they do.
Her V.P. could just as easily be an anglo man. It's the Hispanic support that counts, not a token Hispanic candidate. The big challenge for the Republicans will be reversing many years of hostility toward Hispanics. A token candidate won't work for them, either.
Their community is far from being united or cohesive. There are about as many Hispanics who are conservative as there are liberals, but what they all want to see from either party are progressive proposals to fix the immigration mess, to give their citizens their full share of civil rights, wage equality, health care equality, and all the rest.
Hispanics are learning the power of their vote. Whichever party stands firmly beside them will win as their voting strength increases.
If the GOP believes a candidate with the right last name is going to be enough, they have another think coming.
I'm not on the far left; I'm as moderate left as it gets before it becomes the moderate right.
I don't think Hillary is going to run and never have, despite her consistently high poll ratings. if she does decide to run, and becomes the nominee, don't count on a Hispanic as choice to be her V.P. The Democrats don't have to prove they support Hispanic causes. It's already known among that community that they do.
Her V.P. could just as easily be an anglo man. It's the Hispanic support that counts, not a token Hispanic candidate. The big challenge for the Republicans will be reversing many years of hostility toward Hispanics. A token candidate won't work for them, either.
Their community is far from being united or cohesive. There are about as many Hispanics who are conservative as there are liberals, but what they all want to see from either party are progressive proposals to fix the immigration mess, to give their citizens their full share of civil rights, wage equality, health care equality, and all the rest.
Hispanics are learning the power of their vote. Whichever party stands firmly beside them will win as their voting strength increases.
If the GOP believes a candidate with the right last name is going to be enough, they have another think coming.
Please provide some proof that Republicans have been hostile towards Hispanics. The Hispanic vote only makes up about 10% of the electorate. Do the math.
He hasn't a chance in hell of even winning the GOP nomination. The ideology that he represents, reeks. He can't deliver the Hispanic vote to the bigoted, anti-Hispanic GOP.
He's no more suitable to be President than Pee Wee Herman.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who cares?
