 |
| |
From: Roy Beck, President,
NumbersUSA |
| Date: Wednesday 26DEC07
Noon EST |
| | |
| How well does each candidate
promise to end future illegal immigration and to resist all amnesties?
|
| |
FRIENDS, this is a re-send of an email I tried to get out
Saturday night. But we learned that most major internet services blocked
it. There are so many public disagreements about where the Presidential
candidates really stand on all the immigration issues. I want all of you
to have access to this best tracking of those positions. (I apologize to
all of you who are getting this more than once.) -- ROY
FIRST SENT: Saturday 22DEC07 -- 7 p.m. EST
DEAR FRIENDS,
We have just updated our ratings on the 14 top
Presidential candidates based on 16 immigration categories. Take
a look here.
To the right in this email are how the 14 stack
up in two categories:
- Opposition to amnesty, plus a
commitment to cause most present illegal aliens to go home over time
through an Attrition Through Enforcement policy
- An overall plan for preventing future illegal
immigration
Please note that our ratings do NOT
amount to endorsements. Nor do they convey anything about the character,
the strength or any other positions about the candidates. We know that
every one of these candidates has supporters among the users of NumbersUSA
for a lot of different reasons.
Also note that these ratings are
based on all evidence available as of 21DEC07. We will modify the ratings
at any time a candidate changes position.
Our ratings are based
overwhelmingly on promises and not on their actions in past political
office (you can see our rating for past actions on The
Grid).
I have been on the radio nationwide constantly this
week, talking about these ratings. Everybody wants to know how these
candidates truly stack up. We have received a high volume of email from
many of you about our previous ratings. Many of your comments have helped
us further refine our ratings for this time. To comment about this Alert
or the Candidates Grid, or to request tech help, click here and fill out our
Help Form.
WHAT TO DO WITH THESE
RATINGS If you are supporting one of
these candidates for reasons other than immigration, please look at the
deficiencies of your candidate on immigration and contact the campaign
office.
You can view many details about what each candidate says
on the website, in debates and to the media by clicking on the photo of
that candidate at the top of the Candidates
Grid.
Most of the candidates have been moving at least slowly
toward our position for sensible immigration policies as the campaign has
moved forward. The public is having an effect. You can push the candidates
further.
COMMENTS ABOUT THE 'AMNESTY'
RATINGS Overall these are pretty
disappointing. Now that Rep. Tom Tancredo has dropped out of the race,
only two candidates (THOMPSON & HUNTER) are left who have vigorous and thorough enough opposition
to amnesty to warrant an EXCELLENT rating.
Ron Paul still gets a GOOD rating and could get an
EXCELLENT if he would make clear how he plans to handle the illegal aliens
here if they don't get an amnesty. We don't find a public commitment to
Attrition Through Enforcement, although we feel he probably has it.
Romney and Huckabee were earning
themselves a GOOD rating just a couple of weeks ago. But both went on
national TV and hemmed and hawed around amnesty questions, thoroughly
confusing their message and raising grave doubts about their commitment to
Attrition Through Enforcement as the solution for the 12-20 million
illegal aliens now in our country. Both seemed defensive and more
interested in being liked and thought politically correct by their media
questioner than in making clear promises to the voters.
You can
read their muddled statements on their Candidate Page by clicking on their
photo on The
Grid. If these candidates truly understood the promises they have on
their websites -- and truly believed them -- they would be able to
confidently respond to media questions. At the most charitable, I would
say Romney and Huckabee just haven't spent enough time learning the issue.
Top staffers of the Romney and Huckabee campaigns -- like staffers
of several others this month -- have been in contact with us. They have
promised us that their candidates simply misspoke on these recent network
shows and can truly be counted on to stand against amnesties. The staffers
made fairly persuasive cases. But their candidates -- and their websites
-- have not themselves made new statements that offer that persuasive case
to the public. So, the final word for now on their positions has to be
found in what they told Tim Russert and Chris Wallace. Perhaps after
Christmas.
Hard to believe that Giuliani is in the same BAD category as John 'Amnesty King' McCain.
But McCain has improved from his 'ABYSMAL' rating of last summer. He now
wants to wait until a little later to reward illegal aliens with a path to
citizenship. Giuliani has pretty close to the same position, although not
quite as clearly stated. Interestingly, we don't find any sign that
Giuliani's website even tries to say that he is opposed to amnesty.
One host of an ABC talk show in Los Angeles yesterday told me that
he has been supporting Giuliani for a lot of other reasons but was fully
spooked when he saw our immigration Grid. I told him that he and a lot of
other Guiliani supporters need to scare a little sense into him on this
issue.
And that is my advice for all of you who
are supporting Democratic candidates for President.
Because NumbersUSA is so thoroughly bi-partisan and works with so many
Democratic allies in Congress, I desperately tried to find some way that I
could rate at least one Democratic candidate above 'ABYSMAL' on amnesty.
But so far, not a one dares step out from the pack and take the
anti-amnesty position that polls show the majority of Democratic voters
favor.
On one of my Iowa radio shows yesterday, I admonished
Democrats in Iowa to push their candidates harder in forums. The host said
Democratic voters HAVE been bringing up the issues, but the Democratic
candidates just continually dance around the subject and don't get what
the voters want. I'm not quite sure what to advise except to ask all of
you in contact with Democratic candidates to keep trying.
Right
now, all the Democratic candidates are putting themselves at a severe
disadvantage to win the fall general election, according to recent polls
as described in the article at the bottom of this email.
WOULDN'T YOU THINK THE
RATINGS WOULD BE HIGHER FOR 'STOPPING FUTURE ILLEGAL
IMMGIRATION?' These ratings may do
more than anything to show how stupid many of these candidates think
voters are.
The common response of candidates when pushed on
illegal immigration is that "we probably have to find a way to accommodate
the undocumented people already here but we definitely need to
re-establish the rule of law and stop future illegal immigration."
But only 5 of the 14 candidates of the two
Parties earns an EXCELLENT or GOOD for their overall stands on immigration
enforcement.
The fact is that under their
current promises, 9 of the 14 candidates -- even if they did everything
they promise -- would continue to allow huge flows of illegal immigration
into the country.
And, yes, one Democratic candidate -- Chris Dodd
-- rates higher than the other Democrats in this category.
|
| in this email: |
|
Latest AMNESTY Ratings For Presidential Candidates
(21DEC07) Excellent
- DUNCAN HUNTER
- FRED THOMPSON
They are
EXCELLENT in pledging through website and speech to oppose amnesties
of all kinds for illegal aliens ... advocating Attrition Through
Enforcement to cause present 12-20 million illegals to go home over
time
Good
- RON PAUL
Does a good job of
opposing amnesties of all kinds for illegal aliens
Fair
- MITT ROMNEY
Does a fair job
in pledging through website & speech to oppose amnesty ...
public statements create uncertainty about total opposition and
about what eventually happens to the illegal aliens now here
Poor
- MIKE HUCKABEE
Does a poor job
of pledging clear opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens ...
public statements sound like at least a portion will eventually get
legalization
Bad
- RUDY GIULIANI
- JOHN McCAIN
While saying that
enforcement measures must come first, they would allow most or large
numbers of illegal aliens now here to remain and legalize their
status
Abysmal
- HILARY CLINTON
- BARACK OBAMA
- JOHN EDWARDS
- BILL RICHARDSON
- JOE BIDEN
- CHRIS DODD
- DENNIS KUCINICH
They
assertively advocate for the legalization of most or all illegal
aliens now here ... do not even require that tough enforcement
measures against future illegal immigration be in place first
Latest Ratings on Promises to STOP FUTURE ILLEGAL
IMMIGRATION(21DEC07) These
ratings are a composite of ratings on 8 specific illegal categories
on The Grid, plus the rating on birthright
citizenship
Excellent
- DUNCAN HUNTER
Excellent
promises to stop future illegal immigration
Good
- FRED THOMPSON
- MIKE HUCKABEE
- MITT ROMNEY
- RON PAUL
Slightly mixed
promises on 9 categories amount to an overall GOOD promise to stop
future illegal immigration
Fair
- JOHN McCAIN
- CHRIS DODD
- RUDY GIULIANI
Only fair on
promises to stop future illegal immigration
Poor
- HILARY CLINTON
- BARACK OBAMA
- JOHN EDWARDS
- BILL RICHARDSON
- JOE BIDEN
Poor on promises to
stop future illegal immigration
Bad
- DENNIS KUCINICH
Bad on
promises to stop future illegal immigration
|
| actions in brief: |
Congress has left town but the fax machines
are still on, and skeleton staffs continue to see what voters have
to say.
Please consider sending all faxes that are on your
Action
Buffet corkboard. |
| donate now: |
Please click here to
make any sized donation to keep this grassroots phenomenon
strong and effective.
Because of widespread internet
blocking of our emails this month, we still remain far below our
modest monthly goal of receiving donations from just 1% of the users
of the website.
At the time this email is being sent, the thermometer goes up
only half way to 0.54%. When you open the email, it will reflect
donations as of that moment.
For 10 straight months through
November, users of the NumbersUSA website have made the 1% goal that
provides the income that can support the minimum lobbying, website
activism and education programs of NumbersUSA. |
| how to reply: |
|
Please do not click 'Reply' button to respond to
this message.
To comment about this Alert or to request tech help, click here and fill
out our Help Form.
Our staff mans the Help Desk 18 hours a day.
| |
I'm afraid these ratings may feel like lumps
of coal in your Christmas stockings. But overall they are somewhat better
than a few months ago.
Most of you have a presidential primary or
caucus in your state sometime immediately after New Year's Day and through
the first week of February. Please do what you can to pressure candidates
to offer you better options.
I hope all of you have had good
holidays throughout this month and wish you a Merry Christmas next week.
A lot of the fate of our nation in terms of congestion, quality of
life, national unity, economic fairness, environmental stewardship and
individual liberty will be determined in the next few weeks depending on
which two candidates win the nomination and what their stances on
immigration turn out to be.
THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO,
http://www.postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?z=12&a=320504
Opinion Immigration could be
a deal breaker for voters 12/22/2007
By Peter A. Brown
It has become conventional wisdom that illegal
immigration may be the type of political issue that can rile voters, but
perhaps not enough to change votes. And besides, the thinking goes, people
far from the border really don't care.
These skeptics about the
power of the immigration issue to change votes and elections ought to
think again. The focus on immigration in the TV ads blanketing Iowa should
convince any doubters.
Candidates for the Republican presidential
nomination are learning to read the polls -- not just the horse race
numbers, but the back pages in surveys that get at voters' gut views.
Data from the nation's three most important general election swing
states clearly show that not only do voters care but politicians who cross
them on this issue are taking a serious electoral risk.
A Quinnipiac University poll released earlier this month looked
at attitudes toward immigration policy in Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio,
the big three battlegrounds of the Electoral College. No candidate has
been elected president since 1960 without carrying two of the three.
What stands out is a consensus that cuts across party lines:
Voters want immigration reform focused on stricter enforcement rather than
reform that would make it easier to integrate illegal immigrants into
American life. And almost a quarter of voters see immigration policy as a
potential deal-breaker for them in deciding whom to support for president.
Although the issue is likely to be a bigger deal
in the November election -- because in general the likely Democratic
nominees are less in favor of strict enforcement than their potential
Republican opponents -- it has emerged as a key part of the effort to stop
former Gov. Mike Huckabee's fast-rising campaign for the GOP nomination.
Huckabee has zoomed to the top in the Iowa polls, much to the
dismay of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who had been leading.
Romney's campaign strategy has been built on the idea that he must win
Iowa and New Hampshire to create momentum he needs in the larger states
that follow. A loss in Iowa would make it very difficult for Romney to win
New Hampshire and that would almost certainly doom his candidacy.
That's why Romney has come out swinging hard at Huckabee and he
has decided that immigration is the former Baptist minister's Achilles
heel. Romney has gone on air with commercials that focus on Huckabee's
support for college scholarships for illegal immigrants and for making
them eligible for the in-state tuition break available to Arkansas
residents, but not U.S. citizens who live elsewhere.
Those are not
positions that Huckabee has staked out as a presidential candidate; they
are part of his record as governor at a time when immigration was not the
hot-button issue that it is today. Huckabee has responded with his own ads
that proclaim his support for border security measures, but that do not
mention the actions he took as governor -- doing so would give further
credence to Romney's charges.
Huckabee and Romney understand which
way the wind is blowing on the issue, even in states without large illegal
immigrant populations, and that are far from the Mexican border.
The Quinnipiac survey of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania provide
the evidence for their response. Asked whether U.S. policy on the issue
should primarily move in the direction of integrating illegal immigrants
into American society or stricter enforcement of the laws against them,
there was little difference in the three states. On average 70 percent
favored stronger enforcement, 21 percent favored integrating illegal
immigrants into American society.
Voters were then asked if they
agreed with a presidential candidate "on other issues," but "completely
disagreed on the issue of illegal immigration do you think you could still
vote for that candidate or not?"
A sizable majority -- an average
of 65 percent of voters in those three states -- said that they would vote
for the candidate they agreed with on other issues but not on immigration.
But an average of 22 percent said that illegal immigration could be a
deal-breaker for them when it comes to voting for a candidate.
Of
course the data mean three times as many voters don't think it is a
deal-breaker than do, Yet, the sizable number who put it in that category
underscore the issue's potential clout in anything resembling a close
election.
Most interesting is that 27 percent of independents --
the key swing voters who decide elections -- say immigration could turn
them away from a candidate, more than either Democrats or Republicans.
As we are seeing now in Iowa, immigration isn't just an issue in
border states anymore.
Peter A. Brown is the
assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. Comment
at ne...@postbulletin.com.
|
| Do you want
more or less information? |
|
Do you want fewer emails or to UNSUBSCRIBE
from receiving any emails?
As a member of the NumbersUSA Action Network, you have four options
about how much email and Alerts you get from us. You can change the
frequency of our communication with you at any time by clicking
here to go to your Registration Form. There you can choose among Total
Activism, Moderate Activism, Limited Activism or No Email. If you feel
like you are not getting enough information from us, be sure to change
your registration to TOTAL ACTIVISM.
Update your NumbersUSA Interest Survey This may be a good time for you
to make sure that you've let us know all of the areas of immigration
reform in which you are interested. Click
here to further customize your Interest Survey and the type of alerts
you receive from us. P.S. NumbersUSA's financial management meets all
the criteria of the IRS as a non-partisan, non-profit organization,
and as an authorized charity of the Combined Federal Campaign.
Handling of donations is overseen and held accountable by a Board of
independent directors and by independent Auditors. |