there a very few blacks or minority here. and look at the way they act. they bring the hate to themselfs. nobody goes gunning for them. they love to use race cards. they in fact have more hate still to the white man, even though most whites i know including myself have given them ever chance of being what they are , another human being.
merry christmas
and lets get backto the voting.
and all honesty , i cant see why you or anyone would vote for paul. look at his voting track record and look at what side of the fence he really is
This whole thing reminds me of all the stories of guys getting drunk at the Christmas party and wrecking their careers.
Fortunately this is just a posting fourm. So its easier to get over than making an ass of yourself at a saloon.
People will always remember that you are a prick, however.
Fortunately this is just a posting fourm. So its easier to get over than making an ass of yourself at a saloon.
People will always remember that you are a prick, however.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD width=7> </TD><TD><TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD bgColor=#ffffff marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" leftmargin="0" topmargin="0"><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=650 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>
</TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD rowSpan=3> </TD><TD class=t1fromdatetext>From: Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1fromdatetext>Date: Saturday 22DEC07 7 p.m. EST </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1fromdatetext> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redunderbigheader colSpan=2>How well does each candidate promise to end future illegal immigration and to resist all amnesties? </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1thinwhitespace colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1letterblock vAlign=top align=left width=470>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 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 Guiliani 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. Guiliani has pretty close to the same position, although not quite as clearly stated. Interestingly, we don't find any sign that Guiliani'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 Guiliani 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 others in this category.
</TD><TD vAlign=top align=right width=180><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>in this email:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1subjectstext>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 GUILIANI
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
Good promises to stop future illegal immigration
Fair
JOHN McCAIN
CHRIS DODD
RUDY GUILIANI
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
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>actions in brief:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1subjectstext>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. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>donate now:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1generaltext>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 0.5%. 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. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>how to reply:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1generaltext vAlign=top>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.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1letterblock vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>
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 news@postbulletin.com.
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redoversmallheader vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>Do you want more or less information?</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redundersmallfooter vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>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. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
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 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 Guiliani 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. Guiliani has pretty close to the same position, although not quite as clearly stated. Interestingly, we don't find any sign that Guiliani'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 Guiliani 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 others in this category.
</TD><TD vAlign=top align=right width=180><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>in this email:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1subjectstext>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 GUILIANI
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
Good promises to stop future illegal immigration
Fair
JOHN McCAIN
CHRIS DODD
RUDY GUILIANI
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
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>actions in brief:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1subjectstext>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. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>donate now:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1generaltext>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 0.5%. 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. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>how to reply:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1generaltext vAlign=top>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.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1letterblock vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>
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 news@postbulletin.com.
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redoversmallheader vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>Do you want more or less information?</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redundersmallfooter vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>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. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD width=7></TD><TD><TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD bgColor=#ffffff marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" topmargin="0" leftmargin="0"><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=650 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD rowSpan=3></TD><TD class=t1fromdatetext>From: Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1fromdatetext>Date: Saturday 22DEC07 7 p.m. EST </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1fromdatetext></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redunderbigheader colSpan=2>How well does each candidate promise to end future illegal immigration and to resist all amnesties? </TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1thinwhitespace colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1letterblock vAlign=top align=left width=470>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 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 Guiliani 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. Guiliani has pretty close to the same position, although not quite as clearly stated. Interestingly, we don't find any sign that Guiliani'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 Guiliani 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 others in this category.
</TD><TD vAlign=top align=right width=180><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>in this email:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1subjectstext>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 GUILIANI
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
Good promises to stop future illegal immigration
Fair
JOHN McCAIN
CHRIS DODD
RUDY GUILIANI
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
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>actions in brief:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1subjectstext>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.
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>donate now:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1generaltext>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 0.5%. 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.
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1bluesubheader>how to reply:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1generaltext vAlign=top>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.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1letterblock vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>
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 news@postbulletin.com.
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redoversmallheader vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>Do you want more or less information?</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t1redundersmallfooter vAlign=top align=left colSpan=2>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.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
ron paul has a horrible voting record. and almost all bills he votes for fails.
if he was to win the nom , do you really think republicans will back him. i think not
It never fails that you racist folks can't tell the difference between words that sound the same but...get this...they are not spelled the same. Can you understand that buddy?
Merry Christmas man, no hard feelings here. I couldn't be happier in my life right now. My "crack smoking wife" is 31, smoking hot and pulls in $200K+ a year with a Harvard law degree...and she is the first person in her family to go to college. Go on hating all you want, I will keep on enjoying my life and loving my wife!
It's like you knew there was a difference, but just couldn't quite figure it out, huh? I would guess english is not your first language, but you being a racist makes that less likely, so I guess you are just flat out dumb, uneducated or both. I feel sorry for you Teddy!
