Posted on 08/19/2015 11:11:47 AM PDT by jimbo123
It may not seem like it, but this week has seen the most significant development yet in the immigration debate’s role in the 2016 election. I’d go even farther — it’s possible that the entire presidential election just got decided.
Is that an overstatement? Maybe. But hear me out.
For months, people like me have been pointing to the fundamental challenge Republican presidential candidates face on immigration: they need to talk tough to appeal to their base in the primaries, but doing so risks alienating the Hispanic voters they’ll need in the general election. This was always going to be a difficult line to walk, but a bunch of their candidates just leaped off to one side.
After Donald Trump released his immigration plan, which includes an end to birthright citizenship — stating that if you were born in the United States but your parents were undocumented, you don’t get to be a citizen — some of his competitors jumped up to say that they agreed. NBC News asked Scott Walker the question directly, and he seemed to reply that he does favor an end to birthright citizenship, though his campaign qualified the statement later. Bobby Jindal tweeted, “We need to end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants.” Then reporters began looking over others’ past statements to see where they stood on this issue, and found that this isn’t an uncommon position among the GOP field. Remember all the agonizing Republicans did about how they had to reach out to Hispanic voters? They never figured out how to do it, and now they’re running in the opposite direction.
Here is the list of Republican candidates who have at least suggested openness to ending birthright citizenship, which would mean repealing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution: Donald Trump, Scott Walker,
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
If by “give away” you mean “win,” then I suppose they did.
Well at his point its a walk away for Trump..
The desperation - it stinks
Why shouldn’t Hispanics here be willing to to “pull the ladder up after them”?
Every other group of people on the planet does it LOL!
What does WashPost find deficient in Hispanics?
Paul Waldman is to the left of Van Jones or Bernie Sanders.
A President with a pen and a phone could use an executive order to modify this aspect of the 14th amendment.
And we're sick of having multi-language signs. We're sick of being told that speaking English is racist. All because of illegal immigration. We're sick of being told that we have roll over and accept illegal immigration.
WaPo & NYT are always here to tell us how to win. Just ax em!
Nope, no overstatement. The demmonRATs lose and the Country wins.
Illegals get out of the USA.
Ted Cruz’s Secret Trump Strategy (Holding joint events? They’ve met 5 times and talk on the phone?)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3326440/posts
Probably, because three of the leading candidates (Cruz, Rubio and Jindal) wouldn’t qualify under the Trump diktats. In fact, Trump’s own sister would be an illegal. His family were Scottish immigrants and she was born before they got citizenship.
Of course, this leaves one who is undeniably a citizen: Bush. Hope you like him, guys.
The opposition is trying to save us from ourselves ?
We must be on the right course, if we were making a fatal error, they’d be silent.
Were Rubio’s parents legal? I can’t find anything definite.
Yea, they keep saying that every time Trump says something “off the reservation” so to speak, of both left and so-called right, but strangely enough it’s always like a drink of water in the desert to ordinary Americans.
It was Trump's grandfather that immigrated. Not his parents.
Only if they stumble bum around the argument like the other GOPe fools who couldn’t sell a snow cone to a man crawling across the hot desert....
Yes, we should always listen to the advice of our opponents. Not to mention, they are the very reason that these things became “unmentionable” in the first place, and they are aghast that Trump is making it OK to ask legitimate questions about these issues, publicly. They thought that they had taken these things off the table for good and all, like they have tried to make it the new n-word to have moral principles against sodomites and their agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.