[Centennial]

This will be the headline the day after the November elections if the Democrat nominee is astute enough to use one single viseral issue to hammer George Bush.

Illegal immigration. If the Democrat opponent promises to make the U.S. borders secure and stop the flow of illegals he will be able to steal all the votes he needs from the Republicans to propel himself into the White House. Bush has struck a nerve with the vast majority of Americans on the issue of illegal immigration and it is ready to explode in his face if his Democrat opponet is smart enough to capitalize on it.

Bush should take a clue on what happened in California on the issue of granting drivers licenses to illegals. The turn around in the California state house on this issue was monumental. California with the majority of Hispanics in the U.S. would not stand for something as simple as granting a drivers license to illegals. What does Bush think will be the reaction of the vast majority of Americans to his far reaching proposal? Clearly he has planted a potential political bomb shell that can be detonated by a Democrat opponet with the guts to use it.

The democrats would not abandon a champion who promises to secure our borders. Republicans and independents will in huge numbers abandon George Bush on this one issue. As a life long Republican I hope the Democrat who runs against Bush is too cowardly and poorly advised to use this wedge issue against my party. But I wouldn't bet on it.

[MJY1288]

LOL, Single Issue Voters, ROFLMAO, God knows we have many of them here

[cyborg]

I was about to scream TROLLLLLLLLL but good thing I read the article (i need a cup of coffee)

[MegaSilver]

This is the party of "amnesty, acid, and abortion." If they're smart, they'll keep their mouths shut. If they're not, they'll hammer Bush for not giving full-blown citizenship.

[TomB]

If the Democrat opponent promises to make the U.S. borders secure and stop the flow of illegals he will be able to steal all the votes he needs from the Republicans to propel himself into the White House.

ROTFLMAO!

That's like saying, "all the Dems have to do is declare life begins at conception and that abortion should be outlawed, and they'll get all the votes they need!"

[zarf]

Anyone who thinks the Democrats wouldn't do the same as Bush-except ten fold-is dillusional.

It's about sucking up to Latino voters.

Everyone does it. Lets move on.

[Dog Gone]

Hell yeah, if you don't like Bush's proposal, do everything to make sure a Democrat gets elected! Good advice for any Republican retard.

[Cicero]

There are things about Bush that I like very much, and things about Bush that I don't like. On the whole, I continue to support him and will vote for him in 2004. But I agree that this was a politically stupid move.

Even if no Democrat raises the issue, plenty of conservatives already have. And the result will be that a lot of Bush's base may stay home. Even though he wins, it will cost him the opportunity to end the Senate filibusters and finally appoint some good judges. That's why it's important not only that Bush should win, but that he whould win by a lot--because otherwise we'll be stuck with judicial tyranny for another four years.

Democrats will not want to give the faintest appearance of being racist or anti-Hispanic. But there is a security issue here, and also a jobs issue. As recent posts have pointed out, millions of illegal immigrants means that it's harder to get a job and harder to get a decent salary.

[Paleo Conservative]

If the Democrat opponent promises to make the U.S. borders secure and stop the flow of illegals

ROTFLMAO!

Do you really think there are any DemocRATS intereseted in stopping illegal immigration? Hell the DemocRATS like immigration from poor third world countries because it dilutes Republican voting strength. They figure that these immigrants will have a high demand for socialist programs. What opposition there is comes mostly from House Republicans.

[Enterprise]

My view has shown that the voters will occasionally let the Republicans have a majority, like they had recently in California. It doesn't take much for the voters to throw out the Republicans though. I believe the Republicans were thrown out in California because they were tinkering with the overtime regulations. They are tinkering with them again, on a National level, and couple that with the illegal alien issue and it wouldn't surprise me to see the voters put in the "sink sex" party again.

[RAY]

Who gets the Hispanic vote -- and from a practical standpoint, what is an actual workable alternative. After all, life is a series of compromises.

[Joee]

After Clinton, I gave up, as I figured the Nation would not survive. Then came Bush and I considered him a gift from God. Now I have to face the ilks of Kerry, Dean and the Left. At 76, I figure time is running out, but I don't want to see the Left win, or another crud again take over the Oval Office.

[baldy]

Learning to spell might impress me.

[squidly]

Neither party is willing to do what you suggest; they both want to lay claim to the growing Hispanic vote.

We the electorate have no particularly good choices.

[1rudeboy]

If the Democrat opponent promises to make the U.S. borders secure and stop the flow of illegals he will be able to steal all the votes he needs from the Republicans to propel himself into the White House.

If I was 6'6", with speed, and could sink a jumpshot, I'd be in the NBA.

[Hand em their arse]

Look, the republicans are only going to pull about 12-15% of the hispanic vote. Bush and Rove's thoughts I think on this is if we can even look like we are going to bump a few more points it's going to end up causing them to spend a hell of alot more money than they want to to pull back into play states like FL, TX and Cali. And hopefully leaving states like WI, IL, MI and WV underfunded.

Not the most ethical move but why let that stop us...

[WinOne4TheGipper]

I will proudly cast my first presidential vote for George W. Bush, and hope that single- issue people don't end up putting a kill-em-till-they-leave-the-womb-and-in-some-cases-even-after, tax-and-spend, womb-to-tomb-entitlments liberal in the White House.

[handy]

I'll vote straight Rebublican and give the party money like I always do. But I still cannot figure out why Bush felt the need to promote the immigration bill and announce the Man to Mars stuff. The people at the office are all wondering the same thing, why is he spending so much money? I'd vote for Satan (almost) if he'd give me a tax cut. The spending & rewarding illegal (alien) behavior really bothers me...

[gwbiny2k]

My knee-jerk reaction was...what a terrible proposal by Bush!
But thinking further, here are my thoughts:
We have had illegals coming here for 50 years.
No one has been able or willing to stop this flow.
Why? Because the illegals are definitely filling a need
for cheap manual labor. The employers want them, the
consumers want them. Yet we have no way to find out
their current address without spending Billions.
None of the 911 hijackers entered illegally. None of them
did cheap manual labor. They were financed by others.
So does it make sense to SEPARATE the legitimate workers from the
others by issuing work-permits and thus have them on record?
The work-permits can be cross-checked with employers and
payroll records. The other aliens legal or illegal then
become a much smaller pool to track.
By the way, I had some landscaping work done by a Mexican
(I did not check for his immigration documents) who did the
job for $2000 versus the lowest competing bid of $4500 which
I could not afford.

[Mike Darancette]

Illegal immigration.

There is as much of a chance of a RAT candidate coming out with a tough policy against Illegal Immigration as a Republican championing Abortion on demand. Will not happen.

OBTW: An immigration bill as imagined by people on this board will not happen.

[HitmanLV]

I think that the dem platform will never allow a strong stand of illegal immigration - they have certainly never been for it before, and to do so now doesn't sit well with most the the dem leadership's vision.

You say "The democrats would not abandon a champion who promises to secure our borders." I don't see any dem taking a strong stand like that, in any case.