Posted on 04/16/2006 10:48:10 AM PDT by wagglebee
2008 presidential hopeful George Allen urged his Senate colleagues on Sunday to "put the pedal to the metal" on immigration reform and "first and foremost, secure the borders."
"[For] the people out there in the real world . . . this is a hot issue," Sen. Allen told CBS's "Face the Nation." "I think the Senate needs to put the pedal to the metal, get moving, make decisions and first and foremost, secure the borders."
On some of the amnesty bills currently before Congress, Allen said: "We should not reward illegal behavior because all you'll get is more illegal behavior."
Asked if Republican-controlled Congress would "be hurt" by further inaction on illegal immigration, Allen said: "I think Republicans need to stand up for the rule of law. I think Republicans need to stand up for securing our borders. And I think Republicans - and all people - ought to look at history."
The Virginia GOP'er noted that in 1986, amnesty was provided to the 3 million illegals then in the country.
"Now we have approximately 11 million in the country illegally," he added. "Twenty years from now we're going to have 20 million.
"We need to do this right, do it properly and learn from history."
Just fine thanks. I hope my luck holds. I am getting OLD!
I wish I could build a candidate from the "parts" of those available.
There's plenty of time for a better candidate to show up.
Me to! For both of us and for the same reason!
Dear Torie,
I'm not sure that the polls really show the folks who actually go out and vote in the primaries every four years. We social conservatives and pro-lifers in particular can be a rather fanatical bunch, or so I'm told. ;-)
Each of us brings to these discussions our own working theories of how politics work. My own working theory, at least at the presidential level, is that you win elections by getting more of the folks who are inclined to vote for you to get out and vote than the other guy gets the folks who are inclined to vote for him.
That's what happened in 2004. Mr. Kerry got more folks inclined to vote for him to actually go do the deed than any other candidate had ever done in the history of the United States. Ever.
Except for a fella named George W. Bush. Who got a couple million more.
But each man basically turned out his natural constituency, his coalition.
I think that Mr. McCain might be able to win the nomination. He's said a lot of nasty things about the Religious Right, but the bottom line is, he hasn't voted against the social conservatives a whole bunch of times, or taken positions that are entirely opposite to those desired by social conservatives. He can kiss and make up and get most of us to hold our noses and vote for him. He's done things to piss off other parts of the conservative, Republican coalition, but again, he may very well be able to kiss and make up.
He can win the nomination because he can, if he doesn't behave like an ass, appeal to voters in every part of the Republican coalition.
However, I doubt that pseudo-R Mr. Giuliani can do the same thing. I really doubt that he can get the nomination at all. It's possible, but it doesn't seem very likely to me. He is entirely, entirely alienated from at least social conservatives, and I don't think that folks whom I'll call "border security conservatives" are going to view him favorably, either. Maybe if he changes his rhetoric, he can attract some supply-siders. But really, other than the war, there is little reason for him to run nationally as a Republican.
And frankly, I think Mr. Lieberman would be more credible as a War Democrat than Mr. Giuliani might be as an otherwise liberal Republican.
If he happens to get the nomination, to a lot of folks who ordinarily vote Republican, he'll be an echo, not a choice.
After each election, I note the number of folks vote with the abortion issue as paramount. Roughly about 10% of the voters say they are adamant about voting pro-abortion. They will not vote for a pro-life candidate. Roughly about 20% of the voters say they will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate. Much of social conservatism coaslesces around the pro-life cause.
The Republican coalition (the folks you can actually get to vote Republican, assuming your candidate is acceptable to all parts of the coalition) comprises roughly 45% - 55% of the total population. The roughly 20% of folks who are adamant on the issue of life comprise about 40%, give or take, of the Republican coalition.
I really doubt that the Republicans can get enough cross overs from the Democrats to make up for the loss of a significant number of folks from this part of the coalition.
If the Republicans were to nominate a pro-abortion candidate, I think it's possible to see a small but real third party candidacy in 2008.
I know a lot of pro-lifers who also vote Republican. Most of us are not joined at the hip to the Republican Party, nor to any political party. Many of us grew up Democrat, and as the Democrat party abandoned us, we abandoned them. Should the Republicans now abandon us on what is for us the most important of all issues - the guarantee of fundamental human rights for ALL humans, many of us will no longer be counted among the ranks of Republican voters.
sitetest
Who?
If Guliani or McCain decide to get into the race, they'll be hard to beat. They can lose some Republicans because they'll pick up a lot of moderates and even some Dems.
I don't see Guiliani going anywhere, although I do think it is possible that he may be tapped as the running mate if Hitlery DOES NOT get the 'Rat nomination (he could probably deliver NY). I have always wondered if there is an agreement between Bush and McCain to support McCain in 2008, but Bush's poll numbers could make that a moot point.
Someone better than Allen.
That really isn't a very high standard.
Heck, even McCain is more conservative than Allen on abortion. But thank goodness he's too old to run.
Thanks for the post. At the moment, Rudy is leading the pack in the GOP primary in Georgia, to pick a state packed with so called "conservative" Pubbies at random. I think most GOP voters are fully informed as to who Rudy is. It is not like they think he is a social conservative, in your terms, and will desert him when they find he is not. Pubbie primary voters tend to be informed voters, who know what is shaking. Picking a president is a very special task, and responsibility, and different factors are in play, from the garden variety local race. One interesting aspect of one poll I saw, is that pro Bush Pubbies tend to favor Rudy, and anti Bush Pubbies (a growing cohert, and frankly I am rather down on him myself, but support Rudy so once again I don't fit the mold), tend to favor McCain. Isn't that interesting?
I have friends and family in Bear Sterns, they are still trying to figure it out.
On the upside, they are the only group that isn't saying 11 million but they are trying to come up with a real number.
Don't expect the Dems to be foolish enough to crossover for anyone in 2008. They want the presidency too desperately to sacrifice it.
All a Giuliani or McCain nomination would do is cost the GOP votes.
If he is, its recent.
I still remember cursing at him on TV during the summer when he was on CNN saying over 11 million.
If he is now saying a higher number, he needs to make sure folks like Tancredo and others should start too.
A large number of Democrats do not like Hillary and would support McCain or Guliani. I know a few, in my family, who've never supported a Republican in their lives but would vote for Rudy in a heartbeat because of the impression he made on them on 9/11 and subsequently.
Dear Torie,
It's a long way 'til the primaries, you'll forgive me if I take the polls at this moment with a grain, or perhaps a block of salt. To me, polling right now is about name recognition. If Mr. Giuliani can't score big right now, and I mean REALLY big (e.g., he should be able to poll absolute majorities), then I'm not sure he'll have much strength when folks actually start paying attention.
"Picking a president is a very special task, and responsibility, and different factors are in play, from the garden variety local race."
I agree. And so do most social conservatives, especially the hardcore part of the population that is do-or-die pro-life. I've actually voted for pro-abortion Republicans at levels below the presidency. I voted for Gov. Ehrlich here in Maryland. Why? Because the governor of Maryland isn't remotely related to the one thing that must happen for the pro-life movement to advance - overturning Roe.
I'm a little more squeamish about pro-abort US Representatives, and probably wouldn't vote for a pro-abort candidate for the US Senate, in that these folks vote on the confirmations of US judges, especially US Supreme Court justices.
The presidency, however, is the one unique office that not only currently has the most to do with our next goal - overturning Roe, but is also the one office that can create a national tone or mood. It's that old bully pulpit thingy.
"One interesting aspect of one poll I saw, is that pro Bush Pubbies tend to favor Rudy, and anti Bush Pubbies (a growing cohert, and frankly I am rather down on him myself, but support Rudy so once again I don't fit the mold), tend to favor McCain."
That is interesting, and doesn't bode well for Mr. Giuliani, in that Mr. Bush has increasingly alienated the folks who actually go out and vote in Republican primaries. I still count myself as a Bush supporter. I think he's made plenty of mistakes, many of them grossly stupid, but on most issues, he's pursued policies, in the main, of which I approve. It's tough to ask for more than that, and I won't.
Nonetheless, I wouldn't vote for Mr. Giuliani under any circumstances that I can foresee. I don't know any pro-life Republicans who would vote for him. I wouldn't be happy voting for Mr. McCain, but I would vote for him than for any Dem (unless he goes off the reservation on abortion). Lots of folks I know won't vote for him, but I'm willing.
sitetest
In the end, Democrats will hold their nose and vote for a true Democrat.
Or do you consider McCain and Giuliani true Democrats . . . .?
;)
Newt also
Bush won. He's pretty pro choice IMO
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.