Replies

What the anti-Tancredo people should take from this is this:

TWO YEARS AGO THIS WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE BEEN ON THE RADAR

Uh yes it was. Matt Throckmorton made immigration his main issue against Chris Cannon in 2004. He got 42% of the primary vote.

in 2006 John Jacob spends 6 times as much money as Throckmorton and the race generates massive local and some national interest and Jacob get's a whopping 2 percentage point gain.

If the immigration issue was as "on the radar" two years ago as you claim when Matt Throckmorton "made immigration his main issue against Chris Cannon in 2004," what was the effect of his "42% of the primary vote?"

Did Cannon not go out of his way to say he was tough on illegal immigration?

Why didn't some people believe him?

Did the people who believed him vote for him because they believed him?

Did Cannon not vote FOR the House bill?

Where did John Jacob get "6 times as much money as Throckmorton" to spend in 2006?

Why is it insignificant that Jacob got a "2 percentage point gain?"

Why do you dismiss the fact that this race is now generating more local and national interest?

I don't expect you to answer these questions. You seem rather tendentious and vitriolic.

You seem to be celebrating that your cup is still half full but I think you are ignoring a rather significant hole in the bottom of it.

Totally missing the point, Dane. No one in, say, Ohio where I am was even DISCUSSING illegals two years ago.

And for you to think that a VERY conservative candidate who is wrong on this particular issue, and who had a serious primary challenge, is evidence there isn't a "problem" with being pro-illegal, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Bilbray, who was a total RINO in all other things, won SOLELY on illegals. It's a huge, huge issue, and all your wishing won't wish it away.