Replies

Will have to look for the link, but one analysis I read of the election stated that NOT ONE Republican candidate that ran on a restrictionist (anti-amnesty) immigration platform won.

Well how about Tancredo as that's his sole focal point at the present time. There were others that were anti-amnesty that won, it just may not have been the center piece of their campaign.

I can give two examples here in my state. Rep Tom Osborne, who is just short of deity status in Nebraska, lost the Republican gubernatorial primary to Dave Heineman. This was considered the biggest political upset in state history and many blamed the loss on T.O.'s support for "comprehensive reform". (I voted for Tom for other reasons but did not support his stand on immigration)

Pete Ricketts was crushed by Ben Nelson in the Nebraska senate race. This was in spite of the fact that he invested $15-20 million of his own money and was a very conservative candidate in a conservative state. One of the contributing factors in the race was Pete's support for the McCain bill in the Senate. He was tagged from the get go as pro amnesty and it stuck. Nelson, on the other hand, was very much against McCain and made it abundantly clear during the race. (I voted for Ricketts because a)I work for his company and know him to be a genuine conservative guy and b) a vote for Nelson was still a vote for Harry Reid)

I still don't believe that shamnesty has anywhere near majority support in the Republican Party. I know that W is not a true conservative but I still cannot for the life of me understand why is so supportive of this horrible policy.