Updated Immi. Ratings on Pres. Candidates

Numbers USA ^ | January 23, 2008 | Roy Beck

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

DEAR AMERICANS,

More than half of you will be voting in Presidential Primaries over the next few weeks.

To the right are my latest overall assessments of each candidate based on immigration promises and past actions.

I hope that you will be placing significant weight in your choice based on a candidate's commitment to protect American workers, communities and the environment from current immigration levels that are set to add another 100 million people over the next few decades.

The point totals are the sum of four ratings:

All immigration actions in the past while in political office.

Promises to oppose amnesty for illegal aliens and to cause them to go back to their home countries over time.

Promises in many specific areas of enforcement to stop future illegal immigration.

Promises to reduce future legal flows of foreign workers to protect American workers, communities and natural resources.
We are most interested in what the candidates are promising most recently, how publicly they have made the promises and in what kind of specificity.

We encourage all candidates to turn away from bad or poor positions of the past. And we reward them with improved ratings when they adopt the preferences of the majority of Americans for far less overall immigration.

Nonetheless, it matters what a candidate has done in the past, so 25% of these ratings is based on past actions while in office, since a longer term commitment to less immigration suggests consistency and perhaps a deeper commitment to the promises being made.

As the campaign has progressed, the poor immigration candidates have gotten worse, promising to use high levels of legal and illegal immigration to do more harm to America's poor, its middle classes, its natural environment and its taxpayers. (You see their names in the list to the right printed in black and red.)

The fair-to-good immigration candidates have been growing progressively better in their promises, although none yet qualify as excellent on the issues (now that Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo have withdrawn).

So, what you now see are two clearly defined groups of candidates at the upper and lower ends, with nobody in the middle.

Be sure to look at all 16 of the immigration ratings for each candidate at: www.CongressGrades.org.

***************************
Please note that our ratings do NOT amount to endorsements. Nor do they convey anything about the character, the strength or any other positions about the candidates. We know that every one of these candidates has supporters among the users of NumbersUSA for a lot of different reasons.
***************************

SINCERELY,
ROY BECK

in this email:
Latest OVERALL Presidential Candidate Ratings On IMMIGRATION
How Good Are The Promises of Each Candidate to PROTECT Workers, Communities and Taxpayers FROM OVER-IMMIGRATION? (SEE TEXT TO LEFT AND BELOW FOR HOW POINTS WERE ASSIGNED ON 36-POINT SCALE ... NumbersUSA does NOT endorse candidates.)

EXCELLENT
None

VERY GOOD
Mitt Romney (28 points)

GOOD
RON PAUL (24 points)
MIKE HUCKABEE (24 points)

POOR
RUDY GIULIANIA (7 points)

BAD
JOHN McCAIN (5 points)
JOHN EDWARDS (5 points)
HILLARY CLINTON (4 points)
BARACK OBAMA (4 points)

Look at full ratings in 16 categories at Presidential Candidate Ratings website.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

No candidate is rated Excellent, Romney is rated Good.

[dirtboy]

Romney is rated Good.

Which one? The Mitt who a ways back thought McCain-Kennedy was hunky dory? Or the new, improved Mitt?

[thingumbob]

And that will be “Good” enough for me.

[Antoninus]

No candidate is rated Excellent, Romney is rated Good.

Yeah, today. Wait until Mr. No Core Values gets into office.

[weegee]

What are Alan Keyes (R) ‘s ratings on this issue?

[Antoninus]

And that will be “Good” enough for me.

Ask yourself this question: How likely is it that a corporate elite guy like Flip Romney will actually do something to stem the flow of illegal aliens?

Here's my prediction. He'll make a big show of trying to do something to stop it, fail, sign a bill granting amnesty every bit as bad as Bush's proposal, and then claim he did the best he could have under the circumstances.

That's been his pattern. Watch for it again if this opportunist manages to lie his way to DC.

[presently no screen name]

Actually, they have him at Very Good. Wonder how much he paid for that?

[CharlesWayneCT]

If you insist, figure it’s the new, improved Mitt.

Although they rated his performance as Governor, and he rated very well, so it’s also the old Mitt. In fact, on existing record he had actually outperformed Fred Thompson.

There’s a reason Tom Tancredo felt comfortable endorsing Mitt Romney.

[ari-freedom]

Huck is “good” though hopefully not for giving illegals free tuition

[Lancey Howard]

Romney should be rated “unknown”. But at least he has one rating that’s not squishy.

[presently no screen name]

We are most interested in what the candidates are promising most recently, how publicly they have made the promises and in what kind of specificity.

LOL! Very Good equals a flip flopper and a better BS'er!

[C210N]

If he follows his pattern, then:

3 years and 50 weeks into his presidency, he'll do something about it.

.... that's if he's a one term president. If he's a two-termer, he'll wait till 7 years, 50 weeks.

[thingumbob]

So name the candidate that can beat the Democratic ticket without looking like the mini-me version of it?

I started as a Fred voter but he's no longer an option.... Mitt is the best of what's left IMO. If he's out I'll be sitting back and watching Hillery win the White House......Because I heard some one say, "Sometimes it takes a Carter to get a Reagan" and I agree with that thought.

Please convince me otherwise....Here's your opening to influence my vote before March 4.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

What are Allen Keyes (R) ratings on this issue?

I included the entire NumbersUSA email. For complaints, see them!

[weegee]

Now I know what it is like when a vegan looks at the menu at a steakhouse and tries to find something palatable. The choices are THERE but not clearly labelled, the other selections are being pushed on the consumer.

[Antoninus]

So name the candidate that can beat the Democratic ticket without looking like the mini-me version of it?

There isn't one. Faux News and the "conservative" media picked our candidates and the voters were stupid enough to let them.

[estimator]

I'm less interested in what they're promising now and more interested in their past records.

To me, this is the most important issue of them all...open borders and amnesty will change America...and those changes are irreversible once they happen.

From the site:

What has been the previous record of immigration actions while in elected office?

ABYSMAL -- John McCain

BAD -- Rudy Giuliani

BAD -- Hillary Clinton

BAD -- Barack Obama

BAD -- John Edwards

BAD -- Mike Huckabee

GOOD -- Ron Paul

GOOD -- Mitt Romney

[thingumbob]

Actually, these guys were the only ones who threw their hats in the ring.......and it had more to do with money initially and name recognition.

So who would you choose as the candidate for the conservative's if you could choose any living person to run?

[weegee]

Thompson, Tancredo, Hunter, and Keyes got “shut out”.

Keyes is still in the race.

I’ve had enough of Democrat crossover voters influencing our choices.

[thingumbob]

I'm with you on that one.....it's these g*d damn states that have created this problem.

The Republican party needs to relegate these crossover states to the end of the line.....your choices have a funny way of narrowing down by then.