Apparently, he desires a second term more than amnesty.
Not when the bill described in Post #5 is on the table. If that passes, and he vetoes it, you can crow -- and I'll eat it.
Realistically, how could he have a vetoed a "border security" law and not damaged himself politically? 245(i) was attached to this originally so that he could minimize the amnesty provision under the mantel of "Border Security." Now it's out there, by itself -- which was politically smart of sleazy Little Tommy -- no more subterfuge -- either it's amnesty, or it ain't.