Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 67
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500

    How Should The GOP Handle Immigration Reform?

    Question? In all likely hood the Dem's will Push immigration reform with amnesty very soon. If the GOP finally gives in, Would that make the Dem's the hero's in the eyes of Hispanics? Would it be like what the civil rights act did with blacks all over again and endear Latinos to the Dem's for generations? Would the GOP be better off fighting it, and come off looking like the villain?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,538
    vCash
    1500
    there seems to be a CERTAIN amount of consensus on the issue.
    It just helps in enflaming polarization to focus on the differences.

    I think a combination of amnesty AND stricter border control/penalty laws is the compromise.
    All that was REALLY being debated was which would come 1st.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,805
    vCash
    1500
    I think the biggest republican problem regarding immigration has been tone, even more so than policy. Generally speaking, republicans have been for tougher border security over everything else. There were some that were against any path to citizenship but I think everyone realizes that we aren't going to deport 10 million illegals (or whatever the number is). So the compromise is there, tougher borders, some path to citizenship for people who "qualify" (meaning there should be some screening process) and streamline the legal immigration process. The republicans have always come across as heartless when it comes to immigration.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    there seems to be a CERTAIN amount of consensus on the issue.
    It just helps in enflaming polarization to focus on the differences.

    I think a combination of amnesty AND stricter border control/penalty laws is the compromise.
    All that was REALLY being debated was which would come 1st.
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    I think the biggest republican problem regarding immigration has been tone, even more so than policy. Generally speaking, republicans have been for tougher border security over everything else. There were some that were against any path to citizenship but I think everyone realizes that we aren't going to deport 10 million illegals (or whatever the number is). So the compromise is there, tougher borders, some path to citizenship for people who "qualify" (meaning there should be some screening process) and streamline the legal immigration process. The republicans have always come across as heartless when it comes to immigration.


    See guys I don't think it's thats simple. The Dem's would be incredibly stupid not to make amnesty a priority in there reform plan. But From everything I have seen and read there is a significant portion of the GOP base who do not want amnesty for the illegals.

    This creates two problems.

    1. while the GOP would certainly like to have the white house those members of congress first and foremost want to keep there jobs. An supporting amnesty now could get many of them beat in their next election.



    2. The GOP has to consider would amnesty just be strengthen the Dem's? For example 10 Mil new votes ( i know thats not what it will be but it's just an example). Even if they some Latinos go back to the GOP.....most are still going to vote Dem. So in essence you might just be making the dem voting base stronger. An certainly alot memebers of there base will feel that way. They could very well end up losing ground.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,805
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jayjay33 View Post
    See guys I don't think it's thats simple. The Dem's would be incredibly stupid not to make amnesty a priority in there reform plan. But From everything I have seen and read there is a significant portion of the GOP base who do not want amnesty for the illegals.

    This creates two problems.

    1. while the GOP would certainly like to have the white house those members of congress first and foremost want to keep there jobs. An supporting amnesty now could get many of them beat in their next election.



    2. The GOP has to consider would amnesty just be strengthen the Dem's? For example 10 Mil new votes ( i know thats not what it will be but it's just an example). Even if they some Latinos go back to the GOP.....most are still going to vote Dem. So in essence you might just be making the dem voting base stronger. An certainly alot memebers of there base will feel that way. They could very well end up losing ground.
    1. I think you make a good point. The GOP, specifically those up for reelection next time, will have to walk a tight rope and make sure they aren't perceived to cave or be to weak on any compromise. The one thing the tea party has shown is an effectiveness to take out seemingly popular candidates in the primary from the right.

    2. I understand what you are saying about the risk of handing the Dems a victory that could strengthen them with Hispanic voters. However, in theory, a path to citizenship isn't the same as citizenship, meaning those people wouldn't be able to vote right away most likely. There's a different ways to look at this. One way is, if the Dems are in power when the "amnesty" or compromise is made, then those new voters or that voting base will be forever Democrats. The counterpoint would be that, once immigration is off the table, those voters would be able to look at other issues and that the GOP, would hopefully (for them), be able to appeal to them on other issues.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,960
    vCash
    1500
    why do people call it amnesty? Amnesty is what Reagan did. If you make people learn english, pay a fee, no automatic legal status must earn it, temporary status for now until they prove they are not felons or violent offenders, stay out of trouble, pay back taxes etc. THAT ISNT AMNESTY. Amnesty is saying go apply at your local immigration office and your green card will be waiting. I support amnesty but I think the majority of Americans would prefer something along what I stated and I think that is what would work best.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    1. I think you make a good point. The GOP, specifically those up for reelection next time, will have to walk a tight rope and make sure they aren't perceived to cave or be to weak on any compromise. The one thing the tea party has shown is an effectiveness to take out seemingly popular candidates in the primary from the right.

    2. I understand what you are saying about the risk of handing the Dems a victory that could strengthen them with Hispanic voters. However, in theory, a path to citizenship isn't the same as citizenship, meaning those people wouldn't be able to vote right away most likely. There's a different ways to look at this. One way is, if the Dems are in power when the "amnesty" or compromise is made, then those new voters or that voting base will be forever Democrats. The counterpoint would be that, once immigration is off the table, those voters would be able to look at other issues and that the GOP, would hopefully (for them), be able to appeal to them on other issues.

    I don't disagree with you point at all. But thats why i asked the question and said it's not that simple. Some think the GOP supporting amnesty should be a no brainer, but in actullay it 's a big risk. An to your point not supporting it is also big risk as well.


    But from the GOP stand point theres one thing you should conisder. If you block amnetsy now and later it turns out to be the wrong call you can still comeback and change you stance. However if you allow the Dems to open the flood gates and it turns out to be the wrong call, theres no closing that door. An you run the risk of loosing the counrty. Thats why i thought this was such an interesting question. Either decision or both could end up making them a minority the party. It really is A much tougher decision to make than some people think.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by lamar2006 View Post
    why do people call it amnesty? Amnesty is what Reagan did. If you make people learn english, pay a fee, no automatic legal status must earn it, temporary status for now until they prove they are not felons or violent offenders, stay out of trouble, pay back taxes etc. THAT ISNT AMNESTY. Amnesty is saying go apply at your local immigration office and your green card will be waiting. I support amnesty but I think the majority of Americans would prefer something along what I stated and I think that is what would work best.

    Because the word amnesty doesnt mean automaitc green card. Entering the country improperly is "illegal". So choosing not to arrest and or deport them is in fact granting them amnesty from there illegal act.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,743
    vCash
    1500
    First there isn't such thing as opening the flood gates. Nothing in politics is forever and generally swings back and forth. So if the Democrats are on the right side and whatever happens happens it wouldn't all of the sudden make them the dominate party forever. If that was the case then African Americans would all be Republicans since they where the party that passed the Civil Rights Act.

    As far as how they approach fixing immigration it has to start with softening their tone. Immigration reform is something that will happen sooner or later therefore they need to back off the harsh rhetoric that has been used. Stop with the laws in different states trying to crack down on it as they have proven thus far to be ineffective with the federal government blocking them soon as they are passed. That would greatly help the image of the GOP with Hispanic voters then beyond that start with small pieces. A full revamp of the system is going to be a very long drawn out process. So starting with something along the lines of the dream act would be helpful and both parties could agree on.

    Beyond that it really depends on what Obama has in mind for his second term. Does he bring up Immigration reform after we get through avoiding sequestration? Or does he go after tax code reform? It is going to have to be an either or proposition I believe. They have probably a calendar year to get something major done before reelection season starts again. Once that happens I don't think anything major is getting done. The makeup of Congress after that will go a great distance in determining how to proceed. The House will almost assuredly stay in GOP control with 33 Senators up for reelection (20 D, 13 R). If by some chance the GOP picks up the Senate also then they would be able to be the party in charge when immigration reform occurs.
    French writer Alexis de Tocqueville warned about when visiting this fledgling democracy in the early 19th century that this "American republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosiercubsfan View Post
    First there isn't such thing as opening the flood gates. Nothing in politics is forever and generally swings back and forth. So if the Democrats are on the right side and whatever happens happens it wouldn't all of the sudden make them the dominate party forever. If that was the case then African Americans would all be Republicans since they where the party that passed the Civil Rights Act.

    As far as how they approach fixing immigration it has to start with softening their tone. Immigration reform is something that will happen sooner or later therefore they need to back off the harsh rhetoric that has been used. Stop with the laws in different states trying to crack down on it as they have proven thus far to be ineffective with the federal government blocking them soon as they are passed. That would greatly help the image of the GOP with Hispanic voters then beyond that start with small pieces. A full revamp of the system is going to be a very long drawn out process. So starting with something along the lines of the dream act would be helpful and both parties could agree on.

    Beyond that it really depends on what Obama has in mind for his second term. Does he bring up Immigration reform after we get through avoiding sequestration? Or does he go after tax code reform? It is going to have to be an either or proposition I believe. They have probably a calendar year to get something major done before reelection season starts again. Once that happens I don't think anything major is getting done. The makeup of Congress after that will go a great distance in determining how to proceed. The House will almost assuredly stay in GOP control with 33 Senators up for reelection (20 D, 13 R). If by some chance the GOP picks up the Senate also then they would be able to be the party in charge when immigration reform occurs.

    Why do you even write stuff like this? Everyone knows full well who's bill it was and who blacks gave the credit to and the results of getting said credit. That's just completely ridiculous, "the Republicans passed it" I mean seriously. Thats what I mean when I say you are completely out of touch.


    In the 1960 presidential election campaign John F. Kennedy argued for a new Civil Rights Act. After the election it was discovered that over 70 per cent of the African American vote went to Kennedy. However, during the first two years of his presidency, Kennedy failed to put forward his promised legislation.



    Does any of that sound familar to you? Sounds alot like what's going on now doesn't. An we all know how that turned out, who got the credit and the VOTES don't we. Man you are a GOP spin machine.


    Edit. Now that I think about more and how similar it really is. If one were so inclined to conspiracy theories. They might even think this whole thing was patterned after JFK and the civil rights acts scenario in order to duplicate the results with Latinos.
    Last edited by jayjay33; 11-09-2012 at 10:37 PM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,725
    vCash
    1500
    I would start by not treating immigrants like criminals and saying how they just want to be takers from the system would be an excellent start.

    They should come around and support the DREAM Act. The idea of children who came here, of no fault of their own, and decide to join the Armed Forces or get an advanced degree should be rewarded with citizenship. That is the kind of people we want, regardless of ethnicity. Smarter and courageous people are always going to be a net benefit for our country and to deny those people a chance for citizenship because they were brought to this country as infants is asinine.
    Member of the Owlluminati!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I would start by not treating immigrants like criminals and saying how they just want to be takers from the system would be an excellent start.

    They should come around and support the DREAM Act. The idea of children who came here, of no fault of their own, and decide to join the Armed Forces or get an advanced degree should be rewarded with citizenship. That is the kind of people we want, regardless of ethnicity. Smarter and courageous people are always going to be a net benefit for our country and to deny those people a chance for citizenship because they were brought to this country as infants is asinine.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,743
    vCash
    1500
    nvm your not worth responding to.
    French writer Alexis de Tocqueville warned about when visiting this fledgling democracy in the early 19th century that this "American republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosiercubsfan View Post
    nvm your not worth responding to.

    that's fine with me. I know you hate that theres some who will actually call you on all your BS. But im not going to let you get away with spouting foolishness, like that crap you wrote. I mean that was just absurd.........

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,743
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jayjay33 View Post
    that's fine with me. I know you hate that theres some who will actually call you on all your BS. But im not going to let you get away with spouting foolishness, like that crap you wrote. I mean that was just absurd.........
    No that isn't it at all. Just tired of a purely partisan poster not bothering to read anything I write before talking ****. Your not worth the time nor the effort.

    edit

    And I like your comment about not letting me get away with anything. You act as though your opinion on anything actually means anything to me. With that said I am done with you.
    Last edited by hoosiercubsfan; 11-09-2012 at 10:47 PM.
    French writer Alexis de Tocqueville warned about when visiting this fledgling democracy in the early 19th century that this "American republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •