Immigration Issues

With the Latino vote so important, expect to hear more about two issues, from the Obama camp, and probably at Thursday’s debate:

1) Drivers licenses for illegal aliens. It’s a big issue for Hispanics. Obama supports them; Clinton does not. Her flip-flopping on this topic first got her in trouble back in a November debate. Obama has maintained a consistent position.

2) Deporting illegals who have committed crimes. This is the first I’ve heard of this. Clinton seems to want to “ship ‘em out and ask questions later.” Unsurprisingly Clinton Irks Immigrants’ Advocates with such statements:

Immigrant-rights advocates and some Latino leaders are voicing concern at Senator Clinton’s campaign-trail rhetoric about swiftly deporting immigrants with a criminal past.

A vow to give the boot to criminal aliens has become an almost daily part of the New York senator’s presidential campaign spiel on overhauling the immigration system.

“Anybody who committed a crime in this country or in the country they came from has to be deported immediately, with no legal process. They are immediately gone,” Mrs. Clinton told a town hall meeting in Anderson, S.C., Thursday. On Wednesday, she told a crowd in North Bergen, N.J., that such criminals “absolutely” need to be deported. A day earlier, she told a rally in Salinas, Calif., that aliens with criminal records “should be deported, no questions asked.”

An important point here about the arithmetic of bloc voting. When you can ‘flip’ a voter (from your opponent’s bloc), that almost counts as 2 votes. Suppose the vast majority of Latvian Buddhists support candidate Jones. Jones is counting on the significant Latvian Buddhist bloc, who make up some big chunk of the electorate. Suddenly, the opposing candidate Smith, successfully panders to Latvian Buddhists, offering them free temples or something. Each voter he gains is subtracted from Jones’ total and added to his own. 1 + 1 = 2.

So, getting back to the Hispanic vote on Super Tuesday … Clinton has a big lead among them, her “brown firewall.” Every single Latino voter that Teddy and Obama peel off is worth two.

Note: Immigration has never been a critical issue for me, one way or the other. As far as I’m concerned, within the respective nominating battles: “Pander Away!” For all I care, the Republicans can propose the Great Wall of Texas, replete with .50 caliber machine guns mounted in turrets every 50 yards, with orders to shoot to kill. And the Dems can promise instant dry-foot citizenship to anyone who gets here.

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator on 28 Jan 2008 at 7:04 pm

    Clinton Responds To Campaign Critics…

    Hillary Clinton said she must respond in kind to attacks from rival Barack Obama even though she’d r…

Comments

  1. Redhand wrote:

    “Anybody who committed a crime in this country or in the country they came from has to be deported immediately, with no legal process. They are immediately gone,” Mrs. Clinton told a town hall meeting in Anderson, S.C., Thursday. On Wednesday, she told a crowd in North Bergen, N.J., that such criminals “absolutely” need to be deported. A day earlier, she told a rally in Salinas, Calif., that aliens with criminal records “should be deported, no questions asked.”

    This is such BS. I’m an immigration lawyer and can tell you that immigraton consequences of criminal activity is an incerdible difficult area. What Hillary is literally saying is that a $5.00 shoplisting middemeanor means you’re GONE, desipte the extraordinary harm deportation would cause your US citizen spouse, children, etc. This is pandering of the worst kind, devoid of both reality and humanity.

  2. Redhand wrote:

    Sorry about my mispellings. Steven, would you please consider adding a comment preview function to your blog?

  3. John the Marine wrote:

    You know immigration is an issue that needs a serious dose of common sense applied to it. We shouldn’t deport an immigrant for slightlest crime and on the other hand we should not tolerate illegal immigration or criminal felons. Why not give the the shop lifter a second or third chance and throw the armed robber in jail followed by swift deportation? Why not make it easier for more people to come legally and enforce the border and deport border jumpers who are caught? Why does it have to be one of the two illusttrated extremes?

    “Pander Away!” For all I care, the Republicans can propose the Great Wall of Texas, replete with .50 caliber machine guns mounted in turrets every 50 yards, with orders to shoot to kill. And the Dems can promise instant dry-foot citizenship to anyone who gets here.

  4. Stephen wrote:

    JTM,

    It need not be one of the extremes. I’m just illustrating the extremes, since (for me personally) immigration is not a hot button.

  5. BloodSpite wrote:

    Whew. If I had better sense I’d stay out of this one, but immigration *is* a hot button for me. Has been for quite a while :)

    That being said, it’s also the primary reason I will never ever give Obama my backing. Yeah I know that’ll really hurt him right? ;)

    But the point is the key note word: Illegal. By mere definition they have already broken the law and therefor should be deported.

    But I won’t argue semantics. I’m not one for “shoot to kill” I rather think our immigration system needs a desperate overhaul from start to finish.

    Make it easier for folks to come in legally….but don’t offer amnesty or a “earning program” for those that have broken the law.

    Otherwise your automatically showing favoritism. If I get a ticket, I pay a fine and my insurance goes up.

    If I break in to a house I go to jail for B&E.

    I break in to a country however……

  6. a former european wrote:

    Saying you don’t care about immigration when you are far from the border, is like saying you don’t care about hurricane relief because you don’t live in New Orleans.

    It is almost impossible to overstate the problems here in Arizona. Greatly increased crime and gang activities, a tremendous burden and strain on social services, and more recently the moral issues of human trafficking/smuggling. The anti-immigration ballot initiatives passed with about 75% voter approval in the last election. Bush’s soft on immigration stance torpedoed the GOP in border states like Arizona.

    In addition, as a LEGAL immigrant, now a naturalized citizen, I have no sympathy for those who won’t play by the rules.