The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on February 06, 2016, 02:16:01 am
-
http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx/?nodeid=712857
Newsmax
Quinnipiac: Rubio Strongest GOP Candidate, Would Defeat Hillary
Friday, February 5, 2016 08:17 AM
Donald Trump remains the front-runner among the GOP presidential pack nationwide, but Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have risen to take second and third place, respectively, a new Quinnipiac Poll shows.
But the poll offers are unique look at how much people like these candidates and would be willing to vote for them in hypothetical general election matchups.
Among Republicans, Marco Rubio is the strongest, most-liked candidate just days after he took third place in the Iowa Caucuses and days ahead of the New Hampshire primary. For Democrats, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is the most liked in head-to-head matchups in a general election against Republicans.
"While Trump, Clinton and Cruz wallow in a negative favorability swamp, by comparison, Rubio and Sanders are rock stars," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.
The GOP rankings:
Trump, 31 percent,
Sen. Ted Cruz, 22 percent;
Sen. Marco Rubio, 19 percent;
Ben Carson, 6 percent;
Jeb Bush, 3 percent;
Chris Christie, 3 percent;
John Kasich, 3 percent
Carly Fiorina, 2 percent
About 9 percent of likely GOP voters are undecided.
The results mirror those of other polls taken over the past few days. Nationwide, Trump's lead is shrinking. A PPP poll showed Rubio and Cruz tied for second place against Trump, who leads nationally. Rubio also rises to second place in some recent New Hamsphire polls.
In the Democratic race nationwide, Clinton has 44 percent, with Sanders at 42 percent, and 11 percent undecided.
According to the survey's pollsters, on the Republican side, Rubio is the strongest candidate to go up against Hillary Clinton, defeating her 48 to 41 percent.
In other general election matchups:
Clinton tops Trump 46 – 41 percent;
Clinton ties Cruz 45 – 45 percent
Republican voters don't like Trump, and do like Rubio by a wider margin. Some 30 percent say they "would definitely not support" Trump, while 15 percent say they would not support Cruz and 7 percent say no to Rubio.
Sanders has the highest favorability rating among top candidates, while Trump has the lowest.
"Democrats nationwide are 'Feeling the Bern' as Sen. Bernie Sanders closes a 31-point gap to tie Secretary Hillary Clinton," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll. "And despite the Iowa setback, Donald Trump is way ahead of his GOP opponents. But that's not the whole story nine months before Election Day. In mano a mano, or mano a womano, face-offs with all contenders, Sanders and Rubio would be the candidates left standing,"
Among Democrats, Sanders has a greater likeability than Hillary Clinton. In the general election:
Sanders defeats Trump 49 – 39 percent;
Sanders edges Cruz 46 – 42 percent;
Sanders and Rubio are tied 43 – 43 percent.
The survey was conducted Feb. 2-4 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.
-
100% USDA choice Bovine fecal matter IMHO!
-
It is interesting that polls show Trump leading with conservatives, moderate, and liberal Republicans and even grabbing a chunk of independent rat voters yet he can't outpoll Hitlery or Sanders. Something doesn't add up.
-
All the polls I've seen have been targeting either registered Republicans or those likely to vote in a Republican primary.
Unfortunately, I've also seen far too many news sites who then claim these polls are the general voting public.
-
It is interesting that polls show Trump leading with conservatives, moderate, and liberal Republicans and even grabbing a chunk of independent rat voters yet he can't outpoll Hitlery or Sanders. Something doesn't add up.
He's the top-ranked GOP candidate with a positive, uplifting message and without a messianic complex.
-
He's the top-ranked GOP candidate with a positive, uplifting message and without a messianic complex.
I'm presuming you posted that tongue-in-cheek.
-
I'm presuming you posted that tongue-in-cheek.
Not in the least bit.
-
He's the top-ranked GOP candidate with a positive, uplifting message and without a messianic complex.
Vote for him if you like. I won't be joining you. I don't like duplicitous jerks.
-
Vote for him if you like. I won't be joining you. I don't like duplicitous jerks.
What?
I need your f#$*ng permission to vote for somebody?
-
He wasn't giving permission. He was being polite. Apparently that fell on deaf ears.
I think Luis was channeling his inner Trump. Perhaps he should have whispered "f&^%". I guarantee you neither Bigun or Luis will vote for Trump in the primaries.
-
Have you watched the debates. Rubio is #1 smear man. He is neither uplifting nor positive. He is anti-republic in that he promises one thing during campaigns and then right away does the opposite. (Gang of eight.) He then has the gall to flip-flop again while falsely accusing others of being like him. I went from neutral on Rubio to strongly anti-Rubio because of Rubio's lowlife, dishonest smears against Cruz (who I did not even support until recently). I took my time choosing. Rubio is once against saying one thing and doing another. He has been king smear man during the debates and now wants to remake himself into a uniter. Well I know because I watched him. He is not to be trusted.
Sorry you don't like Rubio. Rubio has apologized for the immigration reform bill and what is done is done. I have watched Rubio closely and his campaign and I find your characterizations at odds with my own observations. I can't wait to vote for him.
-
I have watched him, too. My characterization is more of a description. If I had the video feed I could piece together the whole thing from his own mouth. He is not a uniter. He is mean and dishonest.
As for the apology, that does not give the voters back their vote. Plus, I do not think he did apologize. He made excuses. Many Floridians are very mad that he campaigned one way and almost immediately did the opposite. How anti-republic of him. Whatever he thinks about immigration, he owes it to voters to be honest and to follow through with his campaign promises. He is not to be trusted.
Like I said before, I started last summer with no opinion of him one way or the other except remembering positive things people said when he was campaigning for the U.S. Senate. I was out of touch during the Gang of Eight thing, so I was not paying attention during his big famous betrayal of those who voted for him while teaming up with Chuck Schumer.
I don't want to get on the wrong side of you Sir, or Mam. You don't like Trump, You don't like Rubio, you like Cruz. We agree on 66%. I could back Cruz but I prefer Rubio.
The fact is Cruz has altered his stance on immigration too. Cruz was for expanding legal immigration until a few months ago, and Trump has done a complete 180 degree turn on his stance on immigration.
For me immigration is a lesser issue to taxes, military, abortion, guns, and government spending.
I have not found Rubio to be a mean guy, or Cruz...but Trump is a mean SOB. Anybody who says anything negative about him gets a tweet that they are dumb, 3rd rate, major losers, with zero credibility.
Even people like George Will, and Thomas Sowell.
So again, we agree on Cruz and Trump. Sorry you don't like Rubio, but Cruz is my #2 guy.
-
He wasn't giving permission. He was being polite. Apparently that fell on deaf ears.
I'm not polite.
-
I think Luis was channeling his inner Trump. Perhaps he should have whispered "f&^%". I guarantee you neither Bigun or Luis will vote for Trump in the primaries.
I can also guarantee you that I will not vote for Trump in the General Election either.
I can say the same for Cruz.
-
I have watched him, too. My characterization is more of a description. If I had the video feed I could piece together the whole thing from his own mouth. He is not a uniter. He is mean and dishonest.
As for the apology, that does not give the voters back their vote. Plus, I do not think he did apologize. He made excuses. Many Floridians are very mad that he campaigned one way and almost immediately did the opposite. How anti-republic of him. Whatever he thinks about immigration, he owes it to voters to be honest and to follow through with his campaign promises. He is not to be trusted.
Like I said before, I started last summer with no opinion of him one way or the other except remembering positive things people said when he was campaigning for the U.S. Senate. I was out of touch during the Gang of Eight thing, so I was not paying attention during his big famous betrayal of those who voted for him while teaming up with Chuck Schumer.
Voltaire once said that "better was the enemy of good". The American version is "perfect is the enemy of good".
Any politician with any kind of a record in office is subject to being attacked by someone for that record, and anyone seeking office who lacks any significant level of a political record because they've either not been in office very long, or have never held office at all, will appear to be perfect in the eyes of the people when compared to someone with a record.
Trump has no political experience or record. To argue that Trump will be a good President because he's a successful and vainglorious business and entertainment figure who speaks his mid about issues, is to arge that Kanye West could also be a good President. Cruz has very little government experience to speak of. He's managed to sponsor and pass one bill during his entire tenure in the Senate. For all his disdain of the GOP establishment, Cruz has voted along Party line 82.3% of the time he's been in office. He's risen to fame by constantly pointing out the failures of his colleagues while simultaneously voting along Party lines a solid majority of the time he's cast a vote.
Cruz and Trump both have created, in the minds of their supporters, the illusion of being individuals who will somehow and single-handed, overcome all the inefficiencies they've been talking about in their stump speeches, if elected.
They're both running on a strong-man Presidency platform (an Obama-like Presidency) where they will dictate to Congress and the Courts what will be done.
They will both fail.
The system will not fall to their knees in awe of them and simply do their bidding. They will push back hard. As hard as both candidates pushed against "the system".
Back to Cruz, Rubio and illegals.
Cruz supported legalization. Said so in the floor of the Senate on May 21, 2013 while defending his Amendment to the infamous Gang of Eight bill:
"They would still be eligible for legal status and indeed, under the terms of the bill, they would be eligible for LPR [Lawful Permanent Resident] status as well so that they are out of the shadows, which the proponents of this bill repeatedly point to as their principal objective, to provide a legal status for those who are here illegally to be out of the shadows. This amendment would allow that to happen, but what it would do is remove the pathway to citizenship so that there are real consequences that respect the rule of law and that treat legal immigrants with the fairness and respect they deserve."
"Now I would suggest to all of those who passionately want to see this program fixed, that saying it’s all-or-nothing if there’s no path to citizenship, quote, there is no reform, tying immigration reform hostage to a path to citizenship is not a strategy to pass a bill. It’s a strategy to create partisan division. It’s a strategy that may well result in more political battles. But it’s not a strategy to fix the problem and so I would urge everyone on this committee to roll up our sleeves and fix the problem in a humane way that secures the border, gets serious about fixing that problem, that expands and improves legal immigration and that does not unfairly treat legal immigrants by removing a path to citizenship but allowing as this legislation does a legal status for those who are here illegally. That would be reform that a great many people across this country, both Republican and Democrat, would embrace and I would urge the committee to consider the amendment."
In an exchange with Rubio on the December GOP debate, Cruz said: “I have never supported legalization, and I do not intend to support legalization.”
So then Cruz either lied on the Senate floor, or on the debate stage.
Duplicitous indeed.
-
Well stated. My support for Rubio is actually based in part on his stance on immigration reform. He still has not backed down from wanting to find a humane solution to the illegals who have been a while and are not violent criminals. To take that stand in the GOP primaries with the prevailing mood of conservative voters I find to be evidence of a strong character, willing to do what he thinks is right no matter the political consequences.
I agree that is an unpopular stance requiring courage
Cruz, Rubio, and Trump have all intensified their opposition to illegal immigration, and they are all full of crap...but that is what they have to do to fool Republican voters.
There will never be a solution to illegal immigration as long as the guy fixing your car, making your cheeseburger, vacuuming your office, and paying for your SS, unemployment, and disability are all illegals or sons of illegals.
I almost wish the xenophobes who hate illegals got their wish, because they would likely be the first "non-productive" Americans euthanized.
Oh no. Was that outloud?
-
Voltaire once said that "better was the enemy of good". The American version is "perfect is the enemy of good".
Any politician with any kind of a record in office is subject to being attacked by someone for that record, and anyone seeking office who lacks any significant level of a political record because they've either not been in office very long, or have never held office at all, will appear to be perfect in the eyes of the people when compared to someone with a record.
Trump has no political experience or record. To argue that Trump will be a good President because he's a successful and vainglorious business and entertainment figure who speaks his mid about issues, is to arge that Kanye West could also be a good President. Cruz has very little government experience to speak of. He's managed to sponsor and pass one bill during his entire tenure in the Senate. For all his disdain of the GOP establishment, Cruz has voted along Party line 82.3% of the time he's been in office. He's risen to fame by constantly pointing out the failures of his colleagues while simultaneously voting along Party lines a solid majority of the time he's cast a vote.
Cruz and Trump both have created, in the minds of their supporters, the illusion of being individuals who will somehow and single-handed, overcome all the inefficiencies they've been talking about in their stump speeches, if elected.
They're both running on a strong-man Presidency platform (an Obama-like Presidency) where they will dictate to Congress and the Courts what will be done.
They will both fail.
The system will not fall to their knees in awe of them and simply do their bidding. They will push back hard. As hard as both candidates pushed against "the system".
Back to Cruz, Rubio and illegals.
Cruz supported legalization. Said so in the floor of the Senate on May 21, 2013 while defending his Amendment to the infamous Gang of Eight bill:
In an exchange with Rubio on the December GOP debate, Cruz said: “I have never supported legalization, and I do not intend to support legalization.”
So then Cruz either lied on the Senate floor, or on the debate stage.
Duplicitous indeed.
damn, I've missed you.
-
damn, I've missed you.
:beer:
I've been watching you.
-
I can also guarantee you that I will not vote for Trump in the General Election either.
I can say the same for Cruz.
Right there with you. Might vote for Cruz in a general but not Trump.
-
Right there with you. Might vote for Cruz in a general but not Trump.
Cruz and his supporters denigrate the GOP and the people who support the GOP. Have been doing it for years.
Voting for Cruz in the General, to me, would be akin to admitting they're right.
I won't do that.
-
Right there with you. Might vote for Cruz in a general but not Trump.
Neiter of you have to worry about that cause TRump won't be in the general! At least not on the Republican ticket!
-
I'll say the same thing I said in 08 about people refusing to vote for Romney..*President Obama thanks you*...this time it will be *President Clinton thanks you*......puke.
-
Cruz and his supporters denigrate the GOP and the people who support the GOP. Have been doing it for years.
Voting for Cruz in the General, to me, would be akin to admitting they're right.
I won't do that.
I don't like Cruz at all. He's out for himself. The fact that he's the only person I've ever heard George W. Bush bad mouth says a lot. Can't work with ANYBODY.
His breathy, preachy speaking style grates. He just comes across as oily.
-
I'll say the same thing I said in 08 about people refusing to vote for Romney..*President Obama thanks you*...this time it will be *President Clinton thanks you*......puke.
Yet, they still refused.
I figure I have the sase right to stand on my convictions as they did.
-
I don't like Cruz at all. He's out for himself. The fact that he's the only person I've ever heard George W. Bush bad mouth says a lot. Can't work with ANYBODY.
His breathy, preachy speaking style grates. He just comes across as oily.
Yep.
And he looks like Grandpa Munster.
-
Yep.
And he looks like Grandpa Munster.
Mrs. Lando and I pay attention to things - at least, I like to think so. My wife often makes interesting remarks so she startled me when she said this about Ted Cruz:
"He's creepy."
It startled me because it required no analysis and it was the most simple statement she has made about these candidates.
Luis - he does have a square noggin, doesn't he?
But, I will adhere to my Yellow Dog Rule. To wit; if the Republicans nominate a yellow dog, I will vote for it over any Democrat available today.
-
Defeats Hillary? Part speculation, part wishful thinking.
-
Mrs. Lando and I pay attention to things - at least, I like to think so. My wife often makes interesting remarks so she startled me when she said this about Ted Cruz:
"He's creepy."
It startled me because it required no analysis and it was the most simple statement she has made about these candidates.
Luis - he does have a square noggin, doesn't he?
But, I will adhere to my Yellow Dog Rule. To wit; if the Republicans nominate a yellow dog, I will vote for it over any Democrat available today.
My wife says the same thing.
(http://victorygirlsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/55402537197176.31439470_r.jpg)
-
Oh, and the general consensus in the group I run with is: Cruz is creepy. Translation, not a devout nuns prayer he takes the nomination.
-
Ted Cruz IS Mr. Haney!
http://youtu.be/jjPo_n5qRuA
-
My husband, Mike has the same reaction to Cruz as others here...calls him a used car salesman[no offense to used car salesmen]...he supports Rubio.
I just don't share others opinion of Cruz..I like him..I like what he says...and hope he wins the nomination....but in the long run I will vote for whoever wins it as I have had to do in the last several elections.
-
My husband, Mike has the same reaction to Cruz as others here...calls him a used car salesman[no offense to used car salesmen]...he supports Rubio.
I just don't share others opinion of Cruz..I like him..I like what he says...and hope he wins the nomination....but in the long run I will vote for whoever wins it as I have had to do in the last several elections.
As far as I know running for President is not a beauty contest!
-
Right there with you. Might vote for Cruz in a general but not Trump.
I've stated the same, several times. Trump is the only one I would not vote for, and if he is the nominee, it will be the first time in my 40 Years of voting that I would excersize my right to write-in a candidate. I find reason to like Rubio and Cruz. Ted being the the most consistant conservative, but his problem is likability, and he didn't help himself out at the last debate. Cruze will make a great President and I would be glad to vote for him, but he cannot win the general election if he rubs people the wrong way like that. Leadership shouldn't be about pleasing people, but unfortunatly politics is. Being a jerk can work for Trump, but it doesn't look good on Ted. He can win the general election, but he needs to connect with potential voters better, even those who have never voted for a Republican President before. That is where Rubio shines. His speaches are very Kennedyesk, and so is his young adorable family. People will like him.
Sad to see some people here I respect very much spend so much of their time and energy attacking him, but welcome to the Primaries. If Rubio becomes our nominee, I expect to see the same shift in support as we saw with Romney, who for a season was despised my the majority on TBR.
-
My husband, Mike has the same reaction to Cruz as others here...calls him a used car salesman[no offense to used car salesmen]...he supports Rubio.
I just don't share others opinion of Cruz..I like him..I like what he says...and hope he wins the nomination....but in the long run I will vote for whoever wins it as I have had to do in the last several elections.
We cast votes for people based on the things they "say" and deem a candidate unelectable based on their last name in spite of a long my list of accomplishments in office.
We really need to retool how we elect politicians.
-
Defeats Hillary? Part speculation, part wishful thinking.
Mostly polls.
Same polls say that Trump loses to Hillary AND Sanders.
So thinking that Trump can win the GE is not only wishful thinking, but it is wishful thinking founded on wishful thinking.
-
We cast votes for people based on the things they "say" and seem a candidate unelectable based on their last name in spite of a long my list of accomplishments in office.
We really need to retool how we elect politicians.
That's fair enough...then Rubio, Trump should be out of the running..
-
As far as I know running for President is not a beauty contest!
You only have to look at who the Democrats are running, to show how true that statement is.
-
That's fair enough...then Rubio, Trump should be out of the running..
And Jeb and Kasich should be battling for the lead.
-
As far as I know running for President is not a beauty contest!
Love you, Big, but how wrong you are. The election of Barack Hussein Obama was a quintessential beauty contest. Not beauty in the Miss America sense. But, Barack Obama managed to tap into the intangibles of electioneering. It certainly couldn't have been his resume.
-
And Jeb and Kasich should be battling for the lead.
LOL....I'll stick with Cruz.... :whistle:
-
As far as I know running for President is not a beauty contest!
Nixon/Kennedy
-
LOL....I'll stick with Cruz.... :whistle:
So faced with the options of supporting one of the two candidates that governed large, complex States as conservatives. Two candidates that created jobs, cut taxes, fought the unions, defended life, cut down the size of government, ended entitlements and broke the backs of teacher's unions, you pick the guy who talks a good game.
If elected and when it comes to light that he can't do all the things that he says he will do, you and he both will lay the blame on a Congress, in spite of the fact that he was obviously over promising and Congress had never agreed to acquiesce their equal standing to the Executive.
-
So faced with the options of supporting one of the two candidates that governed large, complex States as conservatives. Two candidates that created jobs, cut taxes, fought the unions, defended life, cut down the size of government, ended entitlements and broke the backs of teacher's unions, you pick the guy who talks a good game.
If elected and when it comes to light that he can't do all the things that he says he will do, you and he both will lay the blame on a Congress, in spite of the fact that he was obviously over promising and Congress had never agreed to acquiesce their equal standing to the Executive.
Scott Walker and Bobby Jindal already left the race, Luis.
And if John Kasich's expanding Medicaid is "governing as a conservative," then what kind of a Bizarro world am I living in?
Remember, Sarah Palin was a pretty accomplished governor, too. For a little while.
-
Nixon/Kennedy
Nixon eventually ended up serving longer than Kennedy, Luis.
-
So faced with the options of supporting one of the two candidates that governed large, complex States as conservatives. Two candidates that created jobs, cut taxes, fought the unions, defended life, cut down the size of government, ended entitlements and broke the backs of teacher's unions, you pick the guy who talks a good game.
If elected and when it comes to light that he can't do all the things that he says he will do, you and he both will lay the blame on a Congress, in spite of the fact that he was obviously over promising and Congress had never agreed to acquiesce their equal standing to the Executive.
I am not a fan of Jeb...he was your Gov and I suspect you know him well...I get the impression he doesn't even want to be in this race.
Kasich....speaking of Cruz, creeps me out...don't know what it is...that aside, he is not who he was in the 90's even Rush remarked that he didn't know who Kasich was anymore.
If elected and when it comes to light that he can't do all the things that he says he will do, you and he both will lay the blame on a Congress, in spite of the fact that he was obviously over promising and Congress had never agreed to acquiesce their equal standing to the Executive.
Everyone promises the moon and it is never delivered....as long as he limits government and rebuilds the military I will be happy.
-
Scott Walker and Bobby Jindal already left the race, Luis.
And if John Kasich's expanding Medicaid is "governing as a conservative," then what kind of a Bizarro world am I living in?
Remember, Sarah Palin was a pretty accomplished governor, too. For a little while.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
Cruz supported legalization on the Senate floor before he didn't. Then said that he'd never supported legalization on national TV. He flipped on Snowden, Syria, birthright citizenship, H1B visas, deportations. The list goes on.
Is he your guy?
-
So faced with the options of supporting one of the two candidates that governed large, complex States as conservatives. Two candidates that created jobs, cut taxes, fought the unions, defended life, cut down the size of government, ended entitlements and broke the backs of teacher's unions, you pick the guy who talks a good game.
If elected and when it comes to light that he can't do all the things that he says he will do, you and he both will lay the blame on a Congress, in spite of the fact that he was obviously over promising and Congress had never agreed to acquiesce their equal standing to the Executive.
Those are the facts as they are on the ground. This has nothing to do with that. This is a presidential race: Nixon/Kennedy. If it were about resume, a thousand other people would be clearly better qualified.
-
Those are the facts as they are on the ground. This has nothing to do with that. This is a presidential race: Nixon/Kennedy. If it were about resume, a thousand other people would be clearly better qualified.
But there's not a thousand other people running, is there?
-
But there's not a thousand other people running, is there?
Correct. But I will steadfastly continue to consider any presidential race--since they inevitably include democrats--part substance and part beauty contest, with the latter having more import on the outcome. That's just me being cynical and shallow. ^-^
-
Perfect is the enemy of good.
Cruz supported legalization on the Senate floor before he didn't. Then said that he'd never supported legalization on national TV. He flipped on Snowden, Syria, birthright citizenship, H1B visas, deportations. The list goes on.
Is he your guy?
He wields a "silver tongue " in the manner of Richard Millhouse Nixon and William Jefferson Clinton.
-
He wields a "silver tongue " in the manner of Richard Millhouse Nixon and William Jefferson Clinton.
He also dubs himself a consistent conservative in spite of his long list of well-timed flip flops and his campaign of running as an outsider and an enemy of the dreaded "GOPe" while voting with the same GOPe 82% of the time he voted.
-
I agree that is an unpopular stance requiring courage
Cruz, Rubio, and Trump have all intensified their opposition to illegal immigration, and they are all full of crap...but that is what they have to do to fool Republican voters.
There will never be a solution to illegal immigration as long as the guy fixing your car, making your cheeseburger, vacuuming your office, and paying for your SS, unemployment, and disability are all illegals or sons of illegals.
I almost wish the xenophobes who hate illegals got their wish, because they would likely be the first "non-productive" Americans euthanized.
Oh no. Was that outloud?
Don't be so quick to characterize a group. And yes, that was outloud. Thanks for tipping your hand to us.
Perhaps people who don't like illegal aliiens simply don't like scofflaws and those who blatantly ignore our laws. Perhaps they have experience that you don't have with the criminal gangs that are intimately associated with illegal aliens. Perhaps it has nothing to do with race or nationality, but everything to do with legality, respect for our laws, respect for our country. Have you given any of that a thought?
-
Don't be so quick to characterize a group. And yes, that was outloud. Thanks for tipping your hand to us.
Perhaps people who don't like illegal aliiens simply don't like scofflaws and those who blatantly ignore our laws. Perhaps they have experience that you don't have with the criminal gangs that are intimately associated with illegal aliens. Perhaps it has nothing to do with race or nationality, but everything to do with legality, respect for our laws, respect for our country. Have you given any of that a thought?
No, I'm afraid it's not that simple an issue. Since several pieces of legislation over the past ten years addressed the illegality by fines, penalties, requirements to work, English proficiency, no government assistance, the concerns about respect for our laws is a tad overblown. 95% of all criminal cases filed in the US result in plea bargains, which essentially the legalization process is. As for criminal gangs, you're preaching to the choir. Those of us who want to see comprehensive immigration reform are disgusted with these gangs, as well as drug smuggling and human trafficking from the south of this Country. In fact what we want is better border security, more enforcement both at the borders as well as internally to go after these criminals. What we also recognize, as does Rubio, is the fact that there are a lot of these illegals who have nothing to do with criminal activity, are raising families, contributing to their communities and have been here for many years. If we insist on going after those, and it has nothing to do with gangs or such criminal activities, and these people are refused any kind of plea bargaining, then yes, it may well have to do with other factors.
-
:beer:
I've been watching you.
Hiya....good to see you around!
-
No, I'm afraid it's not that simple an issue. Since several pieces of legislation over the past ten years addressed the illegality by fines, penalties, requirements to work, English proficiency, no government assistance, the concerns about respect for our laws is a tad overblown. 95% of all criminal cases filed in the US result in plea bargains, which essentially the legalization process is. As for criminal gangs, you're preaching to the choir. Those of us who want to see comprehensive immigration reform are disgusted with these gangs, as well as drug smuggling and human trafficking from the south of this Country. In fact what we want is better border security, more enforcement both at the borders as well as internally to go after these criminals. What we also recognize, as does Rubio, is the fact that there are a lot of these illegals who have nothing to do with criminal activity, are raising families, contributing to their communities and have been here for many years. If we insist on going after those, and it has nothing to do with gangs or such criminal activities, and these people are refused any kind of plea bargaining, then yes, it may well have to do with other factors.
Actually it really is quite simple. The big money Chamber of Commerce donors want very much to keep their cheap and compliant labor and will spare no expense to do so.
-
No, I'm afraid it's not that simple an issue. Since several pieces of legislation over the past ten years addressed the illegality by fines, penalties, requirements to work, English proficiency, no government assistance, the concerns about respect for our laws is a tad overblown. 95% of all criminal cases filed in the US result in plea bargains, which essentially the legalization process is. As for criminal gangs, you're preaching to the choir. Those of us who want to see comprehensive immigration reform are disgusted with these gangs, as well as drug smuggling and human trafficking from the south of this Country. In fact what we want is better border security, more enforcement both at the borders as well as internally to go after these criminals. What we also recognize, as does Rubio, is the fact that there are a lot of these illegals who have nothing to do with criminal activity, are raising families, contributing to their communities and have been here for many years. If we insist on going after those, and it has nothing to do with gangs or such criminal activities, and these people are refused any kind of plea bargaining, then yes, it may well have to do with other factors.
Then there's the unequal application of the laws.
Bill Cosby almost got away with drugging a woman and raping her, but there's no statute of limitations applicable to being in the country illegally, and due process does not apply to deportations.
-
Love your post and the way you frame the issue. I agree wholeheartedly with you. I hope you all have a live thread for the debate. It's hard for me to post from my cell phone here in Colombia but I love reading the analysis.
Thank you sir. :beer:
-
Actually it really is quite simple. The big money Chamber of Commerce donors want very much to keep their cheap and compliant labor and will spare no expense to do so.
That's true, but not just the CofC. In New Orleans, the minority community that lived there refused to participate in the rebuilding of the area even for $16 to $20 an hour and more. The illegals came in and did the job for $10 to $13 an hour. I know it's racist, but I'll take a Mexican worker any time over other ethnic groups. I know many will disagree with me, but the truth is there are jobs Americans won't do or won't do well.
-
Then there's the unequal application of the laws.
Bill Cosby almost got away with drugging a woman and raping her, but there's no statute of limitations applicable to being in the country illegally, and due process does not apply to deportations.
A point I've never considered, but you're right. I guess the reason that would be given is that being in the Country illegally continues as opposed to single instances of criminal activity?
-
That's true, but not just the CofC. In New Orleans, the minority community that lived there refused to participate in the rebuilding of the area even for $16 to $20 an hour and more. The illegals came in and did the job for $10 to $13 an hour. I know it's racist, but I'll take a Mexican worker any time over other ethnic groups. I know many will disagree with me, but the truth is there are jobs Americans won't do or won't do well.
The locals refused to work because "If I do dat dae will cut off my check!"
-
That's true, but not just the CofC. In New Orleans, the minority community that lived there refused to participate in the rebuilding of the area even for $16 to $20 an hour and more. The illegals came in and did the job for $10 to $13 an hour. I know it's racist, but I'll take a Mexican worker any time over other ethnic groups. I know many will disagree with me, but the truth is there are jobs Americans won't do or won't do well.
This is true, but it short-circuits the free market.
If no one was taking the jobs at $16-20/hour... then the price offered for the service desired was too low in the market. Had there been no intervention, those seeking the service would have had to raise their offers until they were able to obtain the service.
It's much like going to a car dealership and saying that you'll buy a new Corvette for $25,000. No one will sell one to you. That is, until you raise your offer to a price point the seller is willing to take.
Now, a Chinese company (via Alibaba) might take your offer and sell you a 'Corvette' at that price.
But complaining that no American business will sell you a Corvette is not true. Just as much as it isn't true that Americans just won't do certain jobs. What matters is the price offered, which is too low for the good or service requested.
-
The locals refused to work because "If I do dat dae will cut off my check!"
Yeah, that's one way of putting it. :silly:
-
A point I've never considered, but you're right. I guess the reason that would be given is that being in the Country illegally continues as opposed to single instances of criminal activity?
Be that as it were, an individual running a prostitution ring, a crime family, or a multi-national Ponzi scheme is treated according to the Constitutional requirements imposed on the government by several Amendments, yet illegals facing deportation have neither a right to appointed counsel nor a right to a speedy trial. They have l, nor are they given, the opportunity to appeal the deportation.
-
This is true, but it short-circuits the free market.
If no one was taking the jobs at $16-20/hour... then the price offered for the service desired was too low in the market. Had there been no intervention, those seeking the service would have had to raise their offers until they were able to obtain the service.
It's much like going to a car dealership and saying that you'll buy a new Corvette for $25,000. No one will sell one to you. That is, until you raise your offer to a price point the seller is willing to take.
Now, a Chinese company (via Alibaba) might take your offer and sell you a 'Corvette' at that price.
But complaining that no American business will sell you a Corvette is not true. Just as much as it isn't true that Americans just won't do certain jobs. What matters is the price offered, which is too low for the good or service requested.
The free market is short circuited by the government giving workers the option to not work and live off entitlements.
So that employer is not necessarily competing against the free market, but against his own monies, his tax dollars, being used to artificially inflate wages and cut deeper into his business profits.
-
This is true, but it short-circuits the free market.
If no one was taking the jobs at $16-20/hour... then the price offered for the service desired was too low in the market. Had there been no intervention, those seeking the service would have had to raise their offers until they were able to obtain the service.
It's much like going to a car dealership and saying that you'll buy a new Corvette for $25,000. No one will sell one to you. That is, until you raise your offer to a price point the seller is willing to take.
Now, a Chinese company (via Alibaba) might take your offer and sell you a 'Corvette' at that price.
But complaining that no American business will sell you a Corvette is not true. Just as much as it isn't true that Americans just won't do certain jobs. What matters is the price offered, which is too low for the good or service requested.
Part of the problem is that it wasn't a totally free market because the government stepped in two ways, first by pouring huge sums of money into the area, money that had nothing to do with market forces, and two by creating a dependency group out of those who might well have contributed. Instead they took the credit cards, mobile homes and many moved to Houston to take even more handouts. The "American" or "legal" workers saw all that money and demanded their fair share. Illegals used the only leverage they had...bidding lower prices for their labor.
In a larger way the issue of a wage equilibrium isn't just with illegals. Governments in many states as well as labor unions are doing everything they can to disrupt a "market" wage. Minimum wages do not reflect the market. Laws that prohibit hiring outside of union rules do not reflect the market. If we believe that governments should interfere in certain labor markets then we do not support the market setting the price for labor.
-
The free market is short circuited by the government giving workers the option to not work and live off entitlements.
So that employer is not necessarily competing against the free market, but against his own monies, his tax dollars, being used to artificially inflate wages and cut deeper into his business profits.
You said it much more succinctly than I did.
-
Don't be so quick to characterize a group. And yes, that was outloud. Thanks for tipping your hand to us.
Welcome LaRueLaDue, and oh no my cover is blown. :laugh: I thought it might be outloud. rats!
Perhaps people who don't like illegal aliiens simply don't like scofflaws and those who blatantly ignore our laws. Perhaps they have experience that you don't have with the criminal gangs that are intimately associated with illegal aliens. Perhaps it has nothing to do with race or nationality, but everything to do with legality, respect for our laws, respect for our country. Have you given any of that a thought?
Why no. You are the first to mention these things to me. Let us see.
1 "Legality." I does seem like illegal immigrants do conflict with the whole "legality" thing, however Reagan amnestied millions of illegals and they then were legal. Seems like an easy fix to this problem.
2 "Respect for our laws." again another tricky problem. Existing in the US as an illegal immigrant does conflict with the whole "respect for our laws" thing, and quite honestly I don't feel comfortable solving this problem as I have been known to speed in excess of posted federal highway speed limits, jaywalk, cheat on my taxes, fish without a license, and commit indecent and unlawful acts with a minor...however in my defense that Golden Labrador Retriever said she was 18. It is currently legal to murder a child in the womb. It happens almost a million times a year. I have no respect for that law. I suspect I would have no respect for the legalized slavery the US sanctioned for it's first 100 years. When the law is wrong I can't respect it. Our outdated immigration laws are wrong. They should be revised.
My morality comes to me through Christ, and I believe it exceeds the written laws of men.
3 "Respect for our country." - we are talking about the country that elected Obama twice right? The same one the re-elected the rapist in 1996? I got nothin'
Still my post was quite specific about the knuckle dragging cross-burning troglodytes I was talking about, "the illegal hating xenophobe(which is a fancy way of saying racist)." Some one who opposes illegal immigration on the issue of fairness to legal immigrants would not fall under that category. The issue of gangs is an irrelevancy. There are plenty of homegrown gangs. Illegal gang activity is illegal gang activity. My post seems to have spoken to you, however. Perhaps I should thank you.
-
My apologies for turning this into an immigration thread folks, but really enjoyed reading some of the thoughtful posts. I meant only to point out that neither Trump, Cruz, or Rubio has been consistent on the issue, but booze made me get angry at racists.
I hate racists.
One night I beat up 5 skin heads by myself in a drunken rage.
I felt really bad when I found out they were chemo patients at the local cancer center.
-
My apologies for turning this into an immigration thread folks, but really enjoyed reading some of the thoughtful posts. I meant only to point out that neither Trump, Cruz, or Rubio has been consistent on the issue, but booze made me get angry at racists.
I hate racists.
One night I beat up 5 skin heads by myself in a drunken rage.
I felt really bad when I found out they where chemo patients at the local cancer center.
Damn dude, there's a job for you in Germany or Sweden.
-
Damn dude, there's a job for you in Germany or Sweden.
How much does it pay in US dollars please? and do I have to wear a uniform?
-
How much does it pay in US dollars please? and do I have to wear a uniform?
Just a black skullcap, and how can you put a dollar figure on saving the western world?
-
My apologies for turning this into an immigration thread folks, but really enjoyed reading some of the thoughtful posts. I meant only to point out that neither Trump, Cruz, or Rubio has been consistent on the issue, but booze made me get angry at racists.
I hate racists.
One night I beat up 5 skin heads by myself in a drunken rage.
I felt really bad when I found out they were chemo patients at the local cancer center.
:silly:
-
Welcome LaRueLaDue, and oh no my cover is blown. :laugh: I thought it might be outloud. rats!
Why no. You are the first to mention these things to me. Let us see.
1 "Legality." I does seem like illegal immigrants do conflict with the whole "legality" thing, however Reagan amnestied millions of illegals and they then were legal. Seems like an easy fix to this problem.
2 "Respect for our laws." again another tricky problem. Existing in the US as an illegal immigrant does conflict with the whole "respect for our laws" thing, and quite honestly I don't feel comfortable solving this problem as I have been known to speed in excess of posted federal highway speed limits, jaywalk, cheat on my taxes, fish without a license, and commit indecent and unlawful acts with a minor...however in my defense that Golden Labrador Retriever said she was 18. It is currently legal to murder a child in the womb. It happens almost a million times a year. I have no respect for that law. I suspect I would have no respect for the legalized slavery the US sanctioned for it's first 100 years. When the law is wrong I can't respect it. Our outdated immigration laws are wrong. They should be revised.
My morality comes to me through Christ, and I believe it exceeds the written laws of men.
3 "Respect for our country." - we are talking about the country that elected Obama twice right? The same one the re-elected the rapist in 1996? I got nothin'
Still my post was quite specific about the knuckle dragging cross-burning troglodytes I was talking about, "the illegal hating xenophobe(which is a fancy way of saying racist)." Some one who opposes illegal immigration on the issue of fairness to legal immigrants would not fall under that category. The issue of gangs is an irrelevancy. There are plenty of homegrown gangs. Illegal gang activity is illegal gang activity. My post seems to have spoken to you, however. Perhaps I should thank you.
Now that's perspective! :beer: