Posted on 04/25/2015 2:25:58 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
"..........Mr. Walker’s apparent hardening on immigration has inspired a flood of reporting and commentary. Most recently he told the radio host Glenn Beck that he favored restricting legal immigration in tough economic times, a position to the right of most other 2016 presidential hopefuls.
He repeated that view Friday after a speech in Cedar Rapids, when Eddie Failor, 24, expressed concern “as a young Republican” that the party must make inroads to new voter blocs, including by supporting a comprehensive overhaul of immigration.
Mr. Walker told Mr. Failor that his top priority would be securing the border. He also said he favored “making sure the legal immigration system is based on making our No. 1 priority to protect American workers and their wages.’’
Alexander Staudt, the treasurer of the University of Iowa College Republicans, also told Mr. Walker in the meet-and-greet line that he was concerned that by talking tough on immigration, Republican candidates would turn off Hispanics.
“In terms of how wide or how narrow the door’s open, our No. 1 priority is American workers and American wages,’’ Mr. Walker told him. “I don’t know how anyone can argue against that.’’...........
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Gotta get a conservative in to have a chance. Then there's the issue of a bunch of weak-kneed folks in the House and Senate that may get in the way no matter how the bully pulpit is used.
It will take a protracted battle of us actually getting behind (with time and money vs. words) conservative types to really stem the tide --- then comes the really hard part of turning that tide around...
Cruz is still my first choice, but Walker is making some serious waves. Even being a Cruz fan, I find it amusing to see the rabid pro-Cruz/anti-Walker folks trying to adjust their meme to “account for” Walker now coming out even g=harder against the illegals and anyone else who might harm American workers. I actually prefer Walker’s harder stance to Cruz’s latest statements about protecting legal immigration. I hope that at least one of them is left standing for the final ballots.
bttt!
I prefer my pols to be reasonably honest, such that I’ve more respect for those who openly disagree with me than those who falsely pretend to hold my positions.
Until Walker takes back his pro-amnesty positions with substance, I’m not believing him. I also don’t think he genuinely tossed the pro-amnesty Koch brothers overboard in a flash, either.
And, I generally suspect campaign race conversions.
Too bad we haven’t any openly, honestly, anti-amnesty candidates of substance in the race. So far Cruz comes closest—but he plays games on amnesty too.
You are a FILTHY LIAR
Walker was open to debating the idea, but never ADVOCATED.
Nice slimy tactic on your part.
Seems like a conversion of convenience.
I prefer Ted Cruz. I’ll accept Scott Walker. I’ll never vote for Christy, Bush or any other liberal regardless of party affiliation.
But would one of the liberal Repubs be acceptable as a Veep?
Hard to say if it's a conversion. Not everyone has a position on everything. As governor, he had no direct influence on immigration policy, a federal function. More likely, at the time, he offered up the usual pablum that sounded like the consensus within the GOP, voters, pols and donors alike.
Now that he's doing a White House run, he's clearly up for a spot that will play a major part in immigration policy. And that's led to a much more careful examination of what that policy should be. In talking to people, my guess is that he's discovering that that there is a great divide separating voters, who are aghast at the deluge, and both GOP pols and donors, who seem to think we need to open up the floodgates.
There's nothing convenient about Walker's current position. By suggesting that legal immigration levels be rethought, he is opening himself up to accusations of nativism and racism, and that's just from fellow GOP pols. Then there's the adverse reaction from wealthy donors whose principal concern is keeping labor costs low by importing unending streams of foreign immigrants. These donors may start treating him as the party leper.
Walker is treating immigration as an economic issue, when it should be addressed as a national security issue. Militarize the border and deport all illegals; the American workers will get taken care of.
A moratorium is needed on legal immigration. Ted Kennedy's 1965 Immigration Act needs to be repealed and we need to return to a quota system. No immigrants from Muslim or Latino countries.
The 14th Amendment needs to be clarified and U.S. citizenship needs to be stripped from all anchor babies born after the 1986 Reagan amnesty.
Deport ANY and ALL illegals who cannot produce pay stubs and tax records, including their “anchor chirren”.
Why would you want a VP who wouldn’t be acceptable as President? The VP is a heartbeat away from the oval office!
How about we send the liberals back over to the traditionally liberal party?
Can you list how that should be done?
Cruz is a master of rhetoric and an admirable one. Walker is a man of actual accomplishment and an admirable one.
Worry about the ‘other things’, but bring back American manufacturing? You’re confusing cause and effect in your union-fascism. How do you propose bringing back American manufacturing: by force or by invitation?
There are several methods.
The worse our trade situation gets however, the more I an now leaning toward requiring things sold in America, to be made in America.
Very simple.
There are other less drastic measures, but I’ll just say I would not be opposed to that.
I will advocate for the extreme position, and let everyone else come to a more reasonable deal.
:D
You’d miss the barn with your nose touching it. Your analysis is nonsense.
Because you might need him to moderate the presidential candidate's image, and bring in middle-of-the-road voters. That is why Reagan chose Bush rather than some right-winger. Reagan and Bush were never close, and Reagan was meticulous in his political strategizing, based on the copious handwritten notes that were compiled into a book, so this wasn't some offhand decision.
Doubtful. Walker is the fall back position for the uniparty, given that their first and second choices of little jebbie and marco the squish don’t get traction. Hence all the attention his campaign received early on.
That said he is objectively better than most. I think that when push comes to shove when and if he is elected, all those fine words about protecting American jobs will be forgotten and the gates will be thrown open in some fashion or the other. In that all the candidates are of essentially one mind. And I include Cruz in that as well.
I don't know that Cruz has specifically come out against "necessary" green card workers who are cheaper but so unqualified the workers they're replacing have to train them. The number of green card workers the US needs is miniscule.
Scott Walker seems to be taking a states' rights, pro-US workder stance. At least he's talking the talk. The rest of them (except for Jeff Sessions who isn't running) seem to be mincing their words.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.