PDA

View Full Version : Good News from FLA rist's campaign for the U.S. Senate is currently in deep trouble


Borderwatch
12-16-2009, 08:05 PM
A new poll has found that Florida Governor Charlie Crist's campaign for the U.S. Senate is currently in deep trouble. The new Rasmussen poll of likely GOP voters found Crist and his Republican opponent, Marco Rubio, are tied with 43 percent of the vote. This is a huge swing from just a few months ago when most experts believed Crist would win in a landslide.

While Crist's numbers have been in an almost free fall, Rubio's name recognition amongst Republicans has rapidly grown. The new poll found 34 percent of GOP voters now view Rubio "very favorably." In the same poll in August, Rubio's "very favorable" ratings were at 18 percent.

n the flip side, Crist's numbers have fallen off a cliff. Only 19 percent of likely GOP voters have a "very favorable" opinion of the governor. According to Rasmussen, that's a double-digit decline since August.

Crist's precipitous drops in favorability ratings are tied to Rubio's ability to link Crist and President Barack Obama, who is loathed by many GOP voters. Rubio has repeatedly hammered Crist's decision to support the president's $787 billion stimulus bill. The irony though is Rubio has admitted he would have accepted the stimulus money as well, but Rubio adds that Crist's problem was he supported it from the beginning which Rubio said he wouldn't have done.

The Florida GOP race is being followed closely by national political watchers to see what, if any, impact the tea party movement might have amongst GOP voters. In other political races, the "tea party" has threatened to run its own candidate if the GOP candidate isn't far enough to the right. The problem for the GOP is that if a tea party candidate can shave off enough support from the Republican candidate, both parties will lose.

For example, the Rasmussen poll found that on a generic ballot, the Republicans have a seven point lead over Democrats in the 2010 Senate race. But, if a "tea party" candidate jumps into the race, everything changes. Rasmussen found in a three-way race, Democrats would pull in 36 percent of the vote, the tea party candidate will bring in 23 percent and Republicans would finish last at 18 percent.

Click here to see the entire Rasmussen Poll.

Ayatollahgondola
12-16-2009, 08:24 PM
In reviewing his stances, he looks like he mirrors a lot of SOS's wish list

http://www.marcorubio.com/issues/

Twoller
12-17-2009, 08:22 AM
From the above link:

....

IMMIGRATION: “Legal immigration has been a great source of strength and prosperity for America, but I believe illegal immigration threatens the foundation of this system. If I had been in the Senate at the time, I would have opposed the McCain-Kennedy bill. I believe we must fix our immigration system by first securing the border, fixing the visa and entry process and opposing amnesty in any reform.”

...

It would depend a lot on what he meant by "fixing the visa and entry process". Making it too easy to get into this country is not that much different from amnesty. The visa and entry system could be modified, "reformed", so much that illegals already here wouldn't need amnesty. They could just "re-enter" somehow.

The only authentic test for anyone's claim to oppose illegal immigration is the question as to policing the presence of illegals in the country. If you are authentically opposed to illegal immigration, you must support the policing, at the local level, against the simple presence of anyone who is in this country without permission by the immigration authorities. That's it. Anything less than that is a bogus claim.

Kathy63
12-19-2009, 08:41 AM
He says he opposes amnesty IN ANY FORM. Either that's defnitive or not.

Twoller
12-19-2009, 11:09 AM
He says he opposes amnesty IN ANY FORM. Either that's defnitive or not.

If he wants to make it too easy to immigrate, then he has an escape plan from the amnesty question. He can afford to oppose amnesty in any form because nobody is asking him what he means by "fixing" the VISA and entry process.

If one opposes amnesty, then one must have something in mind as to what to do about illegals who are in the country. If he is not outspoken about throwiing them out, then what does he have in mind for them? Illegal immigration is an "entry process". Get it? See, if you "fix" the entry process so that illegals can leave and then re-enter some way, or maybe even be considered to have left without leaving or create some kind of loophole so that illegals can appear to have engaged the "fixed entry process", then this is in no way amnesty. Amnesty is just that, no matter what form it takes. It is the legal declaration that people who have entered the US illegally are not to be prosecuted for doing so. They are allowed, by law, to reside in the US without having received permission to do so.

Given the occasion, I would ask this guy, "You say that you intend to fix the VISA and entry process. Do you intend to make it easier to get into the country or harder."

If he says he intends to make it harder, that sounds better, but still leaves too much wiggle room. I would ask him, "How do you intend to make it harder?" Do not let these guys rest for a moment unless they exhibit real aggression against illegal immigrants and anyone else who thinks the United States is just a big parking lot that anyone can pull into.