77% of Latino voters favor tax hikes= Rand's amnesty plan

Agorism

Banned
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
12,663
http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision...e-fiscal-cliff/story?id=17925835#.UMaJULb2G4W

A friendly reminder of how "comprehensive immigration" reform will work out for the GOP

According to a new impreMedia/Latino Decisions survey of more than 5,600 Latino voters, a whopping 77 percent favor increasing taxes on the wealthy. While the vast majority of Democratic Latino voters -- 86 percent -- fall into that category, so do 51 percent of Republican Latino voters.

Only 12 percent say they favor a spending cuts-only approach, according to the survey.
 
You should really get a temporary ban since you just come here and bash Rand constantly over the exact same issue with nothing constructive to add to the discussion.
 
Only 31% even say they'd CONSIDER voting Republican if they took friendly positions on immigration. To be honest, is it worth going after them? I'd rather rally the base.
 
Only 31% even say they'd CONSIDER voting Republican if they took friendly positions on immigration. To be honest, is it worth going after them? I'd rather rally the base.

Yep, might as well criticize him now before he runs his presidential aspirations into the ditch.

He deserves fair warning.
 
Only 31% even say they'd CONSIDER voting Republican if they took friendly positions on immigration. To be honest, is it worth going after them? I'd rather rally the base.

Well, the word "Republican" is connected to the policies of George W. Bush. When people think of "Republican policies" they think of people who want to cut funding for children's health care programs in order to spend more money on a war against some country that never posed any threat to us. A lot of these people don't support libertarian or limited government principles, because they've never seen an example of those principles being implemented and succeeding.
 
It's not necessary for you to keep calling it an "amnesty plan." That's not what it is. "Rand's immigration plan" would've been appropriate.

Why does it bother you?

Democrats like tax hikes to be called "increased revenue" in D.C. and "fees" in California. They like to rename things.
 
Why does it bother you?

Democrats like tax hikes to be called "increased revenue" in D.C. and "fees" in California. They like to rename things.

"Amnesty" would be if the government just decided to make all of the illegal immigrants citizens tomorrow. I'm still not sold on Rand's immigration plan, but a long path to citizenship with severe penalties is not "amnesty."
 
"Amnesty" would be if the government just decided to make all of the illegal immigrants citizens tomorrow. I'm still not sold on Rand's immigration plan, but a long path to citizenship with severe penalties is not "amnesty."



So by your definition Reagan didn't amnesty. And the Ted Kennedy-McCain bill wasn't an amnesty bill either.

Smoke and mirrors.
 
Trad. con, even if we cut the war spending so we don't look like we're prioritizing war, will they still like us cutting their entitlements? I just think that we're going to have to look at other places besides Hispanics for votes. They seem to like government, of all forms.
 
Trad. con, even if we cut the war spending so we don't look like we're prioritizing war, will they still like us cutting their entitlements? I just think that we're going to have to look at other places besides Hispanics for votes. They seem to like government, of all forms.

I'm just saying that Bush tarnished the Republican brand, which is the main problem that any Republican has. It's just going to take time until people begin to forget about Bush. I think that Latinos would be open to Rand's platform that the kind of Republicanism we had with Bush, although I know that he wouldn't actually get a majority of Hispanics. I heard somewhere where Hispanics are huge fans of gold, and were fascinated by Ron's support of the gold standard.
 
So by your definition Reagan didn't amnesty. And the Ted Kennedy-McCain bill wasn't an amnesty bill either.

Smoke and mirrors.

Reagan offered amnesty without adding any border security first. Rand's plan doesn't consider a path to citizenship until the borders have actually been secured. He wants to secure the borders first and foremost.
 
Reagan offered amnesty without adding any border security first. Rand's plan doesn't consider a path to citizenship until the borders have actually been secured. He wants to secure the borders first and foremost.

Why is border security a penalty causing it to not be "amnesty?"

btw- I don't favor border security or enforcement.
 
Why is border security a penalty causing it to not be "amnesty?"

btw- I don't favor border security or enforcement.

If you don't favor border security, then why do you even care about giving amnesty to the illegals here?
 
Rand's immigration plan is either right or wrong.

If it's right, then shouldn't he support it regardless of whether or not it helps him win?

If it's wrong, then shouldn't he reject it regardless of whether or not it helps him lose?
 
If you don't favor border security, then why do you even care about giving amnesty to the illegals here?


I don't see anything wrong with people working here illegally.

I also like the idea of commerce moving between the borders without any government regulation and Capital moving out and in without restrictions.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top