Cantor Loss Doesn't Mean Comprehensive Imigration Reform is dead!

[protectionist]

With so few TP in the House next year as there will be, immigration reform will happen.

It has to if the GOP wants the presidency in 2016.

The GOP doesn't need amnesty one iota. Amnesty is as dead as a rock in the bottom of a pond.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Immigration reform is dead. What is more worse is Republicans are trying to shapen themselves into a certain more desirable image. Those Republicans lack backbone. Secure the border. Now.

 

[protectionist]

It will be a great travesty for truth if the media along with radio and TV talk show hosts and politicians go around saying and acting as if the majority of registered republicans across the nation are against comprehensive immigration reform because the Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost his primary and Mr. Cantor was a proponent of this type of legislation. The Cantor primary involved sixty-five thousand voters that isn't dispositive about anything nationally. Unfortunately, the incumbent loss here is primarily about the quality of the individual candidates. Mr. Cantor lost touch with ordinary voters in his district he was so busy trying to look good in the national spotlight he forgot what is critical is how good you look in the local spot light. Moreover, this guy David Brat has a lot of personal appeal he really seems like a regular guy that is going to go to Washington and do what is right he is going to do what is right for ordinary people and he is trustworthy he will tell the truth. Plain and simple Mr. Brat ran a better campaign that is all this race is about!

It's rather obvious that you DO think that the Cantor loss means that amnesty is dead, or at least been dealt a major blow. If you didn't, you wouldn't be talking about it. Same goes with the Obama people, and everyone else trying hard to take immigration out of the Cantor loss. Fact is, Brat campaigned relentlessly in it, and it's the main reason he's the Republican candidate.

Reminds me of a guy who once tried to ridicule a surrealistic drawing of mine, by saying "Oh gee! Look at the expressionism in that." I reminded him that only he mentioned expressiveness of the drawing, no one else, and if he had not perceived expressiveness, he wouldn't have mentioned it.

 

[Vigilante]