Roy Beck's picture

Published:  

  by  Roy Beck

I'm writing this at 1 a.m. In the two hours of CNN commentary since the end of the main stage debate, one of the most repeated observations of a parade of commentators was that instead of frontrunner Trump being on the defensive throughout the evening, it was Rubio.

Especially over Rubio's immigration positions.

That was my take two hours ago when we released this statement to the national media:

The anticipated ganging up on the main stage happened less to Trump tonight than to Rubio for his leadership in bringing the Gang of Eight immigration bill to the Senate floor.  Cornered several times by different candidates, Rubio still advanced the same end goal of providing lifetime work permits to millions of illegal aliens to compete with vulnerable American workers.  In  a foreign policy debate, candidates failed to speak up for an immigration policy that is good for American workers but everybody in both debates acknowledged that legal immigration can pose security threats and requires special consideration during this period of terrorism.

The particularly good news for us who fought fiercely against Rubio's Gang of Eight amnesty and immigration expansion bill in 2013 and 2014 is that CNN commentators across the ideological spectrum all agreed that spotlighting Rubio's role in that legislation really hurts him in the campaign.

I don't say that because I'm gleeful about Rubio being damaged politically but because it is wonderful to hear all those pundits agree that the Gang of Eight is immensely unpopular.

Back in 2013, we were constantly informed by most news media that OPPOSING the Gang of Eight was a kind of political suicide.

Many of you activist citizens out there had a role in this.  Hugh Hewitt, one of the moderators in the debate, said afterwards that over the last five weeks, the most requested debate subject mentioned to him on twitter was to have Rubio and Cruz discuss immigration in depth.

Most of those talking on CNN said they believed that Cruz got the best of those exchanges with his attacks on Rubio's leadership on the Gang of Eight.

Here are some of our tweets about this part of the Republican debate tonight:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NEAR CONSENSUS ON PAUSE FOR SYRIAN REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT

Immediately after the early debate of the four candidates with low polling numbers, I put out this statement to the national media:

All four candidates in the first debate made a compelling case  for pausing refugee resettlement from the Syria region as not only best for the refugees and our security but also better for the long term prospects of the region. 

The granting of a marriage immigrant visa to a woman whose social media showed terrorist proclivities was at the heart of the candidates' refusal to trust the government to properly vet new refugees from a region of terrorism. The big news there was that Graham stepped back from the Gang of Eight "comprehensive immigration reform" bill he co-authored and has steadfastly championed and indicated he wouldn't support it today without modification based on this season of terrorism.

Santorum broke important new ground in this year's debates by noting pleas from religious leaders to stop moving moderate Muslims and minority Christians out of the region.  He said their argument is that if re-settled the moderates won't come back to Syria and that they are needed back to help re-establish a Syrian state that can be cooperative with the U.S.

There was almost as much agreement in the main stage debate, although moderators did not press each for an answer.

Here was some of the blogging on that part of the debates:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ROY BECK is President & Founder of NumbersUSA

Tags:  
Elections 2016

Updated: Fri, Feb 19th 2016 @ 10:20am EST

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. The views expressed in blogs do not necessarily reflect the official position of NumbersUSA.