Hilary Clinton went against the white House policy of conducting illegal immigration raids. I think this could throw some voters over to the other side. The current administration is considered by most people I know as being as liberal on this issue as they would really like to go.
Yes, you’re absolutely right. Every time Hillary opens her mouth she says sometimes that will make her lose the election. She’s already lost it, in fact. Over. Done with. Cancel November.
If she wants an issue on which she can distinguish herself from Obama, she could do worse than to choose this one.
Is there a fire sale on straw today?
As for the OP, keep in mind that we are in the primaries, not the general.
Some issues carry more weight with voters than others. Any major issue in an election will swing a significant number of votes. This particular issue will garner almost 0 votes from the right but could potentialy swing a large number of votes on the left.
It might also help motivate a lot of voters on the left and in the middle to vote and support her. Hispanic turnout has a lot of room to grow, and eventually it will grow to match the rest of the population – maybe it will happen this election.
So while Republican candidates are clearly swinging to the right for the primaries, and may perhaps swing a little less far right for the general election; you’re suggesting that Clinton swing to the right for the primaries, too?
A significant portion of “the left” is just fine with reducing the witch hunt on illegal immigration, at least until rational legal immigration methods are available. Trump’s rhetoric on this is driving a lot of sympathy for immigrants of all stripes these days.
Sounds pretty reasonable to me. But I’m speaking for myself, not those “most people” that the OP knows. This won’t win the racist xenophobes over to Clinton–but they weren’t going to vote for her anyway. And might win some important votes.
She has my vote indeed.
-Ed. Salvadoran-American. (Who became an American citizen in the 90’s but was for a few years living as a refugee/undocumented from the civil war in the 80’s, so blame “Saint” Reagan for me pestering conservatives over here )
Taking away a primary criticism of your primary opponents, moving towards the preferred policy of a significant voting block in your party’s base, and strongly differentiating yourself from the most likely of your general election opponents? Tactical mistake, indeed.
The polling I can see finds almost no support among “the left” for deporting illegal immigrants. You can see some numbers here: http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm It looks like a policy of “find and deport” is supported by something like 30% of the public, and maybe 15-20% of Democrats. Independents are strongly opposed.
It has to be noted here that while it is not a big group Libertarians, that usually vote Republican/conservative, are also more open to immigrants and more open borders.
Well, Hilary can now kiss goodbye to the support of the far right-wing xenophobic folks who hate immigrants and listen to Limbaugh and get all their info from Fox News.
And she was really counting on their support to get her nominated as a candidate. Those kind of folks really are such an important part of the Democratic Party nomination process.
What on earth was she thinking to alienate such a base of support?
Exactly my point, she has nothing to gain by going further left but a lot to loose. She already has the vote of the moderates by going further to the left she stands to loose some of them. If she simply believes this is right I applaud her honesty but she had nothing to politically gain by it.
I think the sarcasm radar is failing for you.
The reality is that many moderates will not see this action as a deal breaker; as Bush, Rubio, and others can tell you immigration reform is needed, it is also the correct thing to do, and not only for human reasons.
This is just the break the Cruz campaign is looking for?
If anything i wouldn’t be surprised if this wasn’t all set up just so she could go against it. I can’t imagine why this would make her look bad.
She has the nomination to win by going further to the left.
Again, virtually every presidential candidate spends the primary season appealing to his/her base, and during the general election season they move to the middle. You keep implying that this position is going to haunt her for the next nine and a half months. Almost nobody will remember this issue in three months.
ETA: it is “lose,” not “loose.”
Whose support does Clinton lose by doing this? She hopefully curries favor among latinos and liberals, and Reagan Democrats (who are enamored with Trump) like her even less. It is a very low risk position she is taking.
Hillary is a serious tactical mistake. I almost always vote Democrat, but there’s no way I will vote for her if she gets the nomination.