BRAND NEW - Republican/Democrat Immigration Issue Scores

[Pale Rider]

Find out how your candidate scores on illegal immigration issues...

Republicans... (http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html) - Democrats. (http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_dem1.html)

[avatar4321]

what standard are they using?

[Pale Rider]

what standard are they using?

SOURCES & EXPLANATIONS

ASSESSMENTS CHANGE WITH THE CANDIDATES: The NumbersUSA staff updates the candidate information pages every day. NumbersUSA Founder and CEO Roy Beck looks at those updates and adjusts his grading of the candidates based on the newest information of changes in candidate comments.

ROY BECK’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING: “I look at these candidates ONLY in terms of what they have done about immigration and what they are promising to do on the issue.

“I grade all these candidates on how well they promise to carry out the recommendations of two national commissions in the 1990s and on other widely accepted goals for reducing overall illegal and legal immigration.

“I know that citizens choose to support a candidate based on many issues and on character and on past experience. I don’t endorse candidates because I don’t consider all those other aspects of the whole candidate. But I do candidly assess how each of them stacks up on immigration issues.

“I give the most weight to an official statement of promises, unless the candidate has said or done something since stating the policy to cast doubt on the promise.

“Absent an official policy, I give considerable weight to recent public statements. I leave room for candidates to shift positions; I don’t forever label them based on past statements or actions. The point here is what a candidate is most likely to do in the future as President, not grade them on past performances. But when current statements are ambiguous, contradictory, less than enthusiastically embraced or non-existent, I use past actions to help assess.

“If you don’t like my assessment of a candidate because you think I have used faulty information, contact us with your information. If you want your favorite candidate to get a better assessment from me, work to get that candidate to make better, more convincing promises on immigration.”

"If a candidate has said or done something new that calls into question a rating in a category, we will place black question marks (? ? ? ?) until we have sorted out where the rating should be."

http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html

[manu1959]

what standard are they using?

from the link:

ROY BECK’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING: “I look at these candidates ONLY in terms of what they have done about immigration and what they are promising to do on the issue.

“I grade all these candidates on how well they promise to carry out the recommendations of two national commissions in the 1990s and on other widely accepted goals for reducing overall illegal and legal immigration.

“I know that citizens choose to support a candidate based on many issues and on character and on past experience. I don’t endorse candidates because I don’t consider all those other aspects of the whole candidate. But I do candidly assess how each of them stacks up on immigration issues.

“I give the most weight to an official statement of promises, unless the candidate has said or done something since stating the policy to cast doubt on the promise.

“Absent an official policy, I give considerable weight to recent public statements. I leave room for candidates to shift positions; I don’t forever label them based on past statements or actions. The point here is what a candidate is most likely to do in the future as President, not grade them on past performances. But when current statements are ambiguous, contradictory, less than enthusiastically embraced or non-existent, I use past actions to help assess.

“If you don’t like my assessment of a candidate because you think I have used faulty information, contact us with your information. If you want your favorite candidate to get a better assessment from me, work to get that candidate to make better, more convincing promises on immigration.”

"If a candidate has said or done something new that calls into question a rating in a category, we will place black question marks (? ? ? ?) until we have sorted out where the rating should be."

[5stringJeff]

Looking at "Assessing Specific ILLEGAL Immigration Stances," here's the number of categories that each candidate got a good or excellent rating:

Hunter: 8
Tancredo: 8
Huckabee: 7
Romney: 7
Thompson: 7
McCain: 4
Paul: 4
Guiliani: 2

So, based on illegal immigration stances, I think any of the first 5 candidates are good picks. McCain, Paul, and Guiliani, however, leave a lot to be desired.

[Pale Rider]

Looking at "Assessing Specific ILLEGAL Immigration Stances," here's the number of categories that each candidate got a good or excellent rating:

Hunter: 8
Tancredo: 8
Huckabee: 7
Romney: 7
Thompson: 7
McCain: 4
Paul: 4
Guiliani: 2

So, based on illegal immigration stances, I think any of the first 5 candidates are good picks. McCain, Paul, and Guiliani, however, leave a lot to be desired.

Did you read the same thing I did Jeff, because this is what I see...

Tancredo - - - - 16
Hunter - - - - - 16
Thompson - - - 13
Huckabee - - - 11
Paul - - - - - - - 11
Romney - - - - - 9
McCain - - - - - 4
Giuliani - - - - - 2

[Pale Rider]

Now the DEMOCRAPS that got either a BAD or ABYSMAL....


Kucinich - - - - - 10
Biden - - - - - - 9
Dod - - - - - - - 9
Richardson - - - 8
Obama - - - - - - 8
Clinton - - - - - - 7
Edwards - - - - - 6

[5stringJeff]

Did you read the same thing I did Jeff, because this is what I see...

Tancredo - - - - 16
Hunter - - - - - 16
Thompson - - - 13
Huckabee - - - 11
Paul - - - - - - - 11
Romney - - - - - 9
McCain - - - - - 4
Giuliani - - - - - 2

I was only tallying the bottom section regarding illegal immigration, not all the sections. The top section is actually a rollup of the sections below, if I'm reading it right.

[actsnoblemartin]

excellent thread


Find out how your candidate scores on illegal immigration issues...

Republicans... (http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html) - Democrats. (http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_dem1.html)

[Pale Rider]

I was only tallying the bottom section regarding illegal immigration, not all the sections. The top section is actually a rollup of the sections below, if I'm reading it right.

OK... well.. but it all pretty much pertains to illegals doesn't it?

In any case, it's a great place to see where the candidates stand.

[Trigg]

Does anyone know the standing of the repubs right now? The front runners seem to be Romney, McCain and Giuliani. Of those three Romney seems to have the hardest line against illegals

[Pale Rider]

Does anyone know the standing of the repubs right now? The front runners seem to be Romney, McCain and Giuliani. Of those three Romney seems to have the hardest line against illegals

I'll tell ya Trigg, the majority of these "polls" that show this person or that "out front," I have a hard time believing them, because they certainly don't reflect my feelings, and I don't think they very accurately mirror the feelings of most on this board, and I think this board is a pretty good cross section of voters.

When was the last time YOU were polled? Oh... you weren't. Neither was I. See what I mean?

[avatar4321]

Does anyone know the standing of the repubs right now? The front runners seem to be Romney, McCain and Giuliani. Of those three Romney seems to have the hardest line against illegals

i dont think it matters. where the candidates stand today is irrelevant to what they will be on the day of the vote.