Scott Rasmussen has an interesting look at the way immigration plays out vis a vis a prospective third Party bid on the issue:

Over the past generation, Republicans and Democrats have battled to a draw on issues ranging from taxes to abortion. Both sides have poll-tested, focus-grouped, nuanced answers for these issues and supporters have lined up with the party of their choice.

Even the War on Iraq takes place against a political backdrop that all participants in the process understand--Democrats need to oppose the War while fighting a perception that they are weak on national security. Republicans want to focus on the global threat of terrorism rather than specifics in Iraq.

Immigration is entirely different.

It's not the most important issue to voters (except in a few Southwestern States) but it could shake up the nation's political equilibrium more than the economy, Iraq, or any other contemporary issue. Our latest polling shows that a pro-enforcement third party candidate could attract more support than a generic Republican presidential candidate in 2008 (and also be tied with the Democrats). Conservatives divide equally between Republicans and the third party candidate. Moderates divide equally between Democrats and the third party candidate. (This should be taken as an indication of the issue's power rather than a literal projection of election outcomes).

That last bit is crucial for anyone thinking that a third Party could come along and win 2008 on immigration alone - that won't happen, but illegal immigration looks to be something that will shake up the American political system; it could cause, as Rasmussen goes on to note, an electoral college gridlock in 2008 if an anti-illegal immigration third Party were to win just enough States to prevent either major Party candidate from scoring 270 electoral votes (though, lost in all this, is the prospect that an anti-immigration third Party could cost the Democrats California; which is a death knell for them). Rasmussen goes on to note that his polling actually shows Americans in favor of a generous immigration policy coupled with a desire for enforcement of the laws and the security of the border...in other words, the American people (though they don't know it) are precisely where President Bush is on the issue. Once again, it is GW who has figured out what is the right thing to do...but we've also got a lot of really bad politics preventing something as rational as Bush's plan (increased security plus guest-workers) from happening.

A combination of cowardice and demagoguery on both sides of the political aisle is preventing rationality...Democrats want to harm the GOP over border security, but they also want to pander to hispanics; GOPers want to increase border security, but are afraid that this will alienate hispancs...caught in the crossfire and suffering the most are those Americans who have to pay for the illegal immigrants, and the illegal immigrants who are legally neither fish nor fowl and thus can't be properly integrated into Americans society, nor booted out if that is what everyone really wants.

It is a quandry, and none of us can really see where it will take us - the real problem is that the illegals, and those who seek to exploit them (usually anti-American, leftwing hate groups such as MeCHA and ANSWER, eg) are pushing the illegals into acts guaranteed to increase hostility among the American citizenry. The mere thought of illegals demonstrating against American policy is an insult to all Americans, most especially those who legally came here.

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/majority.cgi/3553