The recent debate among the presidential candidates in the U.S., sponsored by Univision, a Spanish language television network, had rekindled anew a fresh look at how some of the candidates view the controversial illegal immigration issue wherein Republicans and Democrats are in a limbo on where to stand for in order to earn the trust and support of the millions of the voting Latino population in the country.
Add to this the large Asian population and other ethnic denominations who are just on the sideline to closely keep tabs on the latest developments on the issue. From this, one is able to draw a tangible line as to who will they support comes election time. And of course, most of these voting population are relatives of illegal immigrants whose sentiments m ight be swayed and that they won’t have other option but to pick an ideal presidential candidate who is not hypocrite to lay down his cards as to whether he is pro or not on the sensitive issue.
What is clear now is that at least three of the candidates have stood their ground on the issue. And if I were on their shoes, I wouldn’t have the second thought on who to vote for. The likes of Huckabee, McCain and Giuliani, for example, don’t miss a chance, although only one of them would surely make it to be one of the best picks, unless the women population would think otherwise in favor of Clinton, and extend solid support to the former first lady.
Ever since the debate on the Comprehensive Immigration Bill cropped up many months back, McCain never paltered in his stance to fight for what he believed was a humanitarian act that any compassionate man would do. At least, this would give the 12 million illegal immigrants a chance to to come out from the shadows and become productive citizens of this country, except for those who have committed crimes in the U.S.
On the one hand, Giuliani is another good pick for his unrelenting stance on the issue for as long as the illegal immigrants should come forward and pay the penalties and fines that the federal government may impose upon them at the time of application. Perhaps, compassion is seeping into the hearts and minds of these candidates that they would want to put the issue to rest. Or it could be the other way around.
This notion should not be taken seriously but that’s how some of the people interpret this continuing political development. And it is understandable that the other candidates can’t seem to take the gamble of putting a mess on their public relations blitz. If they can avoid getting into a trap, they would do so. But a clear and honest platform on this sensitive topic should not be taken for granted. To some people, principle is something that cannot be ignored. To pick the right candidate is now the decision of those who are in favor of their platforms. The only question is that some of them do not want to commit as to which color to pick. Do you think it is fair?