Questioning her commitment to immigrant rights will certainly not help Trump get votes, because no one who cares about immigrant rights would ever vote for him over her.

It is also in support of pushing her to be specific about her plans for immigration and deportation policy so that she can't too easily pivot away from supporting immigrant rights once the primary is over.

heaven forbid you exercise your 1st amendment rights.

first 100 days in office. She is the only candidate to have said that.

She's the only one who talks about this in almost every speech, wherever she is, not only when she's with Hispanic audiences.

If you visited her website, you'd see her specific plans for it

It eliminates the punitive aspects of the Obama plan.

How can you give a timeline for the passage of a bill?

comprehensive immigration reform, though, given a Repub majority House.

He talks about a lot of things without being asked, the things he cares about.

I don't think anyone asked Hillary.

Look, not promising to address this in the first 100 days is not much evidence that he doesn't care about the issue. His plan is great. I believe he cares more than Hillary does, but that is just my opinion.

Hillary cosponsored The DREAM act. She was one of the two cosponsors of Senator Ted Kennedy’s 2004 bill, the S.O.L.V.E. Act.

Hillary Clinton introduced the Legal Immigrant Children’s Health Improvement Act to end the five-year waiting period for immigrant children and pregnant women to participate in the Children’s Health Hillary. Clinton developed and introduced legislation to expand job training access to people with limited English language skills. In 2007, during debate over the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, Hillary Clinton introduced an amendment to reclassify the spouses and minor children of lawful permanent residents as immediate relatives. All this in her few years in the Senate.

As you know, Latino support for Sanders is minimal. I think the small minority of Latinos who support him are those who don't (or barely) speak Spanish, and for them, immigration reform is not a priority. But among those of us who are fully bilingual and witness or live the plight of immigration, support for him is nil.

Don't you think we don't notice how he started pandering to us only after he needed us? That we have forgotten not only his "NO" vote for immigration reform, but also his "YES" vote in favor of the murderous vigilante Minutemen? Him cosponsoring a bill and campaigning to dump toxic waste on what could be the poorest Latino population in the country? Thank God for Paul Wellstone, a REAL progressive, who ceme to the defense of these helpless, poor town and stopped Sanders.

No, we have not forgotten. And that why a great majority of us don't support him.

Bernie support the Dream Act. Clinton supported Obama's inhumane deportation of refugee children until O'Malley and others embarrassed her and she did her usual weathervane routine. She has bragged about voting for a wall in this primary. Many, many Latinos do not trust her and they shouldn't.

Many, many bilingual Latinos support Bernie. Bernie won the Latino vote in some states. Most young Latinos support Bernie. Many Latino immigration activists prefer Sanders to Clinton. I stand with them. You should be honest and admit that the 2007 immigration reform bill was extremely weak and problematic. It was far from a good immigration reform bill and those like Menendez who worked hard in that fight know that to be true.

to personal attacks. Hillary's record speaks for itself -and so does Sanders.

Where did Sanders win the Latino vote? The numbers don't support your argument.

I showed you facts, and you reply with unproven claims and attacks. BIG FAIL.

It would be so refreshing.

You make unproven claims about why Clinton has been getting the majority of the Latino vote.

Sorry, but if you take part in the minuteman smear of Sanders, you deserve to be called out on that.

Sanders won the Latino vote in Colorado. He split the Latino vote in Illinois. I think he lost Nevada (though that is disputed), but given the distortion of Sanders record on immigration issues by the Clinton campaign, Brock, and other Clinton supporters in Nevada, I'm surprised he got any Latino votes there.

from the immigration issue you are...what a real outsider you are.

If you were part of the immigrant community, you'd be familiar of what a huge, serious issue this was Headline news, night, after night, after night on Univision.

Regarding the votes, I'll give you Colorado, which was a Caucus anyway, and thus not representative of the population. But Hillary won the Latino vote in both Illinois and Nevada.

Hollary won 70% of the Latino vote in FL. Same thing in TX, She also won NY by more than 30 points.

You lecturing me about Latinos and immigration remind me of Susan Sarandon schooling Dolores Huerta on migrant workers...this is MY world, and MY people.

Anyway, this discussion is pointless. Hillary has won already. Her victory will be solidified by the Latino vote in PR. By the time NJ closes, she will be declared the presumptive nominee, regardless of what happen in CA (which I think she will win). She's the one who will take on immigration reform, and I couldn't be happier about it.

Last edited Fri May 27, 2016, 10:27 AM - Edit history (1)

on Univision, that just shows how effective the smear campaign against him has been.

To clarify, I do not think the issue of the minute men patrolling the border is nonsense. That group is vile pile of racist shit. What is nonsense is using Sanders vote in relation to the minutemen to try to show that he is anti-immigrant. That is just sleazy politics.

I love Dolores Huerta, but she did take part in distorting Sanders' record.

And save the "these are my people" bullshit. You don't speak for all Latinos.

mentioned this campaign season.

So, big fail on the conspiracy theory.

Sanders says that he voted for that amendment because it was meaningless. It didn't change any existing policy. For Clinton to suggest that he was "standing with the minutemen" just shows you how low in the gutter she is willing to go.

voted yes.

Why did he vote YES?

He voted yes for the same reason other democrats did. Because they were told it was a vote for a policy that already existed.

about this vote)'

So, he couldn't vote no or abstain from voting for "a policy that already existed", like so many Democrats did, because when policy is wrong? Isn't this the guy who supposedly always stands for the right thing?

Did anyone say the policy was wrong or should be changed? That wasn't the issue. Why vote no on something that just affirms a policy that already existed and that no one was opposing? Sure, you might do it just to piss off the nativist assholes who introduced the amendment, and that is fine. But just voting yes because the whole thing was silly and meaningless is another reasonable response. Taking that to be "standing with" the vigilantes is just plain silly, as well as being an obvious smear.

Hillary has vowed to build on Obama's legacy who also has a horrendous deportation record.

Bernie’s proposal is much better and he opposes sending minors back to be murdered in countries like Honduras which are racked with Hillary Clinton supported coups and civil war.

even though they would be safer here.

And that very same day he went to xenophobic anti-immigrant Lou Dobbs show, famous for maligning immigrants night, after night, after night.

Sanders went to the show to proudly brag about his "NO" vote. He and Sanders spent the whole segment talking about how immigrants take away jobs from Americans.

Someone very close and dear to me was very hopeful about that bill. I remember her crying that night. I remember her pain.

I will never forget.

why they were willing to give everything away. Some immigrant rights groups opposed it. And it had provisions for a guest workers program that the Southern Poverty Center described as semi-slavery.

Reasonable people can disagree about whether those who care about Latino immigrants should have supported it.

anti-immigrant Lou Dobbs. No talk about the bill being "horribly compromised". It was all about how immigrants take away jobs from Americans. Sanders should be ashamed to have been on that show to fuel its hatred for immigrants flames.

You know, that bill is one of the reasons -maybe the biggest reason- why he is doing so poorly with Latinos

on both sides of that one.

What did he say on Lou Dobbs that was offensive? The guest worker program in the bill was bad partly because it would have depressed wages for labor. Hell, Chavez and Huerta opposed similar programs for hurting American farmworkers. That is why some unions were also against it. I despise Lou Dobbs, but you need to quote something Sanders said that was offensive before I will criticize Sanders for going on the show. Maybe something like "I am against illegal immigrants," which is what Clinton said in one interview on a different show.

Would I have voted for the 2007 immigration reform bill if I had been in the Senate? Probably, but even though immigrant rights are on the top of my list of political priorities, it would not have been an easy choice.

All Republicans voted YES. I'm so moved how they were against slave labor /sarcasm>

I would have to lean towards yes on this.

Pls re-read the title of the OP and then my post again.

Last edited Thu May 26, 2016, 04:04 PM - Edit history (1)

his mother brought him here without consent. He was given to a relatives he had only met once for a few hours.

Honestly, I don't know how anyone can't see this as other than a kidnapping.

Janet Reno returned the child to those who were his family in every sense of the word (legally, emotionally).

And this is just my opinion, but my biggest gripe in this matter is that she took too long to do it.

This child had survived a trauma no one should endure. He saw his mother drown and saw himself alone in the middle of the ocean.

At a time when he needed peace, quiet and nurturing from the family he knew and loved so he could heal, he was used a a political prop and paraded around before hundreds of strangers every day by his Miami relatives and the Cuban exile community.

It should have never happened.

He was in opposition to Boxer, Biden, Obama, Clinton, etc...

Sanders, not Clinton, voted against a pathway to citizenship multiple times.

that many immigrant rights activists also opposed.

I found other info that says Clinton deported way less than Bush or Obama. Not sure where truthrevolt got their figures.

This article was written in 2012, so it only related to Obama's first term and there's nothing figuring in his second, yet Clinton was far behind them.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/10/american-principles-action/has-barack-obama-deported-more-people-any-other-pr/

The Clinton numbers you cite are lower because returns are not counted. Obama's numbers looked higher because he counted a return as a deportation.

I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

I have read it elsewhere too, but don't remember where.

Granted, I too have seen the claim that Obama (at least in his first term) deported more than any previous president (no complaints from Hillary about this that I have seen). But it appears that the way the numbers were reported changed in a way that made Obama's numbers look higher than they really were. I am happy to be proven wrong on this, by the way, but I do think everyone agrees that the last three presidents have done more deporting than any previous president.

If I come up with anything different I'll let you know. I appreciate your explanation.

The returns, confirmed by other websites I checked, refers to those who go back voluntarily and are primarily those who are simply turned around at the border. Removals are deportations, where an order is given and someone is forcibly removed from the country.

According to this Bill Clinton did not have more deportations than any other president but many more were apparently turned back and voluntarily left.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/16/the-numbers-ted-cruz-cited-on-past-deportations-during-the-cnn-debate-were-way-off/

Nonetheless, you are absolutely correct in that Clinton, Bush and Obama have had many more than previous presidents.

As I said in my OP, I was following the article I linked to in defining a deportation as a removal or return. On that definition, Clinton is number one in deportations. But now that I look at your broken down data, I do think that a case can be made that Obama and Bush were much worse than Clinton in terms of the effects of their policies on immigrants. That is because a case can be made that removals tend to be more harmful to families than returns.

That was the point I was trying to make. Returns seem to pale in comparison to deportations in the way they affect people.

although the number of deaths due to tighter border enforcement started its upward trend under Clinton in the late 1990s reaching an all-time high (since surpassed) of 340 in 2000. Also, tighter border enforcement leads to more use of the coyotes and all the horrors that go along with that. Also, one should not underestimate the hardship of traveling all the way to the border only to be thwarted there.

But basically I agree with your point.

Of course, Clinton and first term Obama can claim that they couldn't simply fail to enforce the laws, but neither of them really showed interest in doing much of anything. (Second term Obama has been much better.)

Bill Clinton, Bush and first term Obama did a piss poor job on deportation issues, and Hillary has shown incredible insensitivity on the issue. I will continue to criticize them for their failures.

right to be here?
I'm not talking about the DREAMERS

like Clinton favored even while admitting that they would be safer here.

But hey, their parents sure got taught a lesson, or something


http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/minors-honduras-killed_n_5694986.html

Unless you are targeted for your race or religion or your political views (there may be a few others), you are out of luck.

Illegals should be stopped and returned at the border. Only legal vetted immigration should be allowed, thats just smart, but corporations want cheap labor, ranchers want cheap labor so they enable it

with more unnecessary wars, occupations and global empire?
or
TPP?
or
More Fracking (and more toxic drinking water)
or
more corporate welfare
or
allowing Too Big to Fail to get even bigger?
or
etc, etc, etc