Everyone from Chris Christie to Scott Walker has been accused of flip-flopping on their immigration stances within the last few weeks, moving from a position open to a pathway to citizenship to one decidedly against it. In light of all the waffling, Jamie Weinstein, senior editor at the Daily Caller, has asked a good question: Is a hardline anti-immigration stance really the best position for 2016 GOP contenders to take?
For starters, it is worth remembering who won the 2008 Republican nomination: John McCain, co-sponsor of a 2006 Senate bill that would have provided more security for America’s borders, in addition to an earned pathway to citizenship for much of America’s illegal immigrant population.
Ok, maybe things have changed since 2008, with the economy taking a turn for the worse. But polls don’t suggest the GOP has recently become militantly anti-immigration reform.
It is true that polling can sometimes be contradictory on the subject of immigration. Certainly the wording of the poll question matters. But many polls over the last several years have shown Republican majorities supporting immigration reform that secures America’s borders and provides a pathway to legalization so long as certain conditions are met.
Marco Rubio’s strong polling numbers are evidence of the above trend:
Then there is Marco Rubio. At this moment, according to polls, the Florida senator is among the top GOP contenders for the Republican nomination, despite being a member of the Senate Gang of Eight that authored the 2013 immigration reform bill that provided a pathway to citizenship to much of America’s illegal immigrant population, so long as the illegal immigrants met certain conditions, like learning English and paying a fine.
Sure, Rubio has distanced himself from the bill, now saying he thinks it is best to pursue immigration reform in a piecemeal approach rather than through one comprehensive piece of legislation. But he has not distanced himself from his support for some type of earned path to citizenship.
Despite his stand in support of a pathway for citizenship, when pollsters ask Republican voters which candidates they absolutely could not support, Rubio often does among the best. In an April Quinnipiac poll, for instance, only 4 percent of Republicans said they could never vote for Rubio. Only Scott Walker performed better with 3 percent saying they could never cast their ballot for him.
As Weinstein notes, it’s possible that polling could change once anti-immigration hawks starting running campaign ads on the issue during the primaries. However, his argument that a staunch anti-immigration platform might not be the best path to the White House is certainly worth consideration.
