Immigration has been a central issue of the 2016 presidential campaign. Perhaps no other issue presents as sharp a contrast between the visions of the two leading candidates as immigration.
Yet, inexplicably, this driving issue of the 2016 campaign was entirely absent from the first two debates between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. It was not until the third and final debate, just 20 days before the American people head to the polls, that this issue was addressed head-to-head by the candidates.
Even more inexplicably, when finally given the opportunity to address the public’s deep-seated concerns about the economic, social, cultural and national security impact of a rudderless immigration policy, both candidates reverted to vague generalities and platitudes. With the attention of nearly everyone who will cast a vote on Nov. 8, neither Trump nor Clinton made a compelling case for how they would reform immigration in a way that serves identifiable national interests.
In the end, the forum and the candidates left voters with more questions about immigration policy than were answered during the debate.
Read the rest of Dan Stein’s guest opinion at The Hill here.