{"id":6614,"date":"2014-05-08T15:52:01","date_gmt":"2014-05-08T19:52:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=6614"},"modified":"2018-12-28T15:01:43","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T20:01:43","slug":"tuesdays-elections-show-the-power-of-money-not-the-appeal-of-amnesty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2014\/05\/08\/tuesdays-elections-show-the-power-of-money-not-the-appeal-of-amnesty\/","title":{"rendered":"Tuesday\u2019s Elections Show The Power Of Money, Not The Appeal Of Amnesty"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"EllmersWhile open borders lobby groups like Bibles, Badges and Business, are rushing to claim that Tuesday\u2019s primary results show that amnesty is a \u201cwinning\u201d issue, in truth the results show only that amnesty is well funded, not popular. Which we already knew! While these amnesty proponents brag that incumbents like pro-amnesty<\/a> Rep. Renee Ellmers \u201cwon decisively<\/a> while running on a pro-immigration stance,\u201d in fact wins like hers, given the context, were neither decisively won nor based on an honest portrayal of her real stance on immigration. Rep. Ellmers, with all the power of incumbency and a campaign chest of $1 million, proved unable to get 60% of the vote against her challenger Frank Roche, who ran against her with a mere $23,000<\/a>. With a financial advantage of over 43 to 1, such results do not constitute a decisive win.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, Rep. Ellmers did not run on her actual position on immigration. The supposedly \u201cconservative\u201d arm of amnesty proponent Mark Zuckerberg\u2019s Fwd.us, \u201cAmericans for a Conservative Direction\u201d also spent at least $150,000<\/a> airing ads on television<\/a> claiming that Rep. Ellmers is \u201cworking hard to secure the border and fix our broken immigration system once and for all.\u00a0 No amnesty, period.\u201d Unfortunately, for unsuspecting voters who just haven\u2019t heard how to decode amnesty speak<\/a>, the words \u201cNo amnesty, period,\u201d often do convey the false but understandable idea that the candidate does not intend to reward virtually all illegal aliens with legalization.<\/p>\n

Open borders lobbyists perpetually claim that Americans widely support amnesty.\u00a0 But for years, going back at least to President George W. Bush<\/a>, they have refused to call amnesty by its name. If amnesty were actually popular, there\u2019d be no need for code words.