35 Comments - Trafficmatt - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 9:52 am: I think it is a fair topic for Sauerberg to bring up. He has to make a calculated decision. Does the negative of bring up this hot issue with Latino voters outweigh the positives of getting the more conservative voters in the Republican base energized about his campaign? Perhaps Sauerberg sees the trouble that McCain is having with the base on this issue. The other thing about this is that No-body, I mean NO-BODY, is going to naturally give Sauerberg any chance of beating Durbin in this state. If he has a chance, he has to employ one of the mantra’s of Sun-Szu’s “Art of War”. “If you are outmatched by your opponent, provoke him”. Perhaps that is part of the strategy. - Ghost - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 9:58 am: It will garner him very little additional support. For him to beat Durbin he needs to attract the undecideds and the moderates. His logic is actually a bit backwards. The one group of voters the republicans can count on are the ultra conservatives who are hypoed on the immigration issue. Preaching to the choir does little to bring in new support. Since the up for grabs votes in Illinois tend to be moderates, he runs a large risk of just alienating the grps he needs to bring in. Regan understood that there was no need to pander to the conservative republicans who would vote for you regardless. This is the exact strategy that will gurantee Durbin a win. - Levois - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:00 am: Sauerberg has a long way to go. He better learn quickly to attack what amounts to be more important issues than illegal immigration. He’s an MD perhaps he should talk about health care. He should also talk about the economy. Like what does he think about abolishing the federal reserve. - Pat collins - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:10 am: doesn’t even seem to be a dominant issue for Republicans I don’t see how you read those results that way. While the economy is the top issue, it essentially ties the war for number 2. As for “what to do with them” 68% want them to leave now, or leave in a while. How you play it? Easy 1) Fairness - shouldnt we all have to obey the laws? 2) Effect on poor by putting downward pressure on wages. 3) Numbers - do we really NEED more people? Or is immigration like carrying guns, a relic of the 1800s that’s no longer relevant or needed today? *^^* 4) Globalization - do we need to import more people as we export jobs? - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:13 am: Here’s another Sun Tzu quote: “If we do not wish to fight, we can prevent the enemy from engaging us even though the lines of our encampment be merely traced out on the ground. All we need do is to throw something odd and unaccountable in his way.” - Esteban - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:14 am: Illegal immigration is a hot-button issue in Illinois. The pols in office have accomplished nothing on this issue and I think it COULD make incumbents of both parties vulnerable. - Snidely Whiplash - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:16 am: I too believe that the economy comes before illegal immigration as far as the primary issues facing this country at the moment. I also believe, though, that illegal immigration contributes to our economy’s downard spiral in several ways: the driving down of wages; its contribution to the unemployment of citizen workers; and not insignificantly, in the export of U.S. dollars to the foreign countries from which these people came each and every time they send money to their families there. This is money for which our economy sees nothing in return. There is absolutely no benefit to the American economy from these dollars. Rather than being used to buy goods and services in America, these dollars are spent on such things in the foreign countries to which illegal immigrants send that money. If you accept only $100 as the average figure each illegal sends to family in other countries, and you further accept the fantastically-low 12 million figure the government puts on illegal immigrants here, that comes to $120M each and every WEEK. That’s over $4 BILLION dollars per year (please feel free to correct my math if it is incorrect, I don’t pretend to be a mathematician). So, I do see the two issues as being both important AND interconnected. Of course, the war in Iraq isn’t helping our economy, either, nor is it helping the sad state of our educational system and social programs. I think that all that poll shows is that people feel that we have a LOT of problems in this country, and the current administration isn’t doing much to correct them. On the contrary, it seems to be actively working to exascerbate them. - capitol view - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:20 am: there’s an interesting parallel in the Bible - cities of sanctuary. These were intended for persons who accidently killed another person, and was a way to avoid family blood feuds. But why not adapt the concept for illegal immigrants? Declare some regions as sanctuary areas (local county board approves, after feds declare the overall region eligible), based on economic need for lower income labor. Illegal aliens would have to first find work, and then apply for citizenship - and be subject to deportation if they have a criminal record. Just a thought, for persons closer to the immigration issue than myself to consider… - RMW Stanford - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:21 am: I think that he would be served to focus on economic issues and healthcare, as it already been mention he is a MD, so health care should be his strong point. Then again if he can try and, wrongly, connect illegal immigration to the economy and its problems, then he might be successful. Sauerberg probably has the potential to me of problem for Durbin that most people think. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:22 am: Illegal immigration is to the GOP as gun control is to the Dems as an issue. It doesn’t energize the base to vote as much as it inflames the other side to come out against it. Illegal immigration isn’t going to bring a single new GOP voter out in November, but it will almost certainly bring Dems out to vote against it. - Muskrat - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:25 am: I like the point about how “immigrant” in Chicago does not mean “Hispanic.” It means “pretty much everybody, give or take a few generations.” I think the nativist stuff might play better in areas where there is a longer-standing more homogenous or more stable anglo population, like the south, rural areas, etc. Maybe this guy thinks he’ll be able to fire up some downstate emotion. - Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:25 am: Are we sure that all Latinos are in favor of illegal immigration. After all, most of them ARE legal and for many the process was arduous. Many may view less arduous almost-instant citizenship for illegal residents from anywhere as depreciating the huge value (at least in the current era) of US citizenship. And unfair to boot. - Wumpus - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:29 am: He needs to focus on the violent and felonious (new word?) illegals and stregnthening the border. A lot of people have sympathy for people who are abiding by the rules (except breaking into the country) and otherwise, doing their best to be law abiding folks. - Snidely Whiplash - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:36 am: I think that the temporary worker option is a red herring. Once that person becomes unemployed or unemployable, will he or she voluntarily leave the country? I don’t think so, especially when you factor in the fact that they entered illegally to begin with. Guest worker programs only work so long as there is a shortage of unskilled labor. Remember what happened in Germany after unification? West Germany had millions of unskilled Turkish guest workers there, and when unification saddled the economy with millions of unemployed East Germans, the government had a horrible dilemma on its hands. Guest worker programs are only a way of prolonging the inevitable … a bandaid approach that never works. I’d be interested in seeing where that 25% who voted for that option would go if that option weren’t presented. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:51 am: This is an issue that has been proven to be basically unsolveable by government. If workers are needed, employers will find them. If the jobs are here, people will migrate to them. And it could be argued in a world economy, it’s better to have people working here (and turning money over in the economy) than sending the jobs overseas altogether. The best that can be achieved, IMO, is to try to keep criminals out, eliminate abusive situations like “sweatshops”, to keep track of everyone to the extent possible, and to favor legal citizens vs. illegals when the goodies of government are handed out. - Greg - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 10:55 am: I suppose that taking such a position has only upside for Saueberg: how many votes is he going to lose among those who feel the opposite? Also, the minority is a vocal minority. - wordslinger - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 11:06 am: I think it’s still a big issue and will be used as a way to fire up the true-believers. Also, as the son of LEGAL immigrants, I can tell you the issue resonates across the ideological spectrum among many who played by the rules to get here. What saddens me is the wars are so far down the list. I think that reflects that too few of us are making any sacrifice (save for all the borrowed money) in these adventures — which may explain why we’ve allowed them to go on for so long. Bring back the Weinberg-Powell Doctrine. - Justice - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 11:41 am: On the first point of ….most important facing the country….: We tend to be an “at the moment” country. We all should have known that the sucking sound would some day be heard. We also should have known that you simply cannot just keep spending beyond your means. I still see the war in Iraq “undeclared war” as being the most critical. It is costly in lives and in hard cash. We were conned to get there and need to extricate ourselves as soon as possible. Regarding the illegal immigrants: There isn’t one single one of us who would not have tried to get here any way we could on the promise of getting in free, simply by sneaking in. Doesn’t make it right but if we go after the companies breaking the law, with the laws we have, most of the immigration problem goes away. I think there should be a path to citizenship and that path should include the same path as those waiting in line must take. We are overloading our system and it simply cannot continue. If it is out of pity we say stay, we are destroying the process and putting a huge load on our entitlement and care systems, along with schools and infrastructure. What they did is illegal. Hard… but fact. They have broken this country’s laws. - RBD - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 11:50 am: It only matters if Durbin acknowledges him. I expect that in November, when you ask for the under-reported stories of the general election, you will have to remind your readers that there was a Senate race too. - Jon Cutler - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 11:51 am: This is a definite catch-22 situation. If every illegal were to be sent back home, this would drain law enforcement (both local and federal) resources for years. Many Latinos do not favor immediate citizenship for illegals, I truly believe that this is a big misconception. As these elections have proven, Latinos will be a force to be reckon with, and being Latino does not mean that they favor immigration reform. Pols need to do their homework and truly invest in a plan that will work for all. The trick now is coming up with a solid plan. - cermak_rd - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 12:15 pm: The regions of the nation that are screaming the loudest about illegal immigration are the border states that have a direct connection to the problem and the southeast which has not been an area that has been used to immigrants. I have not heard incredible angst coming out of NYC or Chicago about immigrants, because we are used to them, regardless of where they’re from. One of the arguments against illegal immigration from the southeast is a plaintive wail that they are taking over our culture? Never mind that I’m not even sure what culture that is. So as long as Sauerberg focuses on the economic impact of immigration and does not talk about the “cultural” impact (and doesn’t let surrogates do it for him) he may be able to talk about the issue without being branded a nativist. Poll legal immigrants and they tend to say they want the rules followed. Try to deport their nephew or the fellow that’s walking out with their daughter and they take a different view. - Some Guy - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 12:24 pm: Every poll I’ve seen over the last two years (since immigration became such a big issue) have shown, without exception, that this is pushing Hispanics away from the Republicans and toward the Dems. I don’t see him having a prayer to win this, and he’s alienating the most rapidly growing portion of the population. He’s a doctor - he should talk about health care. He should focus on economic conservatism. They ain’t glamorous and he won’t win with it, but he won’t win with this either, and it won’t hurt the GOP down the road. - Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 12:46 pm: Do the big money, big business donors on the Republican side really want to stop the flow of undocumented workers? I think not. This is one of the core issues that Republicans use to energize their loyal base of voters. It works so well they have no intention of solving it. So, he can rant against it all he wants; it’s part of the party line. (The Dems have a stable of these as well.) - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 2:27 pm: Pot- I agree with your comments. There are vested interests in both political parties, as well as economic forces and human behavior, that mitigate against the government ever “solving” this problem…although some useful “campaigning” is done on the issue from time to time that makes a lot of noise with no results. If the US ever becomes an unbearable, undesirable place to be, and some other nation becomes a golden land of opportunity, THEN there will be an exodus. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 2:29 pm: 1. I’d love to see a replay of the Helicopter Jim debate. Anyone still have a youtube link to that ad? 2. How is Sauerberg going to attack Durbin on immigration, when Durbin’s position - as far as I know - is identical to John McCain’s? Good luck with that. 3. Note that this was a REPUBLICAN exit poll, and 55 percent said that “illegal immigrants” should be allowed to stay, one way or another. By demonizing immigrants, Sauerburg is the one out-of-step, not just with the public, but even with his own party. 4. How is Sauerburg going to attack Durbin on any issue without any money? It sure isn’t coming from John McCain or the Senate Republicans. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 3:39 pm: Why did he run if he doing this kind of stuff? Before he sunk his money into this run, he should have first figured out his two narratives; why he would be a great senator, and why Durbin is not. Dr. Sauerberg needs to tell us something about Durbin that is a concern - something we didn’t know about him when considering his re-election. Voters like Durbin, even if they don’t know him. He’s been elected by a majority twice, and Sauerberg’s job is to tell former Durbin supporters why they need to switch. This isn’t an easy sell. Sauerberg needs to show voters why he would be a better senator. They need to discover that they like him more than Durbin. This entire illegal immigration topic isn’t where this campaign should even be at this stage. Claiming that Durbin is ‘out of touch’ isn’t original or even interesting - even if it is true, (which it isn’t). The more Sauerberg runs his campaign in a dull unoriginal fashion, the quicker voters will turn him off. This is what he is to do. WEAR HIS LAB COAT. Look like what he is! Stand there with his Blackberry, or a clipboard. Everyone knows and trusts doctors in some way. WEAR THE UNIFORM. Then start disecting Durbin in medical terms. Use lots of humor. Show charts. Mimic those silly cold remedy visuals. Use humor to take Durbin down. Why? Because folks LIKE Durbin and will not appreciate a full frontal attack on the man. Instead use humor and make him the butt of his political decisions and mis-steps. Durbin is likeable - Sauerberg needs to become more likeable. Drop the political attacks and focus on being unique, original and interesting. Sauerberg will need to have folks talking about his ads and enjoying them. - USA Patriot - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 3:54 pm: I think the exit polls speak for themselves - this issue just does not resonate in our state in any serious way. People may make noise about it at town hall meetings and in letters to the editor, but it’s never translated into enough real votes in the polling place. The GOP tried an explicitly anti-immigrant strategy in the Virginia elections last year, and they failed. They even tried it against Spitzer in NY after his drivers license policy. Failed again. And yes, of course, the anti-immigrant rhetoric is wonderful at driving immigrant voters to the Democratic party. When Bush came out in favor of immigration reform as a candidate in 2004, Latinos supported him at 40% - very impressive for a Republican. Now, after the national anti-immigrant crusades that are closely associated with the GOP, those numbers have evporated. [And by the way, immigrants have proven that they will work against anyone - Dem or GOP - that opposes them. Latinos and Muslims raised tens of thousands of dollars and built precinct operations to work against Dan Lipinski.] Romney’s news today about the suspension of his campaign is one more reminder of the folly of this strategy. He ran anti-immigrant ads in Iowa 12,000 times and was trying to corner the market as the GOP’s key candidate that would “fight” illegal immigration. Look where it got him. - RBD - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 4:09 pm: Isn’t Sauerberg running now to position himself really to run for what is expected to be an open Senate seat in 2010. (There can’t possibly be a poll anywhere showing him winning this year.) - Captain America - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 4:09 pm: In a state with a large number of immigrants, legal and illegal, attacking immigrants seems like a counterproductive political strategy in the long run. This country was built of the blood,sweat, and tears of immigrants. If I were an immigrant, I’d be shouting viva Durbin! - JJPAtriot - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 4:12 pm: Everyone, Sauerburg, by bringing out the immigration, has gaurenteeed himself a downward spiral. According to the associated press exit polls in Illinois, in 2004 latinos made 8% of the electorate in the general election. In 2008, they made up 17% for a PRIMARY!! People, latinos are coming out to vote, and they are energized. Someone asked, do they even care about illegal immigration. Yes!! look at the recent research by the pew hispanic center. http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=84 Latinos do not like the approaches that Sauerburg is taking, and he will most likely for it. As a naturalized citizen from Mexico myself, i hate this kind of rhetoric from republicans. They have only gaureenteed my place with the Democractic party, and I am only 24 years old. That means at least 50 years of voting they have lost me. - chicago womyn - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 4:32 pm: Captain America’s right, “in a state with a large number of immigrants, legal and illegal, attacking immigrants seems like a counterproductive political strategy in the long run. This country was built of the blood,sweat, and tears of immigrants.” Amen. Not only that, if our biggest concern is the economy, we better think twice before deporting a big part of our work force. We would basically be kicking at the invisible buttresses that hold up our economy. - Rob_N - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 5:45 pm: YDD writes… 1. I’d love to see a replay of the Helicopter Jim debate. Anyone still have a youtube link to that ad? Ask and ye shall receive. 2. How is Sauerberg going to attack Durbin on immigration, when Durbin’s position - as far as I know - is identical to John McCain’s? Good luck with that. ‘Cept that McCain is now pandering to the conservatives (who keep booing and mocking him) by backtracking away from real immigration reform. 3. Note that this was a REPUBLICAN exit poll, and 55 percent said that “illegal immigrants” should be allowed to stay, one way or another. By demonizing immigrants, Sauerburg is the one out-of-step, not just with the public, but even with his own party. Good for Durbin. Bad for Slippery Sauerberg. The problem with the GOP’s “brown people are bad” strategy is that it doesn’t actually solve the issue. Build a fence and ladders go up and tunnels go under. Deport people and they just turn around and come back. Throw ‘em in jail and they still turn around and come back. All the conservatives’ strategies are huge wastes of money because they have been proven time and again to simply not work. We need real immigration reform, not thinly veiled xenophobic screeds and borderline racist rants. 4. How is Sauerburg going to attack Durbin on any issue without any money? It sure isn’t coming from John McCain or the Senate Republicans. Good question. How much of his $67,000 did he spend on the primary? He can’t even afford more than one photo it seems like (that head shot with the stethoscope appears everywhere). - day late, dollar short - Thursday, Feb 7, 08 @ 9:09 pm: Someone call a doctor. The doctor has jumped off the ledge!!!! Did he not notice that his own party just picked “Amnesty” McCain over “Deport’em all” Romney? This issue has very short legs on the Republican side, but it has Latinos taking a fast walk over to the Democratic side of the aisle! Calling Grover Norquist… Grover, tell the good Doc what you said last year: “I don’t want to treat the Latinos like we treated the Catholics, tell them we don’t like them and lose their votes for a hundred years.” - kyledeb - Friday, Feb 8, 08 @ 10:07 am: Time and time again we have seen this strategy of scapegoating migrants fail. A majority of U.S. citizens favor an earned path to citizenship for migrants already in the U.S. Sauderberg is a doctor he should focus on issues U.S. citizens really care about like health care and the economy. U.S. citizens are too smart to fall for the politics of fear and division anymore. - Truthful James - Monday, Feb 11, 08 @ 7:10 am: kyledeb – Illegal aliens are not just a Republican issue. The jobs they take could have been filled — albeit at a market clearing wage — by all of the poor who want to come off welfare and seek the American promise of interclass mobility. Those people are the ones who have been habitual Democrats, playing follow their leader. Eighty years ago breadwinners without work left their families intact and in place and went in search of employment. They used the telegraph to send money home; they worked in the fields. This led to the start of the great family migration to the West Coast. Now politicians pay people to stay in place and call it welfare. The system splits up families. That in turn creates a distaste for education — not in all but in too many, who pass on to their single mother children a belief that it is neither an economic or a social good. It might take a village to raise a child, but it surely takes at much less cost intact working families. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.