Thread: Please help me understand Tancredo endorsing Romney

Nicole,
I know both Buchanans were raised as devout Roman Catholics, but please note this said Bay B. had converted to Mormonism. All I have is the link to "The American Spectator": http://www.spectator.org/ . I'm just reporting what I read - it seems such an uncharacteristic choice. I was horrified when I watched Romney on "Meet The Press" Sunday. He seems to have only a very vague interest or understanding of this huge problem, saying on the one hand that "people who work hard should be given residency or citizenship" but then that "they shouldn't be allowed to stay their whole lives". Scary!

Pauls isolationist stand turns off many people

What is an isolationist?

Originally Posted by Texas2step

I just read something that made great sense to me. It said that Tancredo endorsed Romney because his Senior Advisor Bay Buchanan specifically urged him to. Evidentally Buchanan is a convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Romney's Mormon Church), and her opinion carries great weight with Tancredo. It said he did so despite the reservations of others who worked on his campaign, and perhaps because Romney specifically promised to assist Tancredo if he runs for the Senate. I think this is all Bad News, especially reports that Tancredo will now be actively campaigning for Romney!

from:
"The American Spectator"
"Washington Prowler
"Why MITT?
By The Prowler
Published 12/21/2007"

My apology if this point was already posted.

I was going to ask the same thing.....What are the links??

Also, Tom NEVER said that he for sure wanted a Senate seat. He said that this might be something that he would explore in the future.

Originally Posted by Martha

All I can say is that Tom Tancredo is nobody's puppet. If he didn't believe this endorsement was the right thing to do for our country, he wouldn't have done it.

I agree!!! And, he for SURE would not give an endorsement just because Bay Buchanan is a member of the Mormon Church (even if she is, nobody has "PROVED" this yet).

Like I said, they all say they will do one thing, then they just do what they want. It is too bad we can't hold them to their promises. Re-election threats don't scare anyone, by then the damage is done.

To hell with what the people want. Every one of them in positions of power has betrayed us.

Bren:
I gave the source from which this opinion was taken at the end of my post. Alto I don't have the link to the "Why Mitt" article, that to "The American Spectator" is http://www.spectator.org/ . This is just one opinion of many presented here.

Originally Posted by Texas2step

Bren:
I gave the source from which this opinion was taken at the end of my post. Alto I don't have the link to the "Why Mitt" article, that to "The American Spectator" is http://www.spectator.org/ . This is just one opinion of many presented here.

From the source............

"A member of Tancredo's campaign says that while Buchanan's opinion might have had greater influence than others, Tancredo's main criterion was electability. "Romney has made the better showing thus far, and Tom wants to have a influence in the Republican Party beyond Iowa," says the adviser. "Romney was just the smarter pick."

Bren,

Also just above from the source: "We're all scratching our heads a little over this one," says the immigration advisor. "It isn't the one we would have had him make...."

I'm sure there are many facets to this, and certainly Tancredo had information we don't know in making this decision. My primary concern is that if Romney is elected, all indications are that he would follow the wishes of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and completely open our borders with Mexico and Canada, but hopefully I am wrong.

Originally Posted by usanevada

There are 300 million people in this country

Pauls isolationist stand turns off many people

Ron Paul is not an isolationist, he is for Americans first and against the Bush Global Empire.

Originally Posted by Bowman

Originally Posted by usanevada

There are 300 million people in this country

Pauls isolationist stand turns off many people

Ron Paul is not an isolationist, he is for Americans first and against the Bush Global Empire.

The media continues to call him an isolationist even though he is not one. Isolationism requires "protectionism" and as has been discussed in other threads, he is for "free trade". But the isolationist claim serves their purpose.

But he is as you say, "Americans First" which is why he has voted against most "free trade" legislation, as it violates our sovereignty.