Tom Tancredo is considered a one-issue candidate, and to a certain extent he encourages that reputation, making declarative statements in the media like, "I am going to use my presidential campaign as a vehicle to rally the millions of law-abiding Americans who oppose the Kennedy-McCain-Bush sellout of America." But the truth is, the immigration issue connects to a lot of other issues. Big government: what our politicians can do in closed-door hearings and without or despite citizen consent. Federal budget: according to the Congressional Budget Office, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act would increase the federal direct spending by $10 billion over the 2008-2012 period and by $23 billion over the 2008-2017 period. Trade unions: there has been a great deal of speculation over Bush's pro-NAFTA stance and how it connects to this bill he supports so vehemently.
I would support Tancredo's opposition to the immigration bill under any circumstances, but as a presidential candidate, it's important that I also agree with his stance on other issues. (His website reveals he is very strongly opposed to abortion, and has a few things to say about the war in Iraq.) But to me, Tancredo's focus on this one particular issue proves not that he is myopic, but that he understands its importance to the country overall. Illegal immigration is a broad topic that affects almost every area in the life of a modern American. As a young American just beginning to really understand my relationship to the larger political concerns of my country, that is exactly why I am concerned with this issue: its influence is so extensive, it reaches to the very heart of what it means to me to be an American. I believe that those who promote the validity of illegal immigration denigrate the very heritage of this country, and that is also why Tancredo has captured my hopes for the possible political future of this issue.
I would think Tancredo's approach appeals to many people, but he's still hardly noted as a Republican presidential candidate. I know I'm not alone in wishing that Tancredo would be a real contender in next year's elections. Voting for the dark horse candidate is still widely considered throwing a good vote away, though I have to admit that when an important issue like illegal immigration is supported by our own Republican president Bush, a "bad" Republican and an average Democrat basically seem like the same thing.
This article offers a different perspective on Tancredo that I find very disappointing (saying he gave "a kitchen sink answer" even to questions on his so-called one issue). Up to now I would have blamed the media's non-existent attention for his lack of visibility. While I don't have the experience to comment on political popularity, I'm surprised to hear that Tom Tancredo is not known--at least according to the American Spectator--for the kind of interesting and relevant comments I have heard (well, read) him make. For instance, his amusing pop culture aside when he called for Jack Bauer's response to terrorism.
What is one voter to do who would like to support the idealist, anyway? Tancredo himself has actually addressed this issue, challenged by Hugh Hewitt last April on his radio show whether he genuinely believed "shooting the moon and getting nothing" was better than compromising in order to get something at least a little better (paraphrased). Read it here:
Tom Tancredo: "Absolutely not. I have done everything I can to stop it. That is my only responsibility…and to pass good legislation. That is my responsibility. It is not to compromise on issues of this magnitude, not when you’re talking about the fact that the country is at stake, which I believe it to be."
Hugh Hewitt: "And even when you get rolled in the end? So it’s better to lose…"
Tom Tancredo: "That could happen. That could happen. But you know, you don’t make those decisions based on whether you can get rolled or not. At least I don’t. I base the decisions on exactly what I believe to be the right thing to do, and I’m going to continue to do that throughout my political career, however long it lasts."
So, does idealism have enough support in the present political landscape to pull any weight? I guess the only thing you can do sometimes, when you're firmly resolved only one answer is right, is to throw your weight behind it and...heft.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
