The Single-Issue Immigration Voter
Trump Started It. Intransigent Voters Can Finish It.

849 words

The Homeland Institute recently published the results and analysis of a poll they conducted in late August. The results of which suggest fertile ground for the cultivation of a voting bloc that could wield tremendous influence over American politics. A key takeaway from the poll was:

On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being very important, a quarter of Republicans at 25.2% rated immigration as very important.

For me it’s a no-brainer that immigration issues should be the baseline for even entertaining the idea of casting a ballot going forward.

Single-issue voting has borne fruit consistently in the past. Most notably and recently surrounding abortion. It was the doggedness of the pro-life movement from the 1973 decision onwards which saw the appointment of enough Supreme Court Justices to finally drill a hole in Roe’s head, suck its brains out, dismember it with forceps and drop it into the biohazard bag of history. Unfortunately for the pro-life movement, the termination of Roe in 2022 also galvanized the nation’s sluts enough to mobilize them as a counter single-issue bloc. A great argument for the merits of disenfranchising women, but that’s for another time.

Single-issue gun voters also have a storied history of imposing their will in the face of incredible pressure to make concessions. After the sunsetting of the assault weapons ban in 2004, there were a spate of notable mass shootings that Republican politicians held firm in the wake of, despite intense media pressure. This reached its apex in 2013 when Senate Republicans killed a backdoor gun registry that was proposed after the Sandy Hook massacre. The influence of the gun lobby has waned in recent years but mass shootings barely even register as a blip on the radar of the modern news cycle. I consider this desensitization a win for gun rights.

Immigration has a spottier record when it comes to influencing politics as a single-issue. Most of the time it’s implied that Republicans are against it, Democrats are for it, and thats as far as the conversation gets. There are a couple of notable examples of it coming front and center as an issue however. The 1994 California proposition 187 prohibiting illegal aliens from acquiring drivers licenses passed overwhelmingly, only to be struck down by an activist judge a month later. The judge was jewish. In 2007 the American people temporarily became single-issue constituents by overwhelming the Senate switchboards and confronting politicians at townhalls over “comprehensive immigration reform” (see: amnesty for illegal aliens). And of course everyone remembers the golden days of 2015-2016 when Donald Trump took Ann Coulter’s thesis in her book Adios America and bullied his way to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

When voters are polled, “the economy” is consistently the chief issue of concern. Not to say that it’s unimportant but if we’re honest this response essentially boils down to them saying “I want more money”, which is understandable. The economy will always be the chief issue because everyone could always use a little extra scratch.

The key to making immigration restriction into a single-issue voting bloc on par with the pro-life/pro-abortion crowd is by making it a litmus test to even get off the couch on election day. “If we ain’t talking deportations, we ain’t talking about anything.” There is a model for something like this that has had its share of considerable influence in the past.

Enter Americans For Tax Reform. An incredibly dull and mundane interest group headed by an even duller man, Grover Norquist. It seems comical now with countries being swamped by brown hordes and children being routinely exposed to grooming propaganda that marginal tax rates were ever a hot button issue. But even today, Mr. Norquist has, at the time of writing, 42 Senate candidates, 191 House candidates and 19 gubernatorial candidates signed on to his tax pledge. This is a simple solution that could be emulated with regard to immigration.

An example of the tax pledge goes as follows:

I (so & so) pledge to the taxpayers of (state) and to the American people that I will:

1. Oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates 1. for individuals and/or businesses; and

2. Oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, 2. unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

(Sign and date)

An easy enough pledge to take over a currently (marginal?) issue.

The way I see it, after Trump, there are four conditions that must be met before any politician on any level can ever expect me to vote. Keeping in the spirit of Mr. Nerdquist’s pledge, I propose the following. We’ll call it The Homeland Pledge:

I (non-cuck) pledge to the American nation that I will abstain from voting on or vote nay on all legislation or appropriations until:

1. The mass deportation of all illegal aliens begins.

2. All economic migrants or so-called refugees are being repatriated.

3. A remigration program is implemented for so-called legal immigrants and their progeny.

4. A total immigration moratorium until 2100.

The modest proposals in this pledge are all doable. They’re my conditions for ever casting a ballot in a federal election again. They have the added benefit of weeding out libtard “conservative” candidates.