BY SAMUEL STEVENS
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump made a surprise visit on Wednesday with Mexican President Enrique Nieto. Trump’s campaign has evolved from the earlier shock and awe of his primary campaign to a third position in the general election.
The visit to Mexico teased his landmark speech in Phoenix on immigration.
While recently Trump has been waffling on immigration policy—the cornerstone of his campaign and support base—the Mexico visit shows a significant evolution in Trump’s public image.
Trump’s rhetoric is bombastic. He is not, as the neoconservative establishment would say, “respectable.”
The veneer of respectability and his pandering to the opposition is exactly what created Trump. Conservative voters and lifelong non-voters have craved what they see as an authentic candidate.
Trump’s immigration speech on August 31 thankfully clarified his recent gaffes on his immigration stances.
About the current system, he said, “The fundamental problem with the immigration system in our country is that it serves the needs of wealthy donors, political activists and powerful, powerful politicians.”
Trump emphasized the need to reach out to the working class, a viable constituency long ignored by the GOP as it marched toward destructive neoliberalism in the 1980s and 1990s.
In another stellar move, Trump emphasized the utter failure of our immigration system to track down criminal illegal immigrants and repatriate them.
Trump’s speech also marks a rhetorical divergence from the party politics of the last several decades. The candidate did not emphasize strict ideology or abstract “conservative principles,” and instead focused on American interests and the needs of American citizens.
The Republican establishment for too long has focused on giving its base vague promises of “conservatism” while following a disastrous policy of globalist capitalism, costly wars and open borders.
Their platform has done little to solve questions of the economy, immigration or terrorism.
Trump’s plan for a border wall sounds fantastic. However, immigration is one of the greatest national questions of our time.
The wall may not be necessary. The fundamental issue is a lack of enforcement of existing laws. Sanctuary cities, another issue Trump addressed, is a display of complete lawlessness on the part of states and localities.
Mass immigration into the United States may provide foreigners with opportunity. Allowing them all in, from all corners of the globe, does nothing to solve the problems within those countries.
It also contributes to “brain drain” via legal immigration with the H-1B visa program. The United States absorbs skilled workers from the developing world, contributing to waves of illegal immigration by low-skilled workers.
Trump commented on the problems with taking in Middle Eastern refugees. While many may be legitimate victims of war in the region, it does not solve the actual problems in Syria, Iraq, and Libya.
Coupled with his foreign policy, his immigration plan may actually help to improve American national security and even global security.
The opposition claims Trump is unfit for office or lacks the experience necessary for the presidency. The opposition offers Hillary Clinton, whose disastrous foreign policy decisions caused the massive upheavals of the Arab world.
When not wrecking already fragile states, Clinton stored top secret and above material on a private server—an action that would land any other federal employee in prison.
Trump is no threat to national security. He offers a plan to secure the United States from within and without.
Combined with his trips to Mexico and Louisiana, Trump’s immigration proposals show he is far more qualified to lead the United States than his opponent.